Right, because you haven't answered any of the points I brought up in my posts. I laugh at your attempt at a response.
It's easy to laugh at me when you're not even bothering to read what I'm saying. I've been pretty clear, and you're pretty clearly confused.
Do you have a coherent point to make here? Or just some vagueries about elders and religion having political power. It is about Islam and it is about the prevalence of violence observed within the religion. It has nothing to do with political power.
That's my point -- it has
everything to do with political power. The more power
any human organization or institution has, the more likely it is to use violence to achieve its ends.
So the whole of your point is trying to question what "significant fraction" means. If you don't have enough sense to figure out that the number of Islamic terrorist organizations listed in
Islamic terrorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is significant, there's not much point in responding to you.
It wasn't my whole point, as you would've known if you were reading what I was saying, but it certainly was
one of my points. You were refusing to define the term, so I poked you about it repeatedly.
Nevertheless, if your whole counterpoint requires a definition of the term, we can say that a significant fraction is a number statistically significant, or its a number of terrorist involved people that is greater than the average of other religions. If you require a number, we can say its greater than 50% of the average of other religions, even double. It doesn't even really matter because there are many more terrorist involved organizations in Islam than any other religions, the exact number won't matter too much.
That's not a definition. That doesn't even come close to a definition. For one thing, you can't decide if your "definition" involves terrorist organizations, or "terrorist involved people," whatever the hell
that means. Furthermore, you can't compare modern Islam and modern Christianity, because they're practically apples and oranges when you take into account that the problem isn't the
religion, it's the
political power available to that religion's adherants.
Hell, if you compare modern Islam to Christianity at its height, you'd probably find that politically powerful Christianity is a hell of a lot more violent than modern Islam -- and that rather than making Christianity look bad, it makes my point.
It won't do me any good, anything you write is incoherent babble anyways.
That'll happen to you when reading comprehension is a weakness of yours, rather than a strength. :lol: