Anyone notice how the press is lifting up Islam while smearing Christianity?

[Gustaf]

I must say I like the well-reasoned case brought against jmf's assertion here. Well done, defenders of tolerance.

[Gustaf]

Imaginary arguments rooted in nothing deserve the responses they get. Some posts are made to get a reaction and would be better off not responded to, anyway.

I'd hardly say that it's rooted in nothing. Several people were actually able to intelligently disagree with it, after all. In an increasingly global world these kind of issues will become more and more important to deal with and I would think disagreeing would be more appropriate than dismissing in this case.

Besides, if you really think it's better not to respond then not responding would seem better than just displaying some kind of mob behaviour by quoting a post that had no content to begin with. At least in my opinion.

[Gustaf]

I'd hardly say that it's rooted in nothing. Several people were actually able to intelligently disagree with it, after all. In an increasingly global world these kind of issues will become more and more important to deal with and I would think disagreeing would be more appropriate than dismissing in this case.

Besides, if you really think it's better not to respond then not responding would seem better than just displaying some kind of mob behaviour by quoting a post that had no content to begin with. At least in my opinion.

If you read my post correctly, I just stated why the responses were like they were and that some people shouldn't have responded, I didn't attack the OP. That aside, I do think that it's incorrect to assert that Christianity is more attacked than Islam.

More attacked is one thing, judged by different standard another.

There is a Swedish artist who made a work of art that could be viewed as offensive towards Muhammed. He has been subjected to death threats and been physically attacked. In Swedish media this has been debated. Whether it is right to let him speak in public, whether the reactions can be understood and so on. Now, granted, the vast majority have been defending his right to free speech but there have been a lots of ifs and buts.

On the other hand,  a few years back there was an art exihibition made by a Swedish artist which, among other things, depicted Jesus having sex with men. This was put on display in churches. And while controversial among Christians had very solid support in the media and on the left. And that artist has interestingly said that art offensive to islam shouldn't be displayed or defended.

Obviously, there is more to the debate than what I just presented but I think a snarky "no" is a pretty ridiculous reaction.

[Gustaf]

I'll just note a few minor quibbles with Anshiviki's points:

1. There aren't billions of Muslims in the world. There might be 2 or so by this point, but I think even that might be a stretch (last time I checked they were 15-20% of a world population of about 7 billion)

2. When one talks about Muslims in Europe there is also immigration to take into account, combined with much higher birth rates. When one considers the ageing population of Western Europe (and we're in worse shape than the US there) it seems as if immigration might have to increase in the future. Would still take more than a couple of generations for them to become a majority, obviously, but I think Jmf makes a fair point that this wouldn't be required for it to change national policy.

And as regards support for sharia law my understanding is that it is commonly argued that sharia law should be applied for Muslims, but not for non-Muslims. I believe this is the case in at least some Muslim countries, like Malaysia.