I have a much better anology. If 1% of employees of "Apples-R-Us" publicly said they were going to poison random apples until a certain segment of the population was dead, then it would be safe to assume that all apples from "Apples-R-Us" would not be safe to eat.
Listen man, YOU quoted MY claim, tried to pick it apart logically, couldn't. Because it is not able to be logically picked apart. Because it is true. Now your argument has devolved into "but no one said that." OK...I said it for no reason, then. But your first response took issue with the claim itself, not the fact that it came apropos of nothing.
I don't enjoy arguing for the simple sake of arguing as you seem to. I made a claim. It was uncontroversial and not directly aimed at anyone (though it seems that around here, it needs to be made in every Islam thread). The claim was a true one. Just let it go.
And my counterargument was that this line of thinking condemns everything and everyone: Christianity, Islam, Judaism, blacks, whites, Chinese people, lawyers, politicians, mailmen, southerners, northerners. Therefore, it is meaningless.
Christians have killed BECAUSE OF THEIR RELIGION. You say: "a small percent can in fact corrupt an entire thing." So, Christianity is corrupted? No. It isn't. Because that logic is complete bullshit. And you don't really believe it. Disingenuous and incorrect are not good qualities in a statement.
But you haven't been able to point out one example where anyone did any such thing.
It isn't necessary to pick it apart. Something can be true and still be poorly reasoned, out of place, and stupid. See my poop statement.
The problem is that your statement has implied and you have even made the claim that relating terror and Islam is equivalence to claiming all Muslims are terrorists. But you haven't been able to point out one example where anyone did any such thing.
Here is your first response to me, in its entirety:
"Saying Islam is bad and saying all Muslims are terrorists are 2 different things.
If Islam leads only 1% of it's people to try to carry off or support terror attacks, it can make it justified to say that the religion is bad. It does not take majority or even a large percentage to make something bad.
If one Christian in a thousand killed a thousand non-believers, Christianity would be bad. Even though the number of bad Christians would only be .1%.
If I were to put a tiny cyanide capsule in an apple, would you argue that the vast majority of the apple is still okay to eat, or would you throw away the whole apple?"
This doesn't mention the notion of my point being out of place. It tries to justify the position that "Islam is bad." This was not apropos of my original statement, which was: It's not wrong to talk about the terrorists' faith, but it's wrong to use this example as an attack on others of the same faith who aren't terrorists. THAT point, in this thread, is both apropos and uncontroversial.
1) Spanish Inquisition, Crusades, torture and burning alive of heretics for believing the Earth revolves around the sun, killing and bombing of abortion clinics, genocide in Bosnia, The Family funding of a death sentence for homosexuality in Uganda, the KKK--I could go on for awhile here, but hopefully you get the point.
2) How about this: ALL religion fosters hate and bigotry and should not be encouraged.