[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
sorry, but "rarely" is still support for terrorism
[/ QUOTE ]
The question in that poll is "do you approve of attacking civilian targets to defend *
Islam*". Do you approve of attacking civilian targets to defend *
America*? What is carpet bombing, if not attacking civilian targets to defend America? Heaven forbid we hold ourselves to the same standards with which we hold to others.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's not the same standard, and it's not even the same question: the first poll question you cite above regards defending a RELIGION; the second question you list above regards defending a COUNTRY.
Try asking how many Americans would support attacking civilian targets in order to defend
Christianity and I'd bet the answer would be far different. That would be the parallel to the question of how many Muslims support attacking civilian targets in order to defend
Islam.
Also, Christians haven't been marching in the streets demanding the execution of those who have insulted Jesus, as throngs of Muslims did over the Mohammed cartoons. Apparently Christians aren't so fanatically motivated to defend their
religion from perceived attacks or insults, as are Muslims.
In my opinion, the differences in religion and religious worldview are actually greater than most Americans think.
Also, I don't think "support for terrorism" is the most important question or even the real root question at all. I think the most basic issue is
support for Shari'a.
Shari'a is deeply inimicable to modern Western values regarding equality before the law and various freedoms which we in the West generally treasure as essential. It doesn't have to b e "extreme" Shari'a, either, for it to be deeply antithetical to these values: good old regular run-of-the-mill-type Shari'a accomplishes that very effectively. Shari'a is acknowledged and considered authoritative by all schools of Islamic jurisprudence. IMO Shari'a is the problem, and everyone who believes in Shari'a holds very different values from modern Western values. Shari'a values are not beneficial or desirable in any Western society. That doesn't make Shari'a believers bad people, just different people; and different in a way that is not really assimilable into Western society.
Wikipedia Shari'a
[/ QUOTE ]
You seem to like doing this, picking up on completely irrelevant discrepancies in an analogy and then going on about them as if they are important. Why is bombing to defend AMERICA somehow more morally acceptable than bombing to defend CHRISTIANITY? Is it because Christianity makes it clear that it is unnecessary to bomb in order to protect it? Well, thats fine, but of course thats just a lucky arbitrary coincidence. If Christianity DEMANDED using force in its defense, we'd be in a different spot, I suppose. Why is it more noble to intentionally target innocents to defend a nation than it is to do so to defend a religion? Both ideologies, right?