Islamophobia: Is it really "a thing"? My thoughts

Here I give my opinions about the general term “Islamophobia” and how I do not like to use this word.

In genuine criticism of Islamic matters , as an atheist, I prefer to use the term “criticism of Islamism” as this is where any problem really lies: The power of Islam over legislation (i.e. Separation of church and state), and how this affects free expression, and harms women and minorities.

Let's begin by setting out some clear points. If you don't agree with these then chances are you won't think much of this post.

• It must be possible to offer a genuine and legitimate critical, non-abusive viewpoint of any particular political ideology. Such criticisms will not necessarily be listened to or actioned, but equally those offering the criticisms should not be stigmatised or abused themselves
• There is no “race” of Muslims. As it is possible for people from area in which Muslims are the dominant people, to be non-Muslims; just as it is possible for Muslims to be a minority in predominantly non-Muslim countries. Such groups will not necessarily share common racial characteristics.
• Any criticism of Islamism is limited to criticism of Islamic Ideologies and intersection of social/political jurisdiction, and does not extend to people i.e. Muslims themselves.

• As we cannot know what may or may not have influenced any individual Muslim's motivations to become such and what views they hold, we cannot generalise or label Muslims with broad strokes of intent or agency.
• It is recognised that Muslims hold a wide variety of views, beliefs and opinions and we must listen to these viewpoints to gain appreciation of consensus
• The existence of converts and ex-Muslims is evidence that people can both enter from another faith, leave the faith, and be of any race, class etc.
• Criticism of religion or religious beliefs is a general topic not covered here and generally unrelated to this post

With these points in mind I hope we can avoid any talk about racism.

Sam Harris has recently written extensively on the whole subject of Islamophobia. He doesn't really think such a thing exists. I tend to agree with his position, however, I don't share his combative stance to the same degree, and I wouldn't have said some of the things he has said about nuclear confrontation and fascists.

So I think the answer is, that there is a problem with discrimination against Muslims in the west. I think this is what people correctly have an issue with. You can see this by the immediate fury in the aftermath of the recent Boston bombing, where shameful “public profiling” led to the harassment and abuse of individuals simply because they looked like what some idiots thought terrorists would look like. And discrimination against Arabs is simply racism. It's irrational. But I don't like the use of the term “Islamophobia” since it conflates genuine criticism of political Islamism with racism and irrational fears of religious beliefs.

I am going to add it to the list of words I don't use. But I accept its implications under other guises which I have already explained above.

Please see here for further details.

 

But this post is really about my problems with the installation of Sharia law and Sharia courts within the UK.

Here is a link to a petition opposing some of the specific powers which Sharia courts currently claim. It calls for enactment of the Arbitration and Mediation Equality bill.

 

Let's be clear: Sharia law in the UK is an example of political Islamism pushing at its moral and ethical bounds. In some areas, it may represent an overstepping of these bounds. Where two cultures come into conflict like this, we need to take both positions into account and reach a compromise.

Sharia courts tend to give out harsh and unjust punishments to vulnerable members of society who are already underprivileged, disenfranchised or vulnerable, such as women who may have been married against their will, or young children. From a western viewpoint, Sharia courts are clearly a case of the privileged meting out their punishments on those less fortunate then them, for “crimes” that are not recognised as such in the civil or criminal courts of the countries in which they exist.

This for me is a case of social justice being more important than pandering to cultural or religious sensitivities. Such things need to be open to challenge in this context.

But it is a valid position to take, and not really wrong, to argue against Sharia courts if you, like me, believe them to cause harm in a society that we all must share. I accept that the “other side” will fight for their beliefs as well. But I don't think we should just have to accept the fact that our society needs to change in such a way, where it is not clearly already broken, to accommodate non-secular political Islamism. Certainly not without a robust debate and some sort of vote or consensus. These Sharia courts have too often slipped in unnoticed and I think it's important to raise awareness of the harm they can cause.