Can you recognize the parallel between your statement and the one I've paraphrased above?
"Then we win the election because you missed the point."
As in, ignore the message at your own peril, we don't have to care because we are content now.
But in the Muslim's case, the implications for us ignoring their message are more profiling, xenophobia, etc. Which is why I would argue they need to look internally to resolve the issues inside their communities.
That makes Trump's administration racist and makes the people who voted for Trump seem to appear racist. Though, as we've agreed, most of them aren't.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/22/muslims-and-...
But the guilt by association is my point.
In this election, people who voted for Trump considered his Muslim ban policy acceptable enough that they didn't make him change it before they elected him. And guilt by association can cause that support to be interpreted as racist.
Edit: Islam isn't a race, so there's probably a better word than racist in this case. But the point remains.
He changed it: http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-back-pedals-on-bann...
But its not as simple as "Banning all Muslims because they might be Terrorists". This is the headline the media liked to repeat again and again.
http://www.advocate.com/election/2016/8/15/donald-trump-want...
If you are gay, it is rationale to support a full ban on Muslims. Muslim countries have some terrible laws. I personally don't want anyone involved in an honour killing to set foot in the country. This is a real danger.
It is the height of irony that the liberals who protect Muslims so much, do not care what their views are on gays, or women. I don't get it and I would love someone to explain it to me.
Is Trumps Muslim ban policy racist?
Any time I've seen a Muslim actually talk about the issue, and explain how Islam doesn't encourage terrorism, they are evasive, or outright deceptive. Show me a legitimate attempt to explain the "real underlying issues" that is neither of these things (and not just representative of a fringe group e.g heavily westernized Muslims).
> Muslims often say: "Stop calling all of us terrorists and stop saying Islam encourages terrorism because you are missing the real underlying issues. We want everyone to be happy just like you do, but we think your understanding of terrorism is flawed."
So this is the context I am responding to, the hypothetical situation of a Muslim claiming the above.
> because, when you accuse someone of being a terrorist
No, I'm responding specifically to the "stop saying Islam encourages terrorism" part. When I say "Any time I've seen a Muslim actually talk about the issue, and explain how Islam doesn't encourage terrorism", I don't mean in the context of responding to an accusation of being a terrorist.
> You've decided that a religion is guilty and want individuals to show proof of innocence?
What have I decided about the religion? I implied that if it's true that Muslims are saying "you are missing the real underlying issues", then I've yet to see one attempt to explain.
Also, If I had decided that a religion is guilty, who else but individuals could demonstrate otherwise? Religion has no life of it's own, it exists only in the medium of the individuals who decide to carry it.
