&gt; First of all, Breivik himself stated he&#x27;s not a Christian, claiming allegiance to Odin.<p>I was mostly using Breivik as a joke, I don&#x27;t care for his beliefs as they have no root in reality. But for the record, Breivik has said a lot of things, indeed that he was not a religious man, indeed allegiance to Odin, but also statements like &#x27;I consider myself to be 100 percent Christian.&#x27; He contradicted himself on many different occasions, but it&#x27;d be myopic to say he has never identified himself as a Christian. Again though, I don&#x27;t care and certainly don&#x27;t see him as a Christian terrorist, I was just using it for material for my joke to show how silly your reasoning is.<p>Anyway, on to more important things. You bring up aiding and abetting multiple times and then end your post. I don&#x27;t see your point. Well I do but it&#x27;s so wrong that I&#x27;m left wondering if you were trying to make another point.<p>The point you&#x27;re making is &#x27;sometimes people who indirectly are responsible for a crime, get convinced&#x27;. And that&#x27;s true, and that&#x27;s good. If you drive a getaway car for a bank robber or murderer, you&#x27;re responsible.<p>Now, how that in any way reflects on the responsibility of say my father, who stays awake at night because he can&#x27;t sleep, saddened about the loss of innocent life due to the recent terrorist attacks (I&#x27;m not making up a sob story here, take it how you want it), a man who happens to be a muslim, is beyond me. He has zero connection with these attacks, never condoned it, never supported it, never saw any indication it happened. He&#x27;s simply a decent muslim, in no way different from any other, who let his own son grow up an atheist without ever making a fuss. Your idea to punish him by mere association on the basis of his religious beliefs, is again, something you&#x27;d expect from the terrorists you&#x27;re so against. Further, it strengthens the very strategy that IS has, which is to recruit a billion muslims by scaring the world into resorting to medieval instruments like collective punishment of muslims you suggest, creating systems of apartheid based on religious beliefs, and pitting people like my dad against people like myself.<p>Collective punishment is a very distinct idea. It&#x27;s not punishing the crime of aiding and abetting which is a normal and useful part of virtually every justice system on earth. Collective punishment is specifically punishing those with innocent associations. How you can not see the difference is beyond me. Next when a man does something, all men must be punished. When a black person does something, all blacks must be punished. When a computer engineer does something, all engineers must be punished. It&#x27;s like I&#x27;m talking to a child with all due respect, defending collective punishment is an idea silly beyond reason. Some of the worst atrocities have happened under the guise of collective punishment and the world has created laws against it for this very reason.<p>Lastly I&#x27;ll finish with this, and I hope you&#x27;ll be convinced then. Because you must see the irony... to punish innocent people, merely because they&#x27;re associated under an umbrella (a very wide umbrella, amongst which one may find many differences) of islamic faith, is to do exactly what some terrorists have done in the past... Terrorists have attacked and punished innocent people in the west, merely for their association with the west, whose governments have been responsible for various atrocities in the world. They have collectively punished and murdered innocent people on the basis of this association, including ordinary folks who resisted these atrocities, voted and marched against them, as well as punished kids who had no say in the matter. That&#x27;s collective punishment, it&#x27;s insane, it&#x27;s immoral, and you&#x27;re a supporter. I hate to throw a terrorist-supporter card on the table, but you&#x27;re asking for one.