←back to thread

Paris Shootings and Explosions Kill Over 100, Police Say

(www.nytimes.com)
623 points franzb | 2 comments | 14 Nov 15 00:25 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
cryptica ◴[14 Nov 15 01:32 UTC] No.10563894[source]▶
This soils the reputation of islam. I know some good people (muslims) who suffer from prejudice on a daily basis because of attacks like these.

Being a muslim in a foreign country is an increasingly difficult and isolating experience.

replies(5): >>10563901 #>>10564038 #>>10564211 #>>10564822 #>>10565391 #
imaginenore ◴[14 Nov 15 02:07 UTC] No.10564038[source]▶
Islam soils the reputation of islam. It has a massive problem of large percentages of Muslims supporting (or being okay with) violence and terrorism.

42% of young Muslims in France believe suicide bombings are justified (35% overall).

http://www.pewresearch.org/files/old-assets/pdf/muslim-ameri...

replies(6): >>10564079 #>>10564128 #>>10564228 #>>10564454 #>>10564481 #>>10564683 #
dang ◴[14 Nov 15 02:17 UTC] No.10564079[source]▶
> Islam soils the reputation of islam.

No slurs, please. We've already banned one account for turning this thread into a religious flamewar. Comments here need to stay factual.

replies(1): >>10564143 #
imaginenore ◴[14 Nov 15 02:30 UTC] No.10564143[source]▶
I did stay factual, I even provided a link.

If you're going to restrict speech, restrict all mentions of religion, not just the ones that contradict your preconceived notion.

replies(2): >>10564264 #>>10564303 #
1. dang ◴[14 Nov 15 03:28 UTC] No.10564303[source]▶
The part I quoted was not factual and was a slur.
replies(1): >>10564391 #
2. deciplex ◴[14 Nov 15 04:03 UTC] No.10564391[source]▶
It's not a slur against Islam in the slightest, it's a supposition, with a link in support of it. If one-third of a population supports or tolerates a heinous thing, then it is not unreasonable to claim that the reason the population has a reputation for supporting or tolerating the heinous thing, is that one-third of them actually do support or tolerate it. I don't think it would be particularly controversial to say "American whites in the 50s had a reputation for racism" due to widespread support of Jim Crow and segregation, even if those things were not actually supported by the majority, but only a significant minority. So it goes here.

My takeaway from it would be "why does one-third of this population support this heinous thing?" but it's impossible to have that conversation with people like you piping in and asserting that any interpretation of data that could offend anyone's sensibilities, is off limits.