That's a most excellent analogy.

I mostly agree with this, except that in general, people don't like to be required to apologize for the wrong-doing of others. I don't often hear people asking (almost requiring) other religious groups to publicly denounce acts of wrong-doing done by radical wings of their faith.

Except with the KKK I think it's pretty much understood that we don't approve. I'm not sure it's really required of us to run around denunciating the KKK. I mean, we do put them in jail and all whenever we can.

I believe that's the point. We take efforts to denounce the KKK. The rest of the world understands that we may bring them out for Jerry Springer, but we don't condone them.

The Muslim community on the other hand gives the impression that they do condone the terrorists actions. More power to this man for speaking up. Hopefully he will inspire the rest of the Muslim community to speak out. Would love to see the peace loving Muslims more. Then again I would like to see more television time given to peace loving Christians. Or any other religion for that matter, who actually practices peace.

I understand that's the point. I was only responding to Wildswan's small objection.

And also, I don't entirely agree that the muslim world hasn't spoken out. Perhaps not as much as we like and they haven't shown the same determination as we have with groups like the KKK, but there have certainly been a considerable amount of influential muslims who have said they denounce terrorism. Perhaps they don't get enough airtime, perhaps we just conveniently ignore them, but regardless of the reason. They do exists, and have spoken.

I think that it's entirely different than requiring Christians, in particular, to denounce the KKK. By-the-way it's not illegal to belong to the KKK or any of the other myriad white separatist/neo-nazi / skin-head groups. Our secular laws only denounce any violent acts they may commit.

I'm saying that rarely are Christians, for example, called on to answer deeds done by radical Christian groups.

edit: By the way, I don't require or expect some supposed representative of Christianity to come out and denounce acts committed by the radicals among them. First of all they'd probably have to have a tv channel or something devoted strictly to that purpose.

A moderate muslim? Poppycock! He's obviously a criminal, send the FBI after him! Harumph!

I don't believe I said anything about requiring all muslims to answer for deeds done by extremists. Mr Miftah asks that extremists leaders answer for their actions.

I don't believe that I said you did.

To be honest, I'm confused what we're arguing about at this point. I think we all generally agree.

Me no argue.

I'm so glad I stopped involving myself with religion a long time ago.

Whew.. I had to go back and reread my own post to make sure I hadn't typed something in knucklehead mode.

They didnt just kick him out~
Wikpidea

Galileo was ordered to stand trial on suspicion of heresy in 1633. The sentence of the Inquisition was in three essential parts:

Galileo was required to recant his heliocentric ideas; the idea that the Sun is stationary was condemned as "formally heretical." However, while there is no doubt that Pope Urban VIII and the vast majority of Church officials did not believe in heliocentrism, Catholic doctrine is defined by the pope when he speaks ex cathedra (from the Chair of Saint Peter) in matters of faith and morals. While Church officials did condemn Galileo, heliocentrism was never formally or officially condemned by the Catholic Church.
He was ordered imprisoned; the sentence was later commuted to house arrest.
His offending Dialogue was banned; and in an action not announced at the trial and not enforced, publication of any of his works was forbidden, including any he might write in the future.