Gallup Poll - Muslims are religious group LEAST likely to support violence

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="BMD004"]I'm talking about Americans here. But anyway, fair enough. My point still stands. The Middle East and Africa are parts of the world with a lot of violence. The ones who are here in America are the ones who got away from all of that. You cannot compare the Muslims in America to the Muslims who live in those countries.

Plus, a lot of Americans are fed up with the wars in the Middle East, and would be more likely to allow the killing of civilians out of desperation if it would help their cause to end terrorism.

It's more of a political, emotional issue than a religious one.

BMD004

It's true, you can't compare Muslims in the US to Muslims in the Middle East, but what this poll does suggest that Islam itself isn't actually a violent religion, as many people take Muslim extremism to suggest (not saying that you believe that, of course).

I know you're talking about Americans, but I still don't see support for your claim that the Muslims here are ones who fled from violence in the Middle East/Africa. You've just been claiming that's the case without really supporting it... Though I suppose it's not that relevant a point regardless because my above statement about its implications for the "violence" of Islam still hold.

[QUOTE="Blue-Sky"]

There are nearly 2 billion Muslims in the world

the terrorist organizations don't even make up 0.001% of that.

surrealnumber5

i clicked around on a few sites and islamcovers between 21-23% of the worlds population.

2billion/.21 = 9.5 billion

2 billion / .23 = 8.7 billion

so according to you there are between 8.7 and 9.5 billion people on this planet.

Also on the subject, all major religions, cultures, or any group of people would resort to violence when pushed enough. History has proven that.

Wasdie

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Also on the subject, all major religions, cultures, or any group of people would resort to violence when pushed enough. History has proven that.

gameguy6700

All people are capable of wrong and right regardless of their religion or ethnicity or whatever dictates their life style.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="Blue-Sky"]

There are nearly 2 billion Muslims in the world

the terrorist organizations don't even make up 0.001% of that.

chessmaster1989

i clicked around on a few sites and islamcovers between 21-23% of the worlds population.

2billion/.21 = 9.5 billion

2 billion / .23 = 8.7 billion

so according to you there are between 8.7 and 9.5 billion people on this planet.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

i clicked around on a few sites and islamcovers between 21-23% of the worlds population.

2billion/.21 = 9.5 billion

2 billion / .23 = 8.7 billion

so according to you there are between 8.7 and 9.5 billion people on this planet.

surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

It's true, you can't compare Muslims in the US to Muslims in the Middle East, but what this poll does suggest that Islam itself isn't actually a violent religion, as many people take Muslim extremism to suggest (not saying that you believe that, of course).

I know you're talking about Americans, but I still don't see support for your claim that the Muslims here are ones who fled from violence in the Middle East/Africa. You've just been claiming that's the case without really supporting it... Though I suppose it's not that relevant a point regardless because my above statement about its implications for the "violence" of Islam still hold.

chessmaster1989

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"] Well (according to Wikipedia) the current Muslim population is around 1.5 billion, so while his number was a bit high I think it's not all that far off.chessmaster1989

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"][QUOTE="BMD004"]But my point is that it doesn't do anything to prove anything about violence. All it does is talk about killing of innocent civilians. My point is that the killing of innocent Muslim civilians happens a lot in that part of the world. A lot of Muslims have had to deal with that. The Muslims in America are sympathetic when it comes to the killing of civilians because so many Muslims have been killed that way from different wars and oppressive regimes. Americans don't really deal with that. Most Americans don't even realize just how many civilians have been killed from the wars over there. All this poll shows is that Americans, regardless of religion, generally don't like the killing of innocent civilians, and Muslims REALLY don't like the killing of innocent civilians, because they have a connection to their people being killed.BMD004

What if they're not initially from the Middle East or Africa? I think the connection you're talking about, while possible, is a little iffy in that case...

And as I've said, many times, that's not necessarily "where their people are from"... you need to stop using that argument already. :|

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] yes i saw that number a few times too and i would call 25% exaggeration well past rounding and up there with malice fraud and the intent to deceive

surrealnumber5

1.5 billion and 2 billion have basically the same impact in terms of magnitude, and in saying that Muslim extremists are only a miniscule percentage of Muslims. Not everyone takes the time or thinks to look numbers up. If I'd had to give an educated guess (without looking it up), I probably would have guessed 1.5 or 2 billion. So basically, if I'd said 1.5, you wouldn't have had a problem, but if I'd said 2, you would have been on my case saying how I'm maliciously exaggerating things.

