Christian terrorism against abortion providers
Ignoring the perpetrators possible religious affiliations, the number of individuals killed in connection with abortion providers over a period of almost 4 decades does not even reach double figures. In case the reader is interested, the exact figure is 9.
If we look to other faiths, in the U.K., 92 per cent of terrorist-related prisoners unsurprisingly describe themselves as Muslim, while five are Buddhist, one is a self-described Pagan, and none are Christian.
Does this mean Buddhism is a violent religion? Of course not. It is only natural that there are a few hateful adherents in any religion; it's human nature and you will find this in all groups no matter what world-view they adhere to.
If violent acts perpetrated by Muslims were as rare as it is among adherents of other faiths, then Iftikhar may have a point. Sadly this is not the case.
The number of individuals killed in religiously motivated attacks by the hands of Muslims in 2008 alone numbers 10,779. That's more people killed by Islamists in 2008 than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined. These shocking figures were followed by 9,159 killed in 2009 and 9,175 in 2010.[...]
There have been several terror attacks in the U.S. since 9/11 and, with little to no help from American Muslims, more than 30 foiled attempts between October 2001 and May 2010. In fact, whilst Muslims represent less than 1 percent of the American population, they constitute more than 80 percent of all US terror convictions. [...]
Furthermore, no one is arguing that there are no Christian terrorists. Every ideology known to man has had its fair share of extremists, but in the case of Islamic terrorism, the "extremism" is almost always carried out by individuals who hold very orthodox and mainstream Islamic view-points.
Timothy McVeigh, a Christian terrorist?
This is possibly one of the most widely perpetuated myths in the West. Whilst his parents were Catholics, Timothy McVeigh was a self-described Agnostic who said he would "improvise" if it turned out there was an afterlife. He even joked, "If I'm going to hell, I'm gonna have a lot of company."
So unless we are to determine religious affiliation through genetic ties, to describe him as a "Christian terrorist" would be quite a stretch for anyones imagination.
Unlike Nidal Malik Hasan, McVeigh did not cry "Jesus is Greater," or "Buddha is Greater," because he was motivated by his hatred of the federal government, and not by his non-existent religious beliefs.
Anders Behring Breivik, a Christian terrorist?
Today, no-doubt, Iftikhar would also mention Anders Behring Breivik, the perpetrator of the 2011 Norway attacks which left 76 dead. However, in addition to the fact that he was declared insane and in a psychotic state both during and after the twin attacks, Breivik's definition of what makes a person "100% Christian" is a very novel one to say the least, so even this comparison would be faulty.
The most basic requirement which defines a Christian is someone who believes Jesus is the Christ and accepts him as their "Lord and Savior". This is universal accepted by every denomination of Christianity, but not by Breivik [2083: A European Declaration of Independence (p. 1308)].
In his 1,500 page manifesto, "2083: A European Declaration of Independence", Breivik refers to people who are culturally Christian but have no belief in Christ, as "Christian atheists", and goes on to describe himself as a "cultural Christian". Thus his motivations were not religious but cultural [2083: A European Declaration of Independence (p. 1360-on)].
If an Arab Nationalist accepts Islam as a unifying symbol for the Arab states but does not accept Muhammad as a prophet, then he, by the very definition of the word, is not a Muslim and any negative actions by him cannot in anyway be attributed to Islam.
Likewise, the same applies to Breivik, Christianity, and Europe. There is no need to invoke the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, because by the very definition of the word, he is not a Christian.
It could be argued that beliefs do not matter and that self-identification is enough, but then that would by akin to arguing that "The God Delusion" is pro-Christian literature, because even Professor Dawkins has referred to himself as a "cultural Christian".
Furthermore, no one is arguing that there are no Christian terrorists. Every ideology known to man has had its fair share of extremists, but in the case of Islamic terrorism, the "extremism" is almost always carried out by individuals who hold very orthodox and mainstream Islamic view-points.
Further Reading
“Other religions kill, too.” , from TheReligionOfPeace.com:
The so-called “members of other faiths” alluded to by Muslims are nearly always just nominal members who have no active involvement. They are neither inspired by, nor do they credit religion as Muslim terrorists do - and this is what makes it a very different matter.
Islam is associated with Islamic terrorism because that is the association that the terrorists themselves choose to make.
Muslims who compare crime committed by people who happen to be nominal members of other religions to religious terror committed explicitly in the name of Islam are comparing apples to oranges.
Yes, some of the abortion clinic bombers were religious (as Muslims enjoy pointing out), but consider the scope of the problem. There have been six deadly attacks over a 36 year period in the U.S. Eight people died. This is an average of one death every 4.5 years.
By contrast, Islamic terrorists staged nearly ten thousand deadly attacks in just the six years following September 11th, 2001. If one goes back to 1971, when Muslim armies in Bangladesh began the mass slaughter of Hindus, through the years of Jihad in the Sudan, Kashmir and Algeria, and the present-day Sunni-Shia violence in Iraq, the number of innocents killed in the name of Islam probably exceeds five million over this same period.
Keep reading....
