I am quite dismayed at some of the responses to this article. There appears to be a disproportionate sense of fear directed toward Muslims; fueled by ignorance and the recent attacks in Mumbai.

As an Australian, I find this saddening

"I am quite dismayed at some of the responses to this article. There appears to be a disproportionate sense of fear directed toward Muslims; fueled by ignorance and the recent attacks in Mumbai."

What would be a 'proportionate' sense of fear? Certainly, we are at very little risk of a terrorist attack: but if we ARE attacked, the odds are about twenty to one that it will be by Muslim terrorists. And there is nothing we can do about it. We can try and negotiate with people who have rational desires; but how do you negotiate with people who only want to die in the bloodthirstiest way possible?

If you look back over the sad and sorry history of religion in 2008 at

http://atheistwiki.wikispaces.com/Outrage+scoreboard

you will see that if Keysar Trad had to wait for a week when there was no religious outrage in order to publish his piece, then he would be waiting a long, long time.

I don't think that there are many people
out there who would not acknowledge that
the tragic incidents in Mumbai (Bombay),
was the work of terrorists.

Few rational people would blame Islam
for these actions.
These people are fundamentalists, political
fanaticists, whose behaviour is exemplified
in their terrorist bombings.

Fundamentalist revivals, in whatever religion,
take place in times when social changes have led
to turmoil, uncertainty, and the erosion of
familiar values. When people find themselves
confused, threatened, or even appalled at
changing conditions, they may see a 'return
to basics' as a solution.

But to condemn all Muslims for what a small
marginal group does is not something that any
thinking person would do.

However, it is
understandable that a few would buy into the
distorted image presented by the media which
is based on what is newsworthy, rather than
what is typical.

Jon J,

I am an atheist, and I totally agree that religion and superstition can cause great harm.

But so too can alcohol. In fact, I am far more likely to die from a random act of alcohol-fuelled violence than I am from an Islamic terrorist. Does this mean that I should persecute those who drink? Should I discriminate against them and make them feel uncomfortable in their own country? I am not accusing you of these things, but the nasty tone evident in many of these posts made me sick.

The vast majority of Muslims are no more blood-thirsty than you or I. Therefore, while I do not believe in religion, I respect their right to do so - just as the majority of Muslims respect my right not to.

Whats happening in the sub-continent is complex mix of geo-politics, nationalism and religion. The Taliban, Lashka e Toiba, Jaish Mohammed etc were all nurtured by the Pakistani Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) agency as they were considered useful tools in the interstate rivalry with India, and now their actions are having unintended consequences - the US made the same mistake in Afghanistan.

It is easy to blame a complex problem on an entire religion but it is not right. There are several hundred million Muslims living in the sub-continent and these horrible acts of terror are in no way reflective of their character, and as such, we have no right to discriminate against them

Polycarp.
If Christians truly lived the way that Jesus taught, we would not have the problems in the world that we have. Neither would we have problems if Mahammad had understood what Jesus taught. It is just the crazy interpretations of some of the followers of these two men that cause the strife that we see in the world today. What ever happened to "Love thy neighbor".

David

"Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemies if they don't speak up..." very true indeed, Emanuel Tanay.

The true situation is that "moderate" Muslims rarely speak up in a Muslim-majority country. In Malaysia they (Muslim-inspired government) demolished many Hindu temples until the Hindu minority took the protest to the streets. Now they ban the practice of Yoga claiming it to be unislamic.

Islamists, Muslims and some in the West blame the Indian government for marginalising the Indian Muslims, if that is the real reason for the situation in Mumbai why do the Muslim jihadists kill five white Jewish Americans?

So when Muslims are angry they vent their anger by shooting a few Buddhists in south Thailand, burn churches in Indonesia and in northern Nigeria, blow up tourists in Bali. Blame this and blame that. Indeed, its difficult to understand Islamic reasoning.

Pakistan and Bangladesh(East Pakistan) were founded based on the aspirations of the Indian Muslims then for an Islamic state to practice the full range of Islamic Law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Iqbal

But as it turned out these two countries are failed states and India, based on secular democracy is better off. Islam is a failure.

If any Islamic country or Muslim wants to get off the poverty trap, they must completely abandon the ideology of Islam. Any form of government is better than an Islamic one.