Yup, that seems reasonable. :roll:

You also have to realize that there are times where exact numbers are important and when they aren't. In this case, where the only purpose is a magnitude of comparison, the exact number is not important.

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"] Killing of civilians is an important aspect of violence, and in particular the violence often associated with religious (and Muslim) extremism. And my other point was, which you still have not addressed, that you haven't shown that (most) Muslim Americans are indeed closely linked to the conflicts in the Middle East (through, for example, family).chessmaster1989

What if they're not initially from the Middle East or Africa? I think the connection you're talking about, while possible, is a little iffy in that case...

And as I've said, many times, that's not necessarily "where their people are from"... you need to stop using that argument already. :|

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"] lol serious post? If so... :? My guess is he didn't know the exact number and gave a rough (somewhat educated) guess... 2 billion, not an unreasonable guess.chessmaster1989

1.5 billion and 2 billion have basically the same impact in terms of magnitude, and in saying that Muslim extremists are only a miniscule percentage of Muslims. Not everyone takes the time or thinks to look numbers up. If I'd had to give an educated guess (without looking it up), I probably would have guessed 1.5 or 2 billion. So basically, if I'd said 1.5, you wouldn't have had a problem, but if I'd said 2, you would have been on my case saying how I'm maliciously exaggerating things.

Yup, that seems reasonable. :roll:

You also have to realize that there are times where exact numbers are important and when they aren't. In this case, where the only purpose is a magnitude of comparison, the exact number is not important.

What a dumb poll. If you ask a guy that plans on blowing himself up and taking his rival group with him if he plans on doing that....he will say no, of course not. I'm peaceful.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="BMD004"]How would they not be more sympathetic to things happening in the Middle East and Africa? That is where their people are from. Even if they have never left the U.S... and even if they don't know of any family in that part of the world, by being Muslim, they would feel more sympathetic towards Muslim civilians being killed on a daily basis.

BMD004

What if they're not initially from the Middle East or Africa? I think the connection you're talking about, while possible, is a little iffy in that case...

And as I've said, many times, that's not necessarily "where their people are from"... you need to stop using that argument already. :|

Poor analogy. Civil rights directly affect blacks in America in a way that civilian deaths in the Middle East doesn't (necessarily) affect Muslim Americans. And even if a black person didn't grow up during the civil rights era, the fact that it happened still affects them today.

And then you should clarify what you mean when you say "their people," the impression I got (based on some of your previous posts) was that you were referring to their ancestors. And Christians have been targeted (e.g., Darfur), so again your point isn't really true.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] i dont see how being off by 25% is not unreasonable, but that is the opinion of someone who works in a field of exacting number. he could have looked it up, it took both you and i second to do so and neither of us stood up to make a point, nor did we present it as something meaningful to the talks at hand. i dont see anything that places good faith on the part of blue-sky.

surrealnumber5

1.5 billion and 2 billion have basically the same impact in terms of magnitude, and in saying that Muslim extremists are only a miniscule percentage of Muslims. Not everyone takes the time or thinks to look numbers up. If I'd had to give an educated guess (without looking it up), I probably would have guessed 1.5 or 2 billion. So basically, if I'd said 1.5, you wouldn't have had a problem, but if I'd said 2, you would have been on my case saying how I'm maliciously exaggerating things.

Yup, that seems reasonable. :roll:

You also have to realize that there are times where exact numbers are important and when they aren't. In this case, where the only purpose is a magnitude of comparison, the exact number is not important.

Well I'm not particularly familiar with blue-sky's posts so I can't pass judgment there (though I am glad to know you don't think of me as someone who would use false "facts" :P (*schemes ways to use this to my advantage :twisted:*) but as I've said, the number is only really important for presentation of magnitude. Given that 1.5 and 2 billion are of similar magnitude, I don't really see it as an attempt to deceive because there's no real gain (in terms of one's argument) in doing so (even if the deception is believed).

Just because these are American Muslims does not mean the poll is invalid, the other religions shown are also American, basically this is more like a poll for America and not an international one.

[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

What if they're not initially from the Middle East or Africa? I think the connection you're talking about, while possible, is a little iffy in that case...

And as I've said, many times, that's not necessarily "where their people are from"... you need to stop using that argument already. :|

chessmaster1989

Poor analogy. Civil rights directly affect blacks in America in a way that civilian deaths in the Middle East doesn't (necessarily) affect Muslim Americans. And even if a black person didn't grow up during the civil rights era, the fact that it happened still affects them today.

