islamophobia

[Will]

Don't be angry on the internet.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Two words, buddy: sample size.

OK, humblesmurph, here's an example of the kind of crap argumentation I see.  It is, of course, only presented as a put-down quip, probably so that there is nothing really to argue with, as it isn't coherent.

One more time, for those who can read and count or have an interest in such.  One cannot, logically, simultaneously declare that 35 killings from a population of at most 7 million (probably more like 3 million) is insignificant and declare that 1 killing from a population of at least 200 million is significant.  To do so represents a serious thinking problem.  Understanding this requires keeping two concepts in one's consciousness at once, but after that it's relatively straightforward.

There are two absurdly polarized, anti-rational sides to this discussion.  One side holds that there are hordes of destructive Muslims and focuses on them exclusively, while the other holds that there are hordes of destructive Islamophobes and focuses on them exclusively.  Neither position is supportable by the facts, which is why we don't see any argument that is supported by facts.  What we see consists of snotty put-downs like the one quoted, emotional manipulation, and fear-mongering and literal paranoia on both sides.  I do not take either polarized side, which seems to elicit apoplexy more than if I were on one side or the other.  Allies and enemies are simple and do not appear to require much thought or sense.

One polarized side cherry-picks everything bad done to a Muslim by a Christian, and the other polarized side cherry-picks everything bad done by a Muslim to a non-Muslim, both to paint a paranoid picture of their own preconceived ideas.  Neither side is even slightly interested in looking at the facts in a balanced way, nor can they resist dominating the discussion so that it becomes sound and fury, signifying nothing.

However, I've said as much earlier, and if that was not read then, I don't think that this will be read now.

You composed this post in reply to me, judging from the fact that you led it of with a quote of mine.  I have italicized where you clearly imply that I said such a thing.

Now, you can continue your fulmination all you wish.  The record has been corrected, and you are wrong.

Foam away!

[Category]

I feel like epepke is right in his/her underlying message that people can't only see a problem such as this in the farthest extremes, because when they do it's bound to only increase the conflict and drown the resolution in a bunch of flame warring and other such non-intelligent activities produced by such conflicts. I also pick up that they're fed up with people using facts out of context and without presenting the view from both sides, only "cherry picking" to what will help their side of the argument. Of course I may be wrong and I apologize if I am for jumping in on this.

My input on the OP... Well, fuck. Don't even remember what we were talking about after reading all of this...