It depends. If the act is clearly motivated by religion and directed at perceived enemies of the religion then it is plainly religious terrorism. If the religion of the perpetrator is clearly irrelevant (e.g. a political cause, and the terrorists and perpetrators are of the same religion) then it is plainly not religious terrorism. In between are grey areas that can be argued case by case.
Yes, and I guess I could have verbalized it more, but it seems like that need (to verbalize) appears every time anything like this is mentioned. So maybe the verbalization is not so important after all.
Comments
It depends. If the act is clearly motivated by religion and directed at perceived enemies of the religion then it is plainly religious terrorism. If the religion of the perpetrator is clearly irrelevant (e.g. a political cause, and the terrorists and perpetrators are of the same religion) then it is plainly not religious terrorism. In between are grey areas that can be argued case by case.
Yes, and I guess I could have verbalized it more, but it seems like that need (to verbalize) appears every time anything like this is mentioned. So maybe the verbalization is not so important after all.