Are muslims more prone to suicide bomb naturally?

[Kimchi]

Answer below. Give me your answers.

[Skepta]

I hope you are trying to be funny. If not you are an imbecile.

[sw3111]

About as likely as you and me. Suicide bombing is nothing to do with Islam.

[wan]

Right now, they are more likely.
Islam is the most dangerous and extreme religion right now.

[Kimchi]

Right now, they are more likely.
Islam is the most dangerous and extreme religion right now.

I heard they kill people even serving their own religion for not worshipping hardcore lol. rip

[wan]

I heard they kill people even serving their own religion for not worshipping hardcore lol. rip

Yeah, there are some really hardcore Muslims.
But no one should hate all Muslims because of the actions of others. We're just lucky most religious people cherry pick the stuff they choose to believe.

[jiang]

it's not all of the muslims. it's just the extremists that cause this. extremists are more likely to do acts of terrorism, not muslims. i'm not muslim but i kinda find it annoying how people automatically link "muslims-terrorists."

[W23rd]

I don't think they're naturally born suicide bombers. lol. I think it has to do more with their society, their lack of education, and that they are ultra-religious, which makes them prone to being easily brainwashed. Yes, I believe they should be kept out of the USA.

[yep123]

I heard they kill people even serving their own religion for not worshipping hardcore lol. rip

I'm sorry, but this is the most ignorant thing i've heard in a while. There are also hardcore Christians, Hindus, Jews that do terrible things as well but you chose to close your eyes to that and focus only what you're being told by others and the news of your country.

[Aborted]

it's not all of the muslims. it's just the extremists that cause this. extremists are more likely to do acts of terrorism, not muslims. i'm not muslim but i kinda find it annoying how people automatically link "muslims-terrorists."

I am one all for being accepting, and not being a bigot, but to say this is willful ignorance, and skirting the actual issue.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm sorry, but this is the most ignorant thing i've heard in a while. There are also hardcore Christians, Hindus, Jews that do terrible things as well but you chose to close your eyes to that and focus only what you're being told by others and the news of your country.

Bullshit, when was the last time a Jew bombed an airport in the name of Yahweh. It doesn't take much focus when such a dwarfing majority of terror attacks are committed by Muslims (I'm talking in the realms of hundreds and even thousands to 1 when compared to other religions). I am not bashing Islam, and I am not bashing Muslims as a whole, but terrorism is very much a Muslim exclusivity. The argument does not have to be made from a here or there perspective, you can support Islam, while still descrying Islamic terrorism. The person you responded to does seem a bit ignorant, but what he is saying does happen, and no it is not a rarity. 'Conversions', 'honor killings', and murders based upon disagreements in the application of the Quran happen on a daily basis. Radical fundamentalists are out there, and in great number, and they are just as Muslim as the more tolerant followers of Muhammad. People in fact do lose their lives, based solely on them not following the correct 'sect' or branch of Islamist ideology compared to those who would kill for it.

[Kimchi]

I'm sorry, but this is the most ignorant thing i've heard in a while. There are also hardcore Christians, Hindus, Jews that do terrible things as well but you chose to close your eyes to that and focus only what you're being told by others and the news of your country.

I never said all of them are. Have you ever seen a Christian blow up a stadium?

[yep123]

No one said it was all Muslims, but 99% of terrorists ARE Muslim, and by extension, Muslims are more likely to commit acts of terror.
I am one all for being accepting, and not being a bigot, but to say this is willful ignorance, and skirting the actual issue.

- - - Updated - - -


Bullshit, when was the last time a Jew bombed an airport in the name of Yahweh. It doesn't take much focus when literally 99.9% of terror attacks are committed by Muslims. I am not bashing Islam, and I am not bashing Muslims as a whole, but terrorism is very much a Muslim exclusivity. The argument does not have to be made from a here or there perspective, you can support Islam, while still descrying Islamic terrorism. The person you responded to does seem a bit ignorant, but what he is saying does happen, and no it is not a rarity. 'Conversions', 'honor killings', and murders based upon disagreements in the application of the Quran happen on a daily basis. Radical fundamentalists are out there, and in great number, and they are just as Muslim as the more tolerant followers of Muhammad. People in fact do lose their lives, based solely on them not following the correct 'sect' or branch of Islamist ideology compared to those who would kill for it.

I can agree with you that at this point in time a lot of terrorism happens from people claiming to follow Islam compared to others. But when i was replying to Cohen i made a response meant only for him as I feel he was being ignorant and therefore lacks knowledge in this area and I wouldn't be able to get into the fine detail with him. So i gave the "right" answer to only what he said. Now on the other hand you seem like you know what you are talking about hence i can say, yes a lot of the terrorism is happening from people claiming to be from Islam, but it changes with time. In the past i you could class the British, Americans and others all terrorists at one point or another. But you must also know and understand that at the end of the day there are bad people and good people within all communities you shouldn't really generalize because it just makes stuff worse. And if you really are intelligent you should further understand that everyone is just a person and an individual. I'm not going to get too in-depth i could be talking about this for hours.

[Aborted]

I can agree with you that at this point in time a lot of terrorism happens from people claiming to follow Islam compared to others. But when i was replying to Cohen i made a response meant only for him as I feel he was being ignorant and therefore lacks knowledge in this area and I wouldn't be able to get into the fine detail with him. So i gave the "right" answer to only what he said. Now on the other hand you seem like you know what you are talking about hence i can say, yes a lot of the terrorism is happening from people claiming to be from Islam, but it changes with time. In the past i you could class the British, Americans and others all terrorists at one point or another. But you must also know and understand that at the end of the day there are bad people and good people within all communities you shouldn't really generalize because it just makes stuff worse. And if you really are intelligent you should further understand that everyone is just a person and an individual. I'm not going to get too in-depth i could be talking about this for hours.

Here, have a read of this, a post from a different site that I found to be very accurate and well articulated:

"It is wrong to say "ISIS are not Muslims" and it is extremely unhelpful to separate them from the religion. My tutor actually has lectured and written articles about this exact topic. He is a Shi'a Muslim and an academic, and he argues - quite correctly I think - that if you ignore the religious roots of the group then you cannot possible grasp the problem. Because their ideology, their beliefs and their objectives, are entirely religious. They fit within a framework that is Islamic (albeit a distinct brand of fundamental Islam) and their justifications are entirely theological.If you disassociate them from Islam, then you have to explain their motives and actions by completely different terms. This is something you hear a lot: 'They just don't know how great Western culture is'. 'They are poor and marginalised so turn to violence.' 'They are responding to the US occupation of Iraq.' 'They are responding to European colonialism.' 'It is all about oil'. So on and so forth.
Some of those things have elements of truth - marginalisation, poverty and retribution certainly are causes as well, and a lot of IR/Politics research has looked into them in great detail. Yet the biggest cause, above anything else, is their religious belief. If you are an atheist like me, you can only truly understand this by imagining how you would see the world if you were a fundamental or extremist Muslim.
Once you do that, (and it requires a basic understanding of fundamental/extremist strands Islam that I don't have time to write here), then it all makes sense. It works the same for if you imagine you were a fundamental/extremist Christian - this might be easier to imagine.
If I believed that the world was going to end and I had to obey the law of the all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful deity in order to reach eternal paradise, I'd do whatever the hell was needed to get on his good side. If that means killing people, why wouldn't I? This world is just a temporary, physical one. It's worth it for infinity in paradise. And they are non-believers anyway, they know nothing.
If that is how you see the world and that is how you understand it, then these acts of violence make sense. The whole Islamic State makes sense.
Where it gets extremely tricky and sensitive is how regular Muslims fit into the picture. The same goes for regular Christians, or Jews, or anyone else. Fundamentalists would argue, and in a way I agree with them, that the beliefs of these people are so far removed from the original message and meaning of the religion that they are not truly Muslims, or Christians or Jews. In order to achieve a form of Islam, or Christianity, or Judaism that is acceptable to 'Western society', you have to reshape and twist the doctrine of that religion so much that it stops making a lot of sense.
Christianity is the perfect example. I live in Britain, which is now a mostly secular country. The majority of people are not religious - the Church has lost most of its power and influence. I think that this happened because the Church in this country was forced to adapt to the new ideas and values that came out of the Enlightenment and the succeeding centuries. By doing so, over a long period of time, the practice of Christianity became so divorced from its scripture that it stopped making sense. As a schoolchild, I was made to go to church twice a week. The priest would tell us that Christianity preaches equality, freedom and love for everybody, including people from other faiths. But then we would go and read the Bible, and it didn't have that message at all. It was violent, and brutal, and had all manner of rules and prescriptions that didn't fit into Western values at all. Those were ignored - but this 'cherry picking' means the religion loses its logical stability and starts making no sense. The result of this was a generation of people turning away from Christianity, and now you have a secular Britain.
To a much more limited extent, the same is happening to Muslims in Western countries. Many of my friends back home are Muslim. Yet they don't pray 5 times a day. They don't have multiple wives. They follow our legal system, not shari'a (there are a lot of misconceptions about shari'a, but that's another story). Why? Because this is how they had to adapt their religion in order for it to fit within a Western framework.
Many of them read the Qur'an and the Hadith collections, or learn Islamic history, and realise how far removed their practice of Islam is from its 'fundamentals'. Western Islam has to reinterpret and abstract the scripture so much in order to remodel the religion as acceptable to post-Enlightenment ideals, that it no longer makes sense to a lot of Muslims. Many turn away from religion entirely and become atheist. But many go the other way, and begin to follow the scripture fundamentally. These are the ones who, in the west, are more likely to turn to extremism and violence (although this not always the case).
That is why it is unhelpful to say extremists such as ISIS advocates are not Muslim. If you do so, you cannot comprehend any of what I have just said. You limit your understanding to secular factors and motives, and by doing so lose sight of their objective. How can you stop an idea, an organisation, if you fundamentally misunderstand their purpose and mission? I understand why many people try to separate ISIS from Islam - they have good intentions and want to prevent Islamophobia. But by doing this, you actually make it easier for the discourse to become 'us vs. them', because you secularise yourself to an extent that is alien to a religious extremist and make yourself appear ignorant and in need of 'conversion'."

[yep123]

Here, have a read of this, a post from a different site that I found to be very accurate and well articulated:

