In support of Goto

Well done! ... now let's see if the Muslims respect other religions, or if they permanently solve the "Should we respect Islam" question by disrespecting the request from these religious leaders and thus absolve all of us from ever having to show any respect for Islam.

Because either all religions are worthy of respect or none are.

These monks should protest in front of the Saudi Embassy for the release of Goto, that's a lot more like the Islamic State than the prime minister's residence.

now let's see if the Muslims respect other religions, or if they permanently solve the "Should we respect Islam" question by disrespecting the request from these religious leaders and thus absolve all of us from ever having to show any respect for Islam.

To be more accurate, Goto is being held captive by ISIS, not 'the Muslims'.

I'm sure ISIS members will be very impressed!

"Oh my! Buddhist monks are protesting! Allah is merciful! We should totally release this Goto dude!"

slumdogJan. 27, 2015 - 07:46PM JST

now let's see if the Muslims respect other religions, or if they permanently solve the "Should we respect Islam" question by disrespecting the request from these religious leaders and thus absolve all of us from ever having to show any respect for Islam.

To be more accurate, Goto is being held captive by ISIS, not 'the Muslims'.

A completely valid point. Of course an organisation entitled "Islamic State" has nothing to do with Muslims. ... oh, wait, it completely does. Guess you're mistaken as usual.

To be more accurate, Goto is being held captive by ISIS, not 'the Muslims'.

What does ISIS stand for? Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.. So you are telling me that ISIS is not Muslim? Are you serious?

Maybe it would make more sense to say ISIS is not Islam because Islam is the most peaceful religion

A completely valid point.

You should have stopped there. When you write things like 'the Muslims', you are implying that you are talking about all Muslims. 'The Muslims' did not capture Goto. ISIS did.

So you are telling me that ISIS is not Muslim?

No, what I am telling you is by using the term 'the Muslims', the posters was lumping all Muslims in with ISIS. Doing so is not only incorrect, but also is racist.

ISIS may be Islam, but not all of Islam is ISIS. Get it?

Amazing that in 2015 I still have to explain such a thing.

slumdogJan. 28, 2015 - 05:16AM JST

So you are telling me that ISIS is not Muslim?

No, what I am telling you is by using the term 'the Muslims', the posters was lumping all Muslims in with ISIS. Doing so is not only incorrect, but also is racist.

ISIS may be Islam, but not all of Islam is ISIS. Get it?

Bull. You're trying to disassociate the actions of ISIS Muslims from all other Muslims, which is completely ridiculous. If someone chooses to share a label (and I'm not imposing this label on them, they freely choose to adopt it), then they share responsibility for the actions of the group. It is the flip side of the right to freedom of association.

The actions of 8 million Muslims living in IS are a sufficiently large sample size to make general statements about Islam in general.

Also your assertion that Muslims are all of the same race reveals your racism, in this case correctly labelled racism.

Amazing that in 2015 I still have to explain such a thing.

Amazing that in 2015 you still cannot understand that Muslims are a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-racial group of people who all choose to adopt the same religious label, and thereby adopt responsibility for the actions of any large group of Muslims anywhere.

Truly your racism knows no bounds. Or perhaps you're just trying to shore up your battered ego because you couldn't understand that a paragraph can be only one sentence long.

Either way I'm done with you. As every you're completely and totally incorrect in every way possible.

Bull. You're trying to disassociate the actions of ISIS Muslims from all other Muslims, which is completely ridiculous.

No, trying to define all Muslims according to the actions of ISIS is ridiculous.

Or do you believe that all Christians are defined by the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church?

You're trying to disassociate the actions of ISIS Muslims from all other Muslims, which is completely ridiculous.

Actually, it is completely logical. Judging a whole group for the actions of a few is racist and wrong.

If someone chooses to share a label

? ISIS is attempting to steal their 'label'. More appropriately, ISIS is attempting to steal their religion.

Also your assertion that Muslims are all of the same race reveals your racism

I never suggested any such thing. Racism is also often used to describe discrimination against religions, which is in fact what you are doing.

