Letter: An individual’s act shouldn’t taint a religion
Every time there is a horrific mass killing in this or any other country, it seems that the first question asked is what religion are the perpetrators. If they look Middle Eastern, they must be Muslim, and then the condemnation of all Muslims follows. Why are we so quick to generalize that all members hold the same beliefs? Why condemn the religion? This act in itself is prejudicious.
Why, when the perpetrators are white, blond and appear to be of European dissent, (is) their religion is off the table? Why don’t we condemn all Christians? Is it that we Christians feel ourselves morally superior to other religions? Is it because we generalize that we are good and therefore it would be wrong to generalize that all Christians are bad?
We don’t see that it is the condemnation and generalization of a religious belief that is wrong. We have a long way to go for our culture to characterize these senseless acts for what they are: terrible acts executed by individuals with distorted beliefs.
Unless you are willing to condemn all Christians for the act of a few, then keep religious generalities out of the discussion.
Fred Freeman, Kennewick
This story was originally published September 8, 2017 at 2:08 PM with the headline "Letter: An individual’s act shouldn’t taint a religion."