example of Christians committing terrorism: the Irish Republican Army, whose death toll over 30 years was higher than Al Qaeda's in 2001. That's not a 1000 years ago. Neither were the intense conflicts between various Christian sects that absorbed Europe's attention over the past 400 years. It's not that long ago that stocks, guillotines, and public torture sessions were considered moral entertainment for Christian audiences.
From many a Muslim's point of view, our invasion of Iraq constitutes a second example. Our unwillingness to count their innocent dead suggests we don't care about the "collateral damage" we cause, and our willingness to abridge human rights conventions suggests we are selfish and hypocritical about our values. Much that we've done there has specifically seemed designed to inflame Muslim sentiment against us--just what bin Laden wanted, and exactly the wrong way to dissuade Muslims from becoming fanatical terrorists.
Russia's treatment of the Chechens might be considered a third example (I don't condone Chechen terrorism, but stories of unnecessary Russion brutality abound).
People seem to be missing the broader point I'm making--just because Christianity isn't currently committing atrocities based on religion doesn't matter. In the big picture, each side has been perfectly willing to commit atrocities in the name of religion. I'm pleased that Christians are currently in a tolerant mode, and hope it lasts a long time--as it did for the 1st thousand years of Christianity.
The purpose of the Crusades was to fight over land that was holy to both Islam and Christianity, and held by the Muslims at that time. It was not to repel a violent Islamic invasion of Europe (though the propoganda at the time said so). The spread of the Islamic empire was partly violent, but also largely accomplished politically--since Muslims tolerated other religions, there were advantages to coming under their wing.
Try a thought experiment. Imagine that the Islamic empire had won, and that Christianity was the religion of a group of impoverished nations around the world who missed their glorious past, when the Roman Empire was Christian, and envied and hated Malaysia, the only superpower in the world. It's not hard for me to imagine that 19 extremist Christians, angered over Malaysia's military presence near a Christian holy site in the Middle East, would fly planes into the tallest skyscrapers in Malaysia. It's easy to imagine. Human nature is human nature, and doesn't differ SO much from one religion or culture to another.
Yes, all those protesting Muslims are a TINY minority of all Muslims, most of whom are law-abiding and decent people.
LuvRPGuy (since you're a guy, it turns out), I'm not sure why you couldn't see the point that the U.S. is a violent society, obsessed with violence at every level. Yes, intellectually our country was founded on high-sounding principles, but on the ground, much of the grunt work that made America rich was performed by slaves--20% of NY city's population at one point--and much of the land America now owns was obtained from its prior inhabitants via treachery, theft, and war. Our country was founded on those things too, and I'm hardly the first person to suggest that a legacy of all that violence persists in our endless fascination with violence.
I'm glad you yourself have met and spent time with Muslims abroad. I'm curious how many other people here have.
You can look back over the thread and see several examples of gross generalizations of Muslim "badness." Sure, no one is saying "all Muslims want to kill all Americans" but the level of black and white thinking on USMB is getting pretty close to that.
I agree completely that Hinduism and Buddhism are not perfect religions--what human institution is? But there's never been a Hindu Holy war or large scale conquest of any kind, and Indians are specifically against evangelism, missionary activity, or colonial conquest.
Mariner.
