I was pointing out that if we decide that faith in Islam connects with the antisocial behaviors they exhibit and the antisocial beliefs they hold, we would have to apply the same logic to people with other faiths, such as Christianity.
But it is naive to do this without examining the core beliefs of the ideology in question.
The antisocial behaviour can be connected to the ideology IF AND ONLY IF you can make a direct connection between the core content of the ideology and the behaviours isn question.
If you do otherwise then you are guilty of confusing correlation with causation. If you can construct a theory that explains the causal mechanism then the empirical evidence can be regarded as endorsing that theory.
I recognize there are plenty of good Christians and good Muslims, and what drives someone to, say, terrorism or heeding misogynistic tradition is going to stem from a more complex background than merely Islam.
Good Christians are people who obey Christ's commandments and emulate his life.
Good Muslims are people who obey Mohammed's commandments and emulate his life. Muslims who in fact obey Christian commandments cannot be good muslims.
Read the lives of the two founders and you will understand.
I would similarly argue that John Newton's life deserves a more sophisticated analysis than he was born again and all his virtuous steps are because of his new relationship with Jesus.
Because otherwise it contradicts your position.
If the politics of the United States would allow for the irreligious (not even atheist -- just those for whom Sunday school isn't a big deal) to also rise to power and show their hypocrisy, I might not so eagerly associate it with Christianity.
Is not the example of Soviet Russia good enough for you?
You seem to be happy to make the connection between bad things and people's faith without evidence - sauce for the goose?
You said In the last century the Christian world had WWI, WWII, the holocaust and the nuking of two cities - with clerics and padres on BOTH the German and Allied sides assuring their respective troops that God thought it was peachy-keen.
Well I would say, using your own argument, that in their heads Christianity was a separate matter from the war.
Re: Looks like you're trying to cherry pick scripture again.
Consider how few Christians regard their neighbors as they would themselves, and considering how little uproar there is for it, I'd submit that loving your neighbor as you would yourself is no longer even a Christian ethic.
I think Jesus got there before you on this one: "21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
Matthew Ch 7
Also what is it with your American so called Christians? From where I'm sitting it looks like being American is the problem rather than being Christian! This is reinforced by the manner in which some of your so called marginalized minorities themselves behave.
These paragraphs from the Wikipedia article seems to imply it to me:
" He apologized for "a confession, which ... comes too late ... It will always be a subject of humiliating reflection to me, that I was once an active instrument in a business at which my heart now shudders." "
"Newton later came to believe that, during the first five of his nine years as a slave trader, he had not been a Christian in the full sense of the term: "I was greatly deficient in many respects ... I cannot consider myself to have been a believer in the full sense of the word, until a considerable time later."
How about we compare them to the US military instead?
Diffcult to do because a lot of the deaths attributed to the US military - see for eaxmple here turn out out to have been carried out in practice by the Islamists. Bad US policy caused by an inability to let go of the Russians as an an enemy is responsible for both.
Burning civilians alive with missles out of nowwhere, torturing prisoners and treating them like dogs imho it isn't that sure anymore who the terrorists are. My best guess is that it depends on where you live.
We in the West are (rightly) self critical in these matters - but please don't be under any illusions about the way other countries view these things. Unlike the West they aren't the least bit embarassed or apologetic.
Re: It is all about what you are brought up to want.
High school teachers are greedy and incompetent and sacred = can not be fired for being bad.
Actually what is wrong with the system in the UK is precisely the threat of being fired for being bad. If that is not yet the case in the US then that is the one good thing left in the system
The trouble is that no one knows what "bad" actually is - let alone how to measure it reliably enough to make any use of the results.
In the UK we have used exam results - but the problem here is that when the teacher's job depends on the students' results then the students' results can no longer be allowed to depend on the students. Since the exam boards are now also "commercial" operations then they are motivated to collude with the schools to corrupt the system. As a University Lecturer I have seen the sorry results of this year by year as the exam scores get better yet the students' ability to actually understand anything gets progressively worse.
A teacher's job should be made more difficult to get in the first place, and well enough paid to attract the best. After that however you have to take the risk of trusting those people you have employed to remain professional.
There will always be a few who will take advantage of this - but the alternative is infinitely worse.