And then you should clarify what you mean when you say "their people," the impression I got (based on some of your previous posts) was that you were referring to their ancestors. And Christians have been targeted (e.g., Darfur), so again your point isn't really true.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

1.5 billion and 2 billion have basically the same impact in terms of magnitude, and in saying that Muslim extremists are only a miniscule percentage of Muslims. Not everyone takes the time or thinks to look numbers up. If I'd had to give an educated guess (without looking it up), I probably would have guessed 1.5 or 2 billion. So basically, if I'd said 1.5, you wouldn't have had a problem, but if I'd said 2, you would have been on my case saying how I'm maliciously exaggerating things.

Yup, that seems reasonable. :roll:

You also have to realize that there are times where exact numbers are important and when they aren't. In this case, where the only purpose is a magnitude of comparison, the exact number is not important.

chessmaster1989

Well I'm not particularly familiar with blue-sky's posts so I can't pass judgment there (though I am glad to know you don't think of me as someone who would use false "facts" :P (*schemes ways to use this to my advantage :twisted:*) but as I've said, the number is only really important for presentation of magnitude. Given that 1.5 and 2 billion are of similar magnitude, I don't really see it as an attempt to deceive because there's no real gain (in terms of one's argument) in doing so (even if the deception is believed).

[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

What if they're not initially from the Middle East or Africa? I think the connection you're talking about, while possible, is a little iffy in that case...

And as I've said, many times, that's not necessarily "where their people are from"... you need to stop using that argument already. :|

chessmaster1989

Poor analogy. Civil rights directly affect blacks in America in a way that civilian deaths in the Middle East doesn't (necessarily) affect Muslim Americans. And even if a black person didn't grow up during the civil rights era, the fact that it happened still affects them today.

And then you should clarify what you mean when you say "their people," the impression I got (based on some of your previous posts) was that you were referring to their ancestors. And Christians have been targeted (e.g., Darfur), so again your point isn't really true.

I'd say the analogy is quite apropriate, deaths of Muslims in the middle east ect. effects Muslim Americans just like civil rights affects African Americans.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="BMD004"]"Their people" as in Muslim people. And don't tell me to stop using that argument. It's the only logical argument there is. You are going to sit here and tell me that Muslim-Americans are just "less violent" because there was a poll done about whether or not killing of civilians is right or wrong. That makes absolutely no sense. First of all, it doesn't have anything to do with their religion, and secondly, it has everything to do with the fact that most stories about civilians being killed are stories about innocent Muslim civilians being killed. Baptists don't deal with their fellow civilians being killed. Catholics don't deal with their fellow civilians being killed. Protestants, Mormons, etc all don't deal with that. Muslims do. They are sympathetic to it. It would be like asking a white person about the civil rights movement.. And then ask a black person about that same thing, even if they didn't grow up during that time. The black person is generally more passionate about that issue.BMD004

Poor analogy. Civil rights directly affect blacks in America in a way that civilian deaths in the Middle East doesn't (necessarily) affect Muslim Americans. And even if a black person didn't grow up during the civil rights era, the fact that it happened still affects them today.

And then you should clarify what you mean when you say "their people," the impression I got (based on some of your previous posts) was that you were referring to their ancestors. And Christians have been targeted (e.g., Darfur), so again your point isn't really true.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] if the number is not important why state it, also i would not have pointed out such a thing if you had done it because you are not a poster who has a history of attempting to present false "facts". i may not agree with you on political or economic terms but i have no reason to suspect you of trying to use dubious claims to support your argument.

BMD004

Well I'm not particularly familiar with blue-sky's posts so I can't pass judgment there (though I am glad to know you don't think of me as someone who would use false "facts" :P (*schemes ways to use this to my advantage :twisted:*) but as I've said, the number is only really important for presentation of magnitude. Given that 1.5 and 2 billion are of similar magnitude, I don't really see it as an attempt to deceive because there's no real gain (in terms of one's argument) in doing so (even if the deception is believed).

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

1.5 billion and 2 billion have basically the same impact in terms of magnitude, and in saying that Muslim extremists are only a miniscule percentage of Muslims. Not everyone takes the time or thinks to look numbers up. If I'd had to give an educated guess (without looking it up), I probably would have guessed 1.5 or 2 billion. So basically, if I'd said 1.5, you wouldn't have had a problem, but if I'd said 2, you would have been on my case saying how I'm maliciously exaggerating things.

