Ahem. Allow me to reiterate my earlier comment and the following responses:

I state: "Have you stopped to realise this? Can't you see that's the only possible result of pushing them too far and putting them in a box?
Even if you BECOME right, and Islam does become a monolithic front, then you're still dumber than the people who said they weren't.
Don't you see this is the end result of making life more difficult for so many people?
You really think an "I told you so" will really help you've helped make this the only possible result?"

To which the rest of you go on harping about problems.

Well guess what?

You're not solving them. You're only making it worse.

Go back to the drawing board and come back with something constructive.

I'd make the point that if you really want to combat these problems, you should combat the extremist groups, whether or not they're representative of the 'accurate' Islam.

If they were the 'accurate' Islam (honestly as if any Christians or anybody else could be the judge of that) then lets encourage the muslims who follow an 'inaccurate' example huh?

Instead of reinforcing the idea that to be a muslim is to be violent, lets explore alternatives, because this is what I see:

I religion with a billion followers. Plus, several people who apparently, seem to think it's a good idea to tell these people that if they're genuine followers, they're violent.

What's the other option? Are they going to go away? Are all billion of them going to spontaneously convert because people started shouting at them?

Religion thrives on repression.

Do you see my point yet? Do you see the stupidity yet?

Good grief.

Nursel Guzeldeniz,

1. I haven't noticed where you have actually defined "Islamophobia" and given examples of what you regard as discrimination against Moslems. If someone ridiculed Mahommed in a cartoon, would that count as discrimination? Or if a Moslem taxi driver was fired for refusing to accept a blind man and his guide dog as passengers?

2. Your argument that the diversity of the Islamic world somehow justifies its silence in regard to Moslem terrorist atrocities is ridiculous, I'll remind you that many Christians protested against the Vietnam and both Gulf Wars,which were crimes committed by other Christians in government.

A thousand pardons to bigmal, whom I acknowledge is a secular Islamophobe. I'd be offended too if someone mistook me for a Christian.

The gall!

Froggie: << Your mentioning the Cronulla riots is just an attempt to divert the conversation on to a subject well covered at the time and since. Please desist. >>

I raised the Cronulla riots as an example of Islamophobic violence in Australian society, following up on my assertion that Islamophobia is far more likely to cause violence in Australian society than the religion of Islam is.

I appreciate that Islamophobes and their apologists mightn't like to be reminded of the consequences of their bigotry, but I have no intention of "desisting" in doing so.

Bassam and Bigmal are correct.

CJ Morgan is busy re-writing history with his comment: “ Islam didn't cause the disgraceful Cronulla race riot, but Islamophobia certainly was a causal factor”

Actually CJ, Islam DID indirectly cause the riots.

People weren’t AFRAID of Islam, they were just incensed by the aggressions of Muslim Lebanese thugs over several years. The real failure was that of the NSW authorities in not curbing these actions of the Lebanese.

Examinator: “In reality everyone is entitled to believe in what ever faith THEY chose.”

Yes, Examinator, that is true. It would be good if Islam would allow that, without making second-class citizens (Dhimmis) of the people who choose their own religion.

“The problem comes about when individuals confuse their rights as an individual with public policy. Christians have no more right to impose their views on public policy than does anyone else.” Absolutely, examinator.

Tell the Islamists the same thing. Maybe “death for apostasy” or “death for insulting Islam” or “Honour Killings” doesn’t rate with you as an imposition on public policy.

TRTL
“1) There's a billion muslims in the world - most don't commit violence, even if there're many fanatical groups making problems.

2) Islam is not going to disappear. Therefore, anyone with a modicum of sense can see we need to find a way to co-exist with the majority.

3) The moment you say the violent interpretation is the "correct" one, you lose all ability to encourage moderacy.
You can't say "shucks, your religion is actually violent and evil and if you were a true follower you would be too, but hey, be nice."”

My response:

1) There are indeed, more than a billion Muslims. Most don’t commit violence, but few censure the ones who do.
2) The only way to co-exist with Muslims is eject the 15-20% who support violent Jihad. The problem is who are the Jihadists, and finding the moral fibre to deport them.
3) Precisely why we must be strong against Islamism, to discourage extremists and encourage a reformation in Islam. As at today, it has not been reformed.

http://www.markhumphrys.com/islam.uk.html

jesus wept.

Ahh... how fascinating are the workings of the mind of the Islamophobe:

<< Actually CJ, Islam DID indirectly cause the riots.

People weren’t AFRAID of Islam, they were just incensed by the aggressions of Muslim Lebanese thugs over several years. The real failure was that of the NSW authorities in not curbing these actions of the Lebanese. >>

So a mob of drunken yobbos draped in Australian flags decide to exact vigilante justice on some people they assume are Lebanese and possibly Muslim.

How, exactly, did the religion of Islam contribute to that?

Jesus wept indeed.