I think it is obvious that Christianity has become mostly benign and secularized for the most part and I don't see Christians subjugating their women and executing gays in the ways that take place in the Islamic world due to the quran and Hadith (the Hadith is the so-called writings of the prophet and his followers in which Islamic Shariah law is based from); but I see too many atheists tending to bash Christianity and giving excuses for Islam. Why is this so when according to the Islamic faith, we atheists are "kafar" should be the first ones killed before the Christians and Jews (especially me, since I am an apostate since I was "born" a Muslim); therefore, why do atheists tend to give excuses for the true evils of the Islamic faith??
Jesus Christ as a symbol (whether he was a real person or not) is a much better role model than the child molesting, murderous, and evil "prophet" called Muhammad. The Bible doesn't demand governments to be Christian but the Quran demands that all governments be Islamic by nature and the punishments are much more bizarre. In Islam, you can not even ask any questions about Muhammad or Allah but Christians and Jews are able to debate within themselves and ask questions. When a cartoon is drawn or a quran is burnt you see how savagely Muslims act throughout the world and those who are "moderate" instead of condemning the barbaric acts blame the "Salman Rushdie's" or the "Pastor" instead of placing blame on the perpetrators and culture of violence in the Islamic world. So why is it, that Christianity is often (in my opinion) overly criticized and Islam is not criticized enough when the gravest threat to the existence of the human race is surely an Islamic regime with nuclear weapons?? I'd like to get your opinions..
The only people ever to use nuclear weapons on a civilian population when it was totally unnecessary (the Japs were suing for peace) was Christians in the pay of the United States of America.
As of today: Dead Japanese at the hands of American nuclear terror: about 400,000(?) Dead at the hands of "Islamic fascist" nuclear terror: 0.
What you people who bring up Hiroshima and Nagasaki fail to realize that despite having used a nuclear weapon only once (or twice) was something like 65-66 years ago. That was well before even my parents were born. Saying this, I admit that it was a dark side of U.S. history but even then, it did help end a war. I still do not excuse it as it targeted a civilian population; but what happened over 65-66 years ago is irrelevant to current foreign policy.
Even if we had used the nuclear weapon which was unfortunate and a dark part of history; we never planned on ending the world. In contrast, an Islamic regime like that occupying Iran would not be deterred by "mutually assured destruction" as they would value jihad and death. They would be willing to allow every last Iranian to die as the lives of Iranians are not important for them. As the regime itself produced a video regarding the return of the "hidden imam" or "imam mahdi", what does this mean? It means that they have to start violence in order to take over Jerusalem before moving on to the west in order for the "hidden imam to return". A requirement accorded by the Hadith is concurring Jerusalem; so all this support of Hamas and other terrorist groups in the Palestinian territories is not because "they care" about Palestinians but need Jerusalem for their end-of-the-world prophetic dreams.
Let's be realistic and stop being naive in bringing up the Hiroshima and Nagasaki issue when it has no relevance to the year 2011. That is something the Islamic Republic does.
I'm sorry but then to your logic all of the European countries should hate each other since they were mortal enemies, but guess what? They are all part of one big family in the European Union. 40+ years ago we had segregation, we now have a black President.
It is great to learn from history and it is quite vital. For example, we can learn from history that we can not neglect Afghanistan from their time of need as that is exactly what we did after the Soviet-Afghan war resulting in the Taliban and Al Qaeda and then 9/11. Saying this, we can't be stuck in history. Some of us like Mr. Minion seem to be stuck in history and basing all his world views solely from history. The biggest character of a nation is how it progresses and the west has demonstrated progression. In contrast, my homeland of Iran has done something unique and sad the past 30+ years - something I call de-evolution.
No doubt that ancient Persia has a greater, deeper, and richer history than the U.S. for example. But it is just that: HISTORY.
And one more thing: the Japanese show their class and nature. The Japanese for all intents and purposes could be anti-American because of Nagasaki and Hiroshima but understand that history is history and are actually a pro-American and pro-west people. Dr. Michio Kaku who's parents were in the Japanese internment camps is pro-American and pro-west. Therefore, if the Japanese have been able to advance, modernize, and become successful and not blame all their problems on America and the west, why can't the Islamic world do the same rather than scapegoating against America and Israel?
This notion speaks volumes by itself.
Of course you don't want anyone to consider history, context is an enemy of your arguments. If you want others to fight your fight you need them to simply taken in your fear and enlist in the fight your unwilling to fight.
So when you have the letter written explaining how Islam needs to improve their behavior or what? The west will invade your world while Sassan takes a job with the government.
What is it like to be this fearful, is it why you are a psychology major?
The short answer to your question is that they don't. Islam today (in many parts of the world) is similar to christianity in the dark ages... I see no atheists giving a pass to Islam. Its not even an argument because its so far out there. The reason WESTERN atheists spend more time on Christianity is first because its what we know..(that should be obvious) Secondly it has become sort-of civilized compared to ages past. It tries to dress up its barbarism in civilized clothes. Does this mean it gets a pass and we only go after the most barbaric forms of superstition? I think not.
I think this thread has a tone of 'liberal' bashing.. that I really find distasteful. True there is an element of the left out there that completely overbalances the scales in the name of 'political correctness'... but I don't think you could label them atheists or atheists in general. I think that's a strawman argument that has been played on this thread.
I think Islam is a violent in your face threat and that christianity is a more subtle but socially acceptable...(at least in the west) kind of threat...but a threat none-the-less.
The real problem is that atheists from Islamic countries..are scared to speak up.. That's why there's more christian bashing... Give Islamic countries another 500 to a thousand years and they may become as vocal as the west.