I'm inclined to disagree with this assessment. Christianity has damaged or destroyed outright other cultures before; the Pagan cultures of the Roman Empire, the numerous indigenous cultures around the globe - First Nations, African cultures, Polynesian cultures etc.
Islam isn't unique in this regard. I think what matters is that we should be able to say Islam does this too. For some reason a lot of people who defend Islam by saying 'but other religions do it too' aren't interested when we give Islam the same treatment & scrutiny those other religions receive.
I don't believe I've said anything to the contrary. Islam is not a religion purely of violence just as it is not a religion purely of peace. Saying one is just as disingenuous as saying the other. The reason I tend to focus more on the violent aspects than the peaceful aspects on this forum is because we in the West are not allowed to point out that Islam even has flaws any more without being accused of bigotry, Islamophobia, cultural imperialism and so on. There are those of us who have legitimate concerns about features of Islam and (as you have done) these concerns are labelled 'irrational' and swept aside with no rational examination.
It's not an either/or. It's not a case of attitudes rising
either from a tense socio-political climate
or Islamic bigotry. This intolerance on the part of Muslims can be (and I think it is) informed by both.
He said, immediately following up with an excuse. Further, as a non-Muslim, what gives you the right to decide whether or not a Muslim is approaching their faith 'correctly' or not? You've said in the past
you're not as knowledgeable about Islam as a practising Muslim so your opinion on what constitutes 'true Islam' or does not holds no weight.
This is precisely my point. This is a rule
for Muslims. The thing is you need to remind the Muslims threatening to smash the Guan Yu statue of this because they seem to be under the impression their religion's rules should also apply to non-Muslims. It's the same empty-headed, entitled exceptionalism we saw when Muslims started protesting against or killing people who drew Muhammad. Seriously, this can't be said enough:
Muslims can't draw Muhammad. The diktats of Islam
only apply to Muslims. So please start telling the ones with trouble understanding this issue that instead of condemning me for pointing out something we agree on.
There's no 'perhaps' about this; a key element of the demands involved are because the statue is un-Islamic. The reason they want it covered up is because it's not on the Confucian temple's property (how can it be? It's ****ing massive!). Since it's on public property, they think they have the right to apply their religious law to it.