It was a shocking incident. The man walked up to the couple in the café, slammed his fist hard on the table and shouted “I hate you xxxx religious people..the sooner this country is rid of you the better’! The couple had been talking quietly to each other about their faith. They had experienced more – there was the online abuse – everything from ‘expletive deleted’ abuse, to threats of violence and even death threats. All because of their faith. I have come across this kind of thing many times – which is why the recent report from the Scottish Parliament into Islamophobia ‘triggered’ me.
The report itself is disturbing, fascinating and predictable– as were the reactions to it. Politicians and faith leaders queued up to express their support for it. The Very Rev Dr Susan Brown, convenor of the Church of Scotland’s Faith and Impact Forum, stated, “Racism is a sin and the Church stands in solidarity with our Muslim sisters and brothers.”
It’s always worthwhile reading such reports in full and asking questions of it – such as the methodology and purpose. If after all, it is as the Rev Brown said “crucial that the Church recognises these findings” and the “realities highlighted”, then we had better make sure that the findings are real.
The trouble with these kinds of reports is that they are designed to generate an emotive and political response. It is horrendous when someone is abused for their faith, or the way they look. And so when an official report says this is rampant, the immediate and correct reaction is to feel empathetic and seek to help. If you are a politician you can’t really do anything else. And therefore no one really asks the deeper questions because, after all, who wants to be accused of being Islamophobic? And yet reports such as this can end up doing more harm than good. They do need to be questioned and not just reacted to emotionally.
Is Islamaphobia Racist?
The main problem is that no one seems able to define what Islamophobia actually is. The report itself assumes, but cannot define it. Indeed one of the recommendations is that there should be an official government definition. Is Islamophobia a form of racism? The problem is that Islam is not a race, but a religion which is open to everyone. People don’t choose their race – they do choose their religion.
The Church of Scotland thinks that being opposed to Islam is racist. Which leaves them with a problem – given that the Church is opposed to the faith claims of Islam. Does this mean they are self-defining as racist? And likewise, does the Church think that those who are Christophobic (critical of Christianity) are also racist?
In the same way, we are offered as evidence of Islamophobia the fact that 65 per cent thought that an employer should