Here’s Sam Harris – author of “The End of Faith” – on free speech and Islam:

The controversy over Fitna, like all such controversies, renders one fact about our world especially salient: Muslims appear to be far more concerned about perceived slights to their religion than about the atrocities committed daily in its name. Our accommodation of this psychopathic skewing of priorities has, more and more, taken the form of craven and blinkered acquiescence.

There is an uncanny irony here that many have noticed. The position of the Muslim community in the face of all provocations seems to be: Islam is a religion of peace, and if you say that it isn’t, we will kill you. Of course, the truth is often more nuanced, but this is about as nuanced as it ever gets: Islam is a religion of peace, and if you say that it isn’t, we peaceful Muslims cannot be held responsible for what our less peaceful brothers and sisters do. When they burn your embassies or kidnap and slaughter your journalists, know that we will hold you primarily responsible and will spend the bulk of our energies criticizing you for “racism” and “Islamophobia.” […]

In a thrillingly ironic turn of events, a shorter version of the very essay you are now reading was originally commissioned by the opinion page of Washington Post and then rejected because it was deemed too critical of Islam. Please note, this essay was destined for the opinion page of the paper, which had solicited my response to the controversy over Wilders’ film. The irony of its rejection seemed entirely lost on the Post, which responded to my subsequent expression of amazement by offering to pay me a “kill fee.” I declined.

I could list other examples of encounters with editors and publishers, as can many writers, all illustrating a single fact: While it remains taboo to criticize religious faith in general, it is considered especially unwise to criticize Islam. Only Muslims hound and hunt and murder their apostates, infidels, and critics in the 21st century. There are, to be sure, reasons why this is so. Some of these reasons have to do with accidents of history and geopolitics, but others can be directly traced to doctrines sanctifying violence which are unique to Islam.

A point of comparison: The controversy of over Fitna was immediately followed by ubiquitous media coverage of a scandal involving the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS). In Texas, police raided an FLDS compound and took hundreds of women and underage girls into custody to spare them the continued, sacramental predations of their menfolk. While mainstream Mormonism is now granted the deference accorded to all major religions in the United States, its fundamentalist branch, with its commitment to polygamy, spousal abuse, forced marriage, child brides (and, therefore, child rape) is often portrayed in the press as a depraved cult. But one could easily argue that Islam, considered both in the aggregate and in terms of its most negative instances, is far more despicable than fundamentalist Mormonism. The Muslim world can match the FLDS sin for sin–Muslims commonly practice polygamy, forced-marriage (often between underage girls and older men), and wife-beating–but add to these indiscretions the surpassing evils of honor killing, female “circumcision,” widespread support for terrorism, a pornographic fascination with videos showing the butchery of infidels and apostates, a vibrant form of anti-semitism that is explicitly genocidal in its aspirations, and an aptitude for producing children’s books and television programs which exalt suicide-bombing and depict Jews as “apes and pigs.”

Any honest comparison between these two faiths reveals a bizarre double standard in our treatment of religion. We can openly celebrate the marginalization of FLDS men and the rescue of their women and children. But, leaving aside the practical and political impossibility of doing so, could we even allow ourselves to contemplate liberating the women and children of traditional Islam?

It’s worth reading in full.

Update: more on that FLDS comparison.

Posted in

7 responses to “Especially Unwise to Criticize Islam”

  1. tolkein Avatar
    tolkein

    And quite where is it taboo to criticize religious faith in general? Seems like there’s no problem if it’s Chritianity or Judaism that’s being criticized. If it’s so taboo, how come Dawkins and Harris and Hitchens sell so many books and appear so regularly on TV and in the press?

    Like

  2. Mick H Avatar
    Mick H

    Well yes, but it’s more the case in the US I suppose.

    Like

  3. Dom Avatar
    Dom

    If someone starts telling me about the zodiac, I’ll call them a nitwit without even thinking about it. If he says something similar with the word “God” in it, I keep quiet because it’s a matter of faith.
    I have two English friends who don’t make that distinction. It was a little surprising to me when I first saw this. It seemed rude when one of them started in on a Jehovah’s Witness. So, yes, I think there’s a difference between the US and Europe on this point.
    I think that’s why ID is a problem in the US and not Europe. We really believe that if a parent wants to raise a child to believe something stupid, it’s their right, as long as God is in there.

    Like

  4. Marge Avatar
    Marge

    To be fair to Muslims, honor killing and female “circumcision” are not exclusive to Muslims — far from it — nor is the oppression of women. (Female genital mutililation is I think only practiced in Africa.) I would agree that Islam does glorify conquest and warfare — this is exclusive to Islam, as far as I know.

    Like

  5. dearieme Avatar
    dearieme

    “I have two English friends who don’t make that distinction.” What distinction?

    Like

  6. Mick H Avatar
    Mick H

    Between religion and astrology.

    Like

  7. dearieme Avatar
    dearieme

    As I say, what distinction? You might as well distinguish mumbo from jumbo.

    Like

Leave a reply to Mick H Cancel reply