This thread is full of such generalisation, notably about Muslims. Not all Muslims are extremist douchebags, just the ones you hear about.
I would like to state for the record that the particular Muslims to which I am referring
do have a questionable track record.
As a matter of fact, though, I have to say that there are many elements of Islamic faith which are worrisome. This is true to some extent with most religions, particularly the Abrahamic ones, but the real problem is that what we call "religious moderation" is essentially just the act of ignoring the most violent teachings. Those passages of the Qur'an which promote peace, love, and unity tend to be vaguely worded, short, and buried amid extended passages about how it is your duty to destroy nonbelievers.
The Western world, in light of horrific tragedies such as the Holocaust and extended injustices such as Jim Crow laws, holds above all else the belief that every culture and every faith is exactly equal in its moral value and its worth to society, and that to argue otherwise is the antithesis of reasoned discourse. To some extent this is true, and it is certainly true that the absence of such a moral stance can encourage racism, but we have reached a point where this view is carried to such extremes that we turn a blind eye to legitimate cases of "moral poverty" in the world, where local beliefs are prone to encouraging destructive and intolerant behavior.
A case in point: in high school once, we read the book
Things Fall Apart by Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe, in which an ancient African tribe employed the practice of murdering newborn twins under the premise that twins possessed evil souls (this was not the focus of the story, but it was mentioned). And we were told that it was not our place to criticize their society, because "that was simply what they believed". I agree that the individual
tribesmen cannot be held to blame for what they have been taught, but to say that their
society is not less ethical than ours is downright ridiculous.
Somehow, the only societies we are allowed to dislike are those which
themselves actively seek to undermine other societies, i.e. Nazi Germany. But societies that persecute their
own people, or societies that raise objections to other societies without resorting to cohesive and uniform violence, are beyond criticism. I would be considered a bigot for saying that I object to the Muslim view of women, or that I object to the idea that societies different from their own are corrupt and must either be assimilated or destroyed.
Yes, there are plenty of Muslims out there who do not agree with this. Most Muslims are not intolerant people in and of themselves, and they go against the most brutal of their religion's teachings. And for that I have respect for them. But here's the crucial point:
They are defying their own cultural standards in the process. There's a difference between saying "All Muslims are intolerant" and "Islam is an intolerant religion." I would strongly disagree with the first statement, but I absolutely say the second statement is correct.
This is actually a problem with all the Abrahamic religions, not just Islam. Look at the despicable atrocities Christians have committed over the years. The Crusades, the Inquisition, the subjugation and butchering of natives from distant lands...the list goes on and on. And yes, modern Christians also have to reject some principles of their faith. But there are still some key differences. The Bible is much more explicit than the Qur'an about loving and forgiving those who are different from yourself. Much more of the the Qur'an is devoted to saying "your faith will constantly be under attack, and those responsible must die." And above all else, the majority of Christians have abandoned
more of the worst elements of their faith than the majority of Muslims. Lots of the anti-women stuff in the Qur'an is also found in the Bible, as are all kinds of atrocities called for against those who would try to divert you from the path of righteousness. In fact, Palestinian Christians have just as much religious cause to detest the Israelis as Palestinian Muslims, but you don't see that many
Christian suicide bombings, now do you?
My mother used to have some Muslim friends whom she considered very moderate and tolerant people. Yet when the whole Salman Rushdie controversy materialized, these moderate friends of hers sided with their religion and still believed that he should be put to death. In many parts of the Muslim world, one of the only major differences between Islamic "moderates" and Islamic "extremists" is that moderates believe it is not the government's responsibility to enforce Sharia law--plenty of them still agree with its principles.
The bottom line? For the most part, mainstream Islamic society is still attached to far more of the religion's more intolerant and violent tenets than, say, mainstream Christian society or mainstream Jewish society. Nobody is willing to say it out loud for fear of disturbing the Western world's mandate of tolerance-above-all-else, but what is going on in the Middle East is straight-up holy war.
I have no intention of generalizing--I would make no judgments of any individual Muslim, and indeed hold any "truly" moderate Muslim in high esteem--but I am perfectly fine with forming opinions about Islam itself. And I am also perfectly fine with forming opinions about how adherent the Middle Eastern world is to a backwards age. This is honest empirical evidence, not bigotry or prejudice.
