Double Standards With Religious Terrorism
BY: Julia Jahanpour/Contributing Writer
When does an act of terror define a religion with long-standing values and traditions? Acts of violence from individuals in the name of religion have occurred for centuries throughout the world. The Thirty Years Roman War, The Crusades, The Inquisition, The Holocaust, KKK lynching, bombings and shootings throughout the Middle East, and more, are examples of religious-based violence.
Although the Nazis claimed Neo-Christianity, Jewish extremists operate murderous attacks in the West Bank, Buddhists protest and murder Muslims in South Asia, and the KKK proclaims itself to be “a Christian Organization”, Islam seems to be the only religion that gets widespread hatred when a Muslim commits a crime.
We are taught from youth not to group together every one of a certain race, religion, sex, nationality, etc., because generalizing creates stereotypes and is always incorrect. There is no demographic in which every person belonging behaves and thinks in the exact same way. In the case of Muslim terrorism, however, it appears many Americans blame the entire religion, and all of its members, for the violent doings of a small group that also claim Islam.
Imagine if every time a pro-gun white, Christian American shot and killed someone, the entire population of gun owners were held responsible for the death. What if a significant portion of those Americans were yelled at and treated with disrespect for the actions of that one individual who also owned a gun? Not only would it be unfair for the thousands of innocent people who have zero connection to the shooter, but also it would label all gun owners as murderers.
Faulting an entire religion for extremists’ actions is holding millions of innocent, peaceful Muslims accountable for awful killings that many of them are fighting to stop. For years, Muslim communities and organizations have been taking real steps towards ending terrorism and violence in the name of Islam.
This past November, millions of Muslims marched in Karbala for the annual Arbaeen Pilgrimage. However, this year, thousands of marchers took their trek a step further by denouncing all acts of terrorism as being endorsed by Islam. Many of them took the subject of terrorism and ISIL to social media, explaining how they are marching against the type of violence extremist organizations propagate.
Even more, nearly 70,000 Indian Muslims have signed a fatwa against terrorist attacks. Leaders and governments around the world have condemned ISIL and other terrorist groups as being anti-Muslim and separate from the millions of people who practice the faith.
One important strategy for ending terrorism includes not alienating the Muslim population in any country. Isolation creates confusion and mistrust, which leads to anger and violence. Inclusion of those people would foster a conversation of honesty, trust, and openness, which could help eliminate violence from marginalized groups before they occur.
When certain demographics are labeled as violent because of individual crimes, the same standard is not applied equally across the board. Just as in the Muslim community, in the black community, many are labeled as “thugs” or violent in nature because of shootings and gang violence.
When it comes to acts of violence within other demographics, however, such as the white community, the crime is often chalked up to mental illness or an issue with the person’s past. Is it possible that terrorist crimes are also just committed by mentally unstable, violence-driven individuals who use their belief system as a means to propagate the violence?
The way media treats Muslim shooters is also very different from the kind of coverage given to non-Muslim ones. During the San Bernardino shootings, television news anchors and the media ransacked the shooter’s house. They broadcasted, on live air, pictures found in the home, including those of children and elderly relatives. Personal belongings were displayed to the public. It was a direct violation of privacy, and put the family of the shooter in danger.
In contrast, after the Sandy Hook shooting, or any other shooting involving a white terrorist, the criminal is treated with his rights as an American citizen. They are said to have had a troubled past, and that their actions are separate from the actions of other white Americans. Muslims terrorists are seen as belonging to a greater cause of terrorism, though. They don’t get the “lone wolf” pass.
The treatment of the word terrorism needs to change to be equal across the board. Unwarranted hatred and fear of Muslims will only continue without a change in how the word terrorism is used in American media. As a society, we need to view acts of violence as those from individual people, and create a barrier between religion and terrorism. In doing so, it becomes less difficult for politicians to scapegoat the Muslim American community, or create a “bad guy” for Americans to fear so they may gain political popularity.
The act of granting one race or religion excuses for their crimes, yet automatically forcing a narrative of terrorism on another needs to stop. Muslims around the world have shown their disapproval of terrorism. It’s time every individual be charged separately from their demographic and given fair treatment when tried for their crimes.
