Plenty of bible passages call for something similar. You cannot cherry pick a document or we'd all be stoning our neighbors for working on the sabbath.

[quote]Islam demands that all who follow it either engage in active warfare/conquest against all who are not Muslim or to assist those engaged in those endeavors. Read a Koran, a history book or Ibn Ishaq’s biography on Muhammad before you try and use the correlation is not causation arguments to justify Islam’s aggression towards anything that is not Islamic.[/quote] You sir need to be hit in the head with a tractor cannon for being a Lame Duck

Sir?!?!?!! I can’t believe that you just assumed my gender. You are literally Hitler.

Prove it. Look, I don't like Islam either, but it doesn't ask muslims to participate in warfare. And the Koran you read, who made it? If Islam alone was the cause, we'd see terrorists from Morocco and Egypt and Indonesia and Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, but we don't. Most Muslim terrorists come from poor nations that have suffered invasion or conflict. It is a combination of poverty, scapegoating ("USA invaded my nation and I'm poor, so it's the US's fault" kind of thing. You know, the stuff we do with immigrants), and a religion that, while it doesn't call for violence, says nothing against it and is already slightly toxic, then you get real problems. So yeah, Islam isn't all that great but the religion isn't the issue.

The most recent version of the Koran that I have read is the translation by Abdel Haleem. I am not going to write out each verse for you in their entirety but I will provide you with some fun ones that you can look up on your own that will cure your obvious ignorance concerning the subject of their religious texts and the demands that it contains therein. 9:23, 9:29, 9:73, 9:81-95, 9:111, 9:123, 5:10, 5:14, 5:33, 22:51, 22:3-4, 58:5, 48:17-24 and last but certainly the most important: 9:5.

Have you read Leviticus?

The irony is that he's show the same sort of prejudice and tribalism that he's decrying Muslims for being guilty of. It's "The crazies who look like me are SICK....while the crazies that look like you just show how bad ALL of your are." Sort of like Waterboarding is torture if its done TO Americans, but its only "enhanced interrogation" if its done BY Americans.

Do you not see the hypocrisy of calling out one group of people for stereotyping; and then in the same turn call an entire group of people who voted for a person redneck, white supremacist, racists? This thinking defies all logic. I just need an answer. Why can you stereotype a group of people, but that group is not allowed to stereotype another.

[quote]Do you not see the hypocrisy of calling out one group of people for stereotyping; and then in the same turn call an entire group of people who voted for a person redneck, white supremacist, racists? [/quote] Its only hypocrisy if somone actually believes that EVERYONE (without exception) is. I've never heard anyone on the Left actually say anything like that, and I'd call them out as an [b]idiot [/b]if they did. Even Hillary Clinton's "Basket of Deplorables" gaff didnt' make that accusation: [i]Speaking at a fundraiser in New York City on Friday, Hillary Clinton said half of Donald Trump’s supporters belong in a “basket of deplorables” characterized by “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic” views. “You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?” Clinton said. “The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.” [b]She said the other half of Trump’s supporters “feel that the government has let them down” and are “desperate for change.” “Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well,” she said. [/b][/i] Clinton made the political gaff of actually getting caught saying what you think....even though its politically stupid to say. Frankly I think she hit the nail right on the head....but that doesn't change the fact that she WAS making a sweeping generalization...and it WAS something politically rather stupid to say in public. She was right about part of Trumps appeal coming from nakedly bigoted catcalls and appeals to "Demographic Panic". But she should have left that part out and focused on the OTHER half of that statement, and used it as a the basis for the POLITICAL MESSAGE that her campaign never really produced.

So, just so I am sure of what you're saying, if you believe your statement to be true of all persons in that category than that is wrong to say. And sadly, being middle ground, I get to witness both sides of the fence spewing their rhetoric. A simple google search can return thousands of results on both sides calling each other the worst possible names imagined and using a blanket statement.

[quote]So, just so I am sure of what you're saying, if you believe your statement to be true of all persons in that category than that is wrong to say. [/quote] Where did I say that I believed ANYTHING was true of EVERYBODY? What I SAID is that I agree with Sec. Clinton's politically ill-advised comment. That about half (about 25 % of the population) are authoritarians who found his catcalls to ethnic, racial, nativistic, and ideological animus to be appealing. Research shows that authoritarian followers make up about this percentage of the population and are MUCH more prone to kind of "authoritarian aggression" towards groups unlike themselves than other groups. THE OTHER half being people who are genuinely tired of the political status quo.....are feeling that the system is FAILING them as they work harder and harder each year for less and less. Like Sec Clinton....I EMPATHIZE with those Trump supporters...BECAUSE THEY'RE RIGHT. They are only guilty of being desperate for change..and making a bad choice. Because Trump is a narcissist, a shameless bigot, and a con-man. ...and we Progressives are partially to blame because we failed to give them a BETTER CHOICE. Sec. Clinton FAILED to give them a better choice. Because she was more concerned about adding another award to her trophy case, than she was in speaking to the needs of that struggling section of the working class voter. They've turned their back on Democrats....because Democrats turned their backs on them.

Your opening sentence about hypocrisy. That’s where I’m taking my information from. I don’t think your opinion about where we’re at right now as a country is far off base at all. Democrats did not provide a candidate that would sway undecided republicans.

Are you asking why stereotyping people by their actions is different than stereotyping people by things they can't control like their skin color?

Actions. Far right conservatives see Muslim actions and stereotype them all as terrorists. Far left liberals see a person who voted (action) for Trump and assume redneck/KKK member. Whats the difference between both parties? Nothing. They're both hypocritical, over opinionated assholes.

The sun, is yellow. This banana is also yellow. What's the difference between the two? Nothing, they're exactly the same. Far right conservatives hate Muslims because they're brown. Just because they say it's their actions doesn't make it so. It was spelled out for you above. They conveniently forget all the light skinned Muslims.

Right, so you didn't give me an example whatsoever of how it's not hypocrisy. You simply spewed your unintelligent, completely opinionated response. Can you, with complete confidence, say that every far right conservative hates Muslims because of their skin color? No, you can't. You made an assumption, which is what they do, which makes you two completely the same.

It's not hypocrisy because you're a moron. The extremes are hypocrites, of course, every moron knows that except you. Unfortunately for you and your terrible opinion the two parties aren't just their extremes. Kelly green spelled it out for you.