Amazing that in 2015 you still cannot understand that Muslims are a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-racial group of people who all choose to adopt the same religious label, and thereby adopt responsibility for the actions of any large group of Muslims anywhere.

Ridiculous. ISIS is an extremist group that does not represent the majority of law-abiding Muslims around the world. Muslims have not chosen to adopt ISIS ideology and should not be expected to adopt responsiblity for the actions of people that do not represent them.

Truly your racism knows no bounds.

If that is not the pot calling the kettle black. You decide on your own that all 'the Muslims' are bad because ISIS claims to be Muslm. So, if someone of your culture, race, religion or nationality does something bad, you are also equally to blame? Again, ridiculous. Lumping people together as your are doing is a perfect example of discrimination.

Or perhaps you're just trying to shore up your battered ego because you couldn't understand that a paragraph can be only one sentence long.

What you quoted and commented about was a sentence. You were, incorrectly by the way, attempting to complain about the phrasing/structure of a sentence. You were wrong on both accounts and pretty much wrong about your other observations in that discussion.

You have been basing your feelings about a religion based on one group in that religion, completely ignoring that fact that the majority do not belong to that one group ISIS.

You are wrong for doing that.

No, trying to define all Muslims according to the actions of ISIS is ridiculous. Or do you believe that all Christians are defined by the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church?

Exactly.

StrangerlandJan. 28, 2015 - 11:34AM JST

Bull. You're trying to disassociate the actions of ISIS Muslims from all other Muslims, which is completely ridiculous.

No, trying to define all Muslims according to the actions of ISIS is ridiculous. Or do you believe that all Christians are defined by the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church?

Judging all Christians on the basis of about 40 people (number of members in the Westboro Baptist Church) would be utterly ridiculous.

But ISIS is 8 MILLION people. That's a fair number to generalize from. That's the key difference that you cannot seem to grasp, possibly because it doesn't agree with your personal bias.

But ISIS is 8 MILLION people

Nope. You are incorrect. It is no where that number. Please attempt to back up your claim.

because it doesn't agree with your personal bias.

Hah! Give me a break. You have painted one of the world's largest, if not the largest, religions with the same brush of a small minority of extremists.

You obviously believe religious discrimination is okay. You are wrong to do so.

You feel it appropriate to judge an entire group based on half a percent of it's members? That's ridiculous.

My request was extremely simple. Proof your number of 8 million members of ISIS.

The thing is: You absolutely cannot. Why? Because there are not 8 million members of ISIS. I know the latest estimates published at the end of 2014 and they were NOT 8 million. In fact, they were no where near it.

So it is valid to generalize from a sufficiently large sample

1) Your number is wrong.

2) For any sample to be valid, it should be compared to the whole. You are claiming all Muslims are the same as ISIS supposedly based on your 'sample' of crazy extremists. As has been pointed out, it is plainly ridiculous.

So, back up what you say or consider how wrong you actually are in this case.

No, what I am telling you is by using the term 'the Muslims', the posters was lumping all Muslims in with ISIS. Doing so is not only incorrect, but also is racist. ISIS may be Islam, but not all of Islam is ISIS. Get it? Amazing that in 2015 I still have to explain such a thing.

it doesnt matter how Islam and ISIS are associated. They all follow some idiot who married a 9-year old. Period.

slumdog: last I checked, muslims aren't a race.

it doesnt matter how Islam and ISIS are associated. They all follow some idiot who married a 9-year old. Period.

You are entitled to your opinion, no matter how unsavory it is.

slumdog: last I checked, muslims aren't a race.

I already commented on this above. I could have written the more cumbersome 'religous discrimination', in fact I did also write it, however 'racism' is also used to describe the phenomenon. This is particularly true of the case where their religion is also considered their ethnicity by the followers of said religion, as is the case with the followers of religions such as Islam and Judaism.

Anyway, discrimination is a bad thing. Instead of arguing questionable semantics, why not comment about that?