Since when are happy endings reported on nationally or globally? That doesn't get "butts in the seats". It doesn't get people fired up enough that the conservative and liberal media conglomerates will rake in that sweet sweet ad-revenue.

If it's not earning money or furthering an agenda at best it will be local news.

Thank you for sharing that.

Not trying to start anything. I've gotta ask though hows that even work? Every passage I've ever read from their texts is anything but tolerant. I don't even think I've seen the margin/room for debate that other belief systems allow for when it comes to these topics. Seen a lot of death penalty passages and conquer type passages though.

First off, the friends and families of the victims must be going through hell right now, and my sympathies go out to them. Best of luck to those fighting through their injuries.

Ah, but when we take the same discussion to America, very strict gun control is always "the answer". Somehow it's not a complicated matter over here...

-----

This murderer claimed allegiance to a group that regularly uses home-made bombs to wreak its havoc. It's not a stretch to think that he might have done the same in the absence of firearms availability. This quote expresses my feelings on the matter:

With emphasis on the last. This guy was going to do something, somehow. Guns, bombs, machete attacks, and more: all have been in the news the last few days, and people will always find a way to violently push their view onto others. Yes, the firearm makes it easier, but that's not the underlying problem.

Does this mean we can not find ways to improve our system for allowing firearms ownership? Absolutely not, and I think there have been some surveys over the last half-decade or more showing firearms owners mostly support improving the screening process. But that also doesn't help much with the already extant proliferation, of which there isn't a practical solution.

Tsk, tsk. And people say Donald is mad and dangerous... Condolences. I might not like some content in my games but i don't like "real life innocents being murdered", themes.

First off, the main difference between Islam and Christianism is that the Quran is considered as "the voice of Allah" (through Mahomet) thus even if a believer can make his own interpration, he/she can't deny the voice of his/her God. Then you have the New Testament which are the writings of the apostles thus leaving way more room to interpretations (or even denial).

Besides the Quran, you also have the hadith (don't know the word in English) which are a collection of rules and traditions told by Mahomet. Through the ages, they've been classified by their relevancy thus they are more prone to interpretations than the suras of the Quran.

Also, rather than reading some verses on a forum, you can read the Quran directly to its source:
http://quran.com/4
Personnaly, I have a paper book version of the Quran because it's more practical and readable.

And most importantly, get some feedback from people with real muslim background because I don't think there a lot of knowledgeable people on this forum. For me it's easier as I had many Muslim acquaintances and can communicate more easily with people from the Maghreb due to our common language (French). While I could direct you to some people in French, I don't know the English-speaking scene but you can maybe start here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim

Have a good research ;)

It's a good question, and one that should be asked by anyone who sees themselves with subconscious prejudices against Muslims.

The problem with Islamophobia is that it ignores one fundamental truth: that Islam, like any major world religion, is not uniform. It has dozens of different schools of thought and denominations that range from secular, liberal and 100% compatible with western values to theocratic, ultra-conservative and 100% incompatible with western values.

You can't read the qu'ran or sunnahs in isolation and believe that you "understand Islam". Neither the qu'ran nor sunnahs are to be taken literally. Most of it is written in a historical context that no longer applies today and the different schools of Islam arose as a result of differences in interpretation. The qu'ran rarely makes it 100% clear whether the actions of Muhammad were generally applicable or whether he was reacting to given circumstances. There are also problems with translation. That's where qu'ranic exegesis comes into play - Islamic scholars basically asking themselves "what would Muhammad do?"

I'll give you an example: the widely quoted "kill the idolaters where they stand" quote. The first problem is that "idolater" doesn't refer to "unbelievers", it refers to another people with whom Muhammad's tribe had a peace treaty. This people constantly violated this peace treaty, and Muhammad basically decided turning the other cheek wasn't the best solution. It basically encourages armed resistance against legitimate persecution (so really the polar opposite of Jesus' "turn the other cheek"). Whether you believe armed resistance is justified or not, it prohibits unilateral aggression against peaceful parties. The problem lies in defining "persecution" but you'll find most Islamic scholars agree that targeting civilians and forced conversions are a no-go.

Muslims don't unanimously agree on much - on apostasy, on women's rights, on LGBT rights, on secularism. It's really no different from Christianity or Judaism: compare, if you will, Lutheran doctrine with the Westboro Baptist Church, and you have the same differences. In Israel, you have Jews running the full gamut of secular-liberal to violent extreme-orthodoxy.

So saying "Islam is violent" or "Muslims are all terrorists" is really like claiming that all Germans were Nazis in the Second World War. Sure, Islam has a bit of a problem at the moment with ideological extremists exploiting the widespread lack of education and opportunities for Muslims in the West nowadays, but that's a problem with society, not with the religion as a whole. Extreme political movements on the far left and far right are equally adept at exploiting civil disenfranchisement among low-earners and the poorly educated.

I must admit though, I did find that rainbow burqa hilarious - any branch of Islam that advocates wearing that is very unlikely to tolerate LGBT rights, and very few mainstream Muslims outside of Saudi Arabia actually wear burqas (they just stick out like a sore thumb in western societies).
I agree that contact with actual Muslims is the best way to learn more about the various perspectives on the religion, although these "ex-Muslim" groups online should be met with a certain degree of scepticism - I put them pretty much in the same bracket as the "born again ex-gays" in these fundamentalist Christian churches, most of which are scams. Of course, I applaud the courage of anyone who chooses to risk being oppressed for leaving Islam, just as long as the story is genuine.

Yeah, this guy has some serious shitty issues he needs to work through ... :(

Major problem with this analogy: Germans were functionally all Nazis during WWII. Their government was all Nazis, and was at war with the rest of Europe, so regardless of whether any individual was a hardcore Nazi it was actually a good assumption that any German you ran across was a Nazi.

This is the key difference between modern Muslims and Germany in WWII, in fact. Muslims are not united under a single trigger-happy bigoted government like Germans were. There are multiple majority Muslim countries, and while they all generally have human rights issues they aren't all the same.
The problem is that right now feelings are running high and productive discussion is the least likely outcome. Tempers need to cool off before people can make rational policies, generally.

The most frustrating part for me is that if we followed our existing gun control laws, manymass shootings would have been prevented.

We don't need more gun control laws, we need actual enforcement of the ones we do have. And we need police and FBI to stop engaging in turf wars and cooperate on the background checks.

And that's exactly what always happens. In a couple of weeks, it'll be old news and people just can't be bothered with it anymore.

In case people are wondering why folks bring up gun control in response to terrorism, check out this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpRQzTP8H1o

Ever since 9/11, the feds have been stepping up tracking the traffic of explosive materials or the stuff used to make them, so terrorists are encouraging their peers to take advantage of America's lax gun laws instead.

Because the gun he used was legally obtained and possessed? As are probably most used in crimes and terrorist attacks? Maybe if even one of the people in the club lawfully owned one he wouldn't have 50 kills.

More likely he would have had 60 instead. 'cause the only thing that leaves a bigger carnage than one guy pumping out hot lead like crazy in the middle of a crowded environment is several guys pumping out hot lead in the middle of a crowded environment. Real life isn't Hollywood.

Blah blah blah Im a conservative Blah Blah.

All I heard buddy. Your arguments are pointless and fall on deaf ears.
How about using some actual facts instead of the contrivances or those nice indie rag links you have there.

infinite9 was kicked out of ISIS for being too violent.