"It is wrong to say "ISIS are not Muslims" and it is extremely unhelpful to separate them from the religion. My tutor actually has lectured and written articles about this exact topic. He is a Shi'a Muslim and an academic, and he argues - quite correctly I think - that if you ignore the religious roots of the group then you cannot possible grasp the problem. Because their ideology, their beliefs and their objectives, are entirely religious. They fit within a framework that is Islamic (albeit a distinct brand of fundamental Islam) and their justifications are entirely theological.If you disassociate them from Islam, then you have to explain their motives and actions by completely different terms. This is something you hear a lot: 'They just don't know how great Western culture is'. 'They are poor and marginalised so turn to violence.' 'They are responding to the US occupation of Iraq.' 'They are responding to European colonialism.' 'It is all about oil'. So on and so forth.
Some of those things have elements of truth - marginalisation, poverty and retribution certainly are causes as well, and a lot of IR/Politics research has looked into them in great detail. Yet the biggest cause, above anything else, is their religious belief. If you are an atheist like me, you can only truly understand this by imagining how you would see the world if you were a fundamental or extremist Muslim.
Once you do that, (and it requires a basic understanding of fundamental/extremist strands Islam that I don't have time to write here), then it all makes sense. It works the same for if you imagine you were a fundamental/extremist Christian - this might be easier to imagine.
If I believed that the world was going to end and I had to obey the law of the all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful deity in order to reach eternal paradise, I'd do whatever the hell was needed to get on his good side. If that means killing people, why wouldn't I? This world is just a temporary, physical one. It's worth it for infinity in paradise. And they are non-believers anyway, they know nothing.
If that is how you see the world and that is how you understand it, then these acts of violence make sense. The whole Islamic State makes sense.
Where it gets extremely tricky and sensitive is how regular Muslims fit into the picture. The same goes for regular Christians, or Jews, or anyone else. Fundamentalists would argue, and in a way I agree with them, that the beliefs of these people are so far removed from the original message and meaning of the religion that they are not truly Muslims, or Christians or Jews. In order to achieve a form of Islam, or Christianity, or Judaism that is acceptable to 'Western society', you have to reshape and twist the doctrine of that religion so much that it stops making a lot of sense.
Christianity is the perfect example. I live in Britain, which is now a mostly secular country. The majority of people are not religious - the Church has lost most of its power and influence. I think that this happened because the Church in this country was forced to adapt to the new ideas and values that came out of the Enlightenment and the succeeding centuries. By doing so, over a long period of time, the practice of Christianity became so divorced from its scripture that it stopped making sense. As a schoolchild, I was made to go to church twice a week. The priest would tell us that Christianity preaches equality, freedom and love for everybody, including people from other faiths. But then we would go and read the Bible, and it didn't have that message at all. It was violent, and brutal, and had all manner of rules and prescriptions that didn't fit into Western values at all. Those were ignored - but this 'cherry picking' means the religion loses its logical stability and starts making no sense. The result of this was a generation of people turning away from Christianity, and now you have a secular Britain.
To a much more limited extent, the same is happening to Muslims in Western countries. Many of my friends back home are Muslim. Yet they don't pray 5 times a day. They don't have multiple wives. They follow our legal system, not shari'a (there are a lot of misconceptions about shari'a, but that's another story). Why? Because this is how they had to adapt their religion in order for it to fit within a Western framework.
Many of them read the Qur'an and the Hadith collections, or learn Islamic history, and realise how far removed their practice of Islam is from its 'fundamentals'. Western Islam has to reinterpret and abstract the scripture so much in order to remodel the religion as acceptable to post-Enlightenment ideals, that it no longer makes sense to a lot of Muslims. Many turn away from religion entirely and become atheist. But many go the other way, and begin to follow the scripture fundamentally. These are the ones who, in the west, are more likely to turn to extremism and violence (although this not always the case).
That is why it is unhelpful to say extremists such as ISIS advocates are not Muslim. If you do so, you cannot comprehend any of what I have just said. You limit your understanding to secular factors and motives, and by doing so lose sight of their objective. How can you stop an idea, an organisation, if you fundamentally misunderstand their purpose and mission? I understand why many people try to separate ISIS from Islam - they have good intentions and want to prevent Islamophobia. But by doing this, you actually make it easier for the discourse to become 'us vs. them', because you secularise yourself to an extent that is alien to a religious extremist and make yourself appear ignorant and in need of 'conversion'."

Sorry but i'm put off reading it from just the starting as it says "It is wrong to say "ISIS are not Muslims" (but i've given the whole thing a skim re read) which is right and i agree with it. ISIS are or believe that they are Muslim yes, but all not Muslim's are ISIS. So this doesn't really look at the original point we were talking about the entire thing. Everybody interpret things differently, if they didn't then everyone who calls themselves a Muslim would either be peaceful or they will not, due to there being no interpretation. But you don't just see 1 type of Muslim you see many.

Dude really think about things in-depth there is always a reason for something you just got to look far back enough.

[Chaos]

This literally gave me cancer smh, no one is more prone to any type of violence than any one else.