Yup, that seems reasonable. :roll:

You also have to realize that there are times where exact numbers are important and when they aren't. In this case, where the only purpose is a magnitude of comparison, the exact number is not important.

chessmaster1989

Well I'm not particularly familiar with blue-sky's posts so I can't pass judgment there (though I am glad to know you don't think of me as someone who would use false "facts" :P (*schemes ways to use this to my advantage :twisted:*) but as I've said, the number is only really important for presentation of magnitude. Given that 1.5 and 2 billion are of similar magnitude, I don't really see it as an attempt to deceive because there's no real gain (in terms of one's argument) in doing so (even if the deception is believed).

How does them being American affect the results of this? The people who are always bad mouthing Islam say that it's inherently violent. Most of the people who defend Islam from the blind hate on this forum say the middle east is violent because of their current economic and social situations, by saying "oh but these are Americans" you're just agreeing with the people on here who defend Islam.Ace6301

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="BMD004"]"Their people" as in Muslim people. And don't tell me to stop using that argument. It's the only logical argument there is. You are going to sit here and tell me that Muslim-Americans are just "less violent" because there was a poll done about whether or not killing of civilians is right or wrong. That makes absolutely no sense. First of all, it doesn't have anything to do with their religion, and secondly, it has everything to do with the fact that most stories about civilians being killed are stories about innocent Muslim civilians being killed. Baptists don't deal with their fellow civilians being killed. Catholics don't deal with their fellow civilians being killed. Protestants, Mormons, etc all don't deal with that. Muslims do. They are sympathetic to it. It would be like asking a white person about the civil rights movement.. And then ask a black person about that same thing, even if they didn't grow up during that time. The black person is generally more passionate about that issue.parkurtommo

Poor analogy. Civil rights directly affect blacks in America in a way that civilian deaths in the Middle East doesn't (necessarily) affect Muslim Americans. And even if a black person didn't grow up during the civil rights era, the fact that it happened still affects them today.

And then you should clarify what you mean when you say "their people," the impression I got (based on some of your previous posts) was that you were referring to their ancestors. And Christians have been targeted (e.g., Darfur), so again your point isn't really true.

I'd say the analogy is quite apropriate, deaths of Muslims in the middle east ect. effects Muslim Americans just like civil rights affects African Americans.

[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

Poor analogy. Civil rights directly affect blacks in America in a way that civilian deaths in the Middle East doesn't (necessarily) affect Muslim Americans. And even if a black person didn't grow up during the civil rights era, the fact that it happened still affects them today.

And then you should clarify what you mean when you say "their people," the impression I got (based on some of your previous posts) was that you were referring to their ancestors. And Christians have been targeted (e.g., Darfur), so again your point isn't really true.

chessmaster1989

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] if the number is not important why state it, also i would not have pointed out such a thing if you had done it because you are not a poster who has a history of attempting to present false "facts". i may not agree with you on political or economic terms but i have no reason to suspect you of trying to use dubious claims to support your argument.

surrealnumber5

Well I'm not particularly familiar with blue-sky's posts so I can't pass judgment there (though I am glad to know you don't think of me as someone who would use false "facts" :P (*schemes ways to use this to my advantage :twisted:*) but as I've said, the number is only really important for presentation of magnitude. Given that 1.5 and 2 billion are of similar magnitude, I don't really see it as an attempt to deceive because there's no real gain (in terms of one's argument) in doing so (even if the deception is believed).

Well that's part of my point really when I talk about magnitudes. When you think of 1.5 billion and 2 billion people, they both spawn images of a ton of people. They're similar in magnitude, so people think of them similarly.

You may be right that it's better to use percentage.

[QUOTE="parkurtommo"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

Poor analogy. Civil rights directly affect blacks in America in a way that civilian deaths in the Middle East doesn't (necessarily) affect Muslim Americans. And even if a black person didn't grow up during the civil rights era, the fact that it happened still affects them today.

And then you should clarify what you mean when you say "their people," the impression I got (based on some of your previous posts) was that you were referring to their ancestors. And Christians have been targeted (e.g., Darfur), so again your point isn't really true.

chessmaster1989

I'd say the analogy is quite apropriate, deaths of Muslims in the middle east ect. effects Muslim Americans just like civil rights affects African Americans.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"][QUOTE="BMD004"]Christians in Darfur isn't really the same. Muslim's have a whole culture... it's not just a religious belief. In America, most people are Christian. Since most people are Christian, they identify with other things. Since Muslim's are a minority in the U.S., they identify with each other through their Muslim culture. So Muslim's in the U.S. would be more sympathetic to other Muslim causes around the world. BMD004

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"][QUOTE="parkurtommo"]

I'd say the analogy is quite apropriate, deaths of Muslims in the middle east ect. effects Muslim Americans just like civil rights affects African Americans.

surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"] Muslims do not have one culture any more than Christians do...chessmaster1989

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"][QUOTE="BMD004"]I never said that and that is irrelevant.

BMD004

How does them being American affect the results of this? The people who are always bad mouthing Islam say that it's inherently violent. Most of the people who defend Islam from the blind hate on this forum say the middle east is violent because of their current economic and social situations, by saying "oh but these are Americans" you're just agreeing with the people on here who defend Islam.Ace6301

Although, admittedly, I haven't seen any of the prominent Islam bashers posting in this topic. Probably because it rips a gaping hole in their argument.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"] How so?chessmaster1989

:roll: There is some much wrong with this post I'm not even going to bother arguing it.majoras_wrath

[QUOTE="Ace6301"]How does them being American affect the results of this? The people who are always bad mouthing Islam say that it's inherently violent. Most of the people who defend Islam from the blind hate on this forum say the middle east is violent because of their current economic and social situations, by saying "oh but these are Americans" you're just agreeing with the people on here who defend Islam.majoras_wrath

Although, admittedly, I haven't seen any of the prominent Islam bashers posting in this topic. Probably because it rips a gaping hole in their argument.

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] they have the same rights and protections as everyone else in the modern US, that is why they are so happy and well adjusted here? if i had to take a guess....

BMD004

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="BMD004"]If I, as a Catholic, moved to Iran, do you think I'd fit in better with the Iranians there, or other white people who were a mix of Baptist, Protestant, etc?BMD004

[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="chessmaster1989"] I am confused about how that makes the analogy work though. It's not because of Muslim deaths in the Middle East that Muslim Americans have many of the rights that they do (or rather, that they share many of the same rights as everyone else does). It's because of the Civil Rights Movement that blacks have many of the rights that they do (or rather, that they share many of the same rights as everyone else does).chessmaster1989

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="BMD004"]Analogies don't have to be the same exact thing literally. It's just to make you see the general principle of what I was talking about. People have different perspectives on things even though they themselves did not go through something. I didn't go through Katrina... I was in Houston... but I grew up in New Orleans and care about it more than some random person from Minnesota. Some young black dude is going to care more about black history than I would, because I'm not black. A guy with Chinese ancestry is going to care more about things going on in China than I would. And a Muslim would be more sympathetic to all of the wars and turmoil going on in these Muslim countries than most Americans.BMD004

Given that 9/11 occurred for similar reasons and was done by similar people as much of the violence in the Middle East has been related to, I think the comparison is fair. And, if what you suggest about 9/11 applies by extension to the Middle East, how does random suicide bombing in public (non-military) places related to the scenario you speak of? Obviously that is not the only source of violence in the Middle East, but it is a kind that gets a lot of publicity.

You're right about the intention of the question of course, but 9/11 (BS conspiracy theories aside) could most certainly be seen as part of a war of the West done for "the greater good." Sure there may be some innocent Americans who die in the process, but for a broader statement, it was seen as worth it.

[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="chessmaster1989"] Yes but as I've stated, civilian violence isn't unique to the Middle East, and there have been other conflicts that would make other people less fond of civilian violence. Speaking of which, 9/11 is something that would make all Americans, regardless of religion, less fond of civilian violence. In particular, it provides an exposure to civilian violence similar to the type that you're talking about with Muslims. So, I would argue that all Americans have emotional reasons to be opposed to civilian violence.

chessmaster1989

Given that 9/11 occurred for similar reasons and was done by similar people as much of the violence in the Middle East has been related to, I think the comparison is fair. And, if what you suggest about 9/11 applies by extension to the Middle East, how does random suicide bombing in public (non-military) places related to the scenario you speak of? Obviously that is not the only source of violence in the Middle East, but it is a kind that gets a lot of publicity.

You're right about the intention of the question of course, but 9/11 (BS conspiracy theories aside) could most certainly be seen as part of a war of the West done for "the greater good." Sure there may be some innocent Americans who die in the process, but for a broader statement, it was seen as worth it.