Kenko said:
...
And another apologist leaps to defend islam! Stop trying to make muslims into the new jews plx.
I'm highly critical of "Islam" as a dogmatic religion/ideology, as I am of all other absolutist authoritarian world views, but most people who call themselves Muslims aren't 100 % literalist followers, just like all "Christians" don't go around murdering gay people anymore despite the book of Romans (to say nothing of what's in the Old Testament, insofar as that is upheld) still being canon.
Furthermore, despite the many horrific and condemnable dogmas on norms found in the authoritative texts of Islam - and the other religions, especially the Abrahamic ones - there's really nothing in there to suggest that terrorism is an "Islamic" thing.
I'm totally fine with the religion itself being firmly criticized and relentlessly condemned for all the aspects where it falls beneath basic human rights and decency. I do just that [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.230964-Imam-Feisal-Abdul-Rauf-speaks-about-the-mosque-controversy?page=7#8108983] all the time (with all religions). Just be sure that what is criticized is actually part of Islamic dogma, and remember that the actual "Muslims" are every bit as hypocritical as us in their selflabeling, and will rarely "fit the bill" 100 %; In fact, most would probably just be ordinary human beings unconcerned with religious dogma.
In conclusion, it's certainly not (all parts of) Islam I defend or even refrain from relentlessly condemning, but as for the vast majority of who actually call themselves Muslims, they're not as bad as parts of their own scriptures strictly logically should, and the media coverage of terrorists and ultradogmatic Islamic literalists (not even the same thing, actually they're two somewhat separate evils) by now unfortunately would, suggest. Not by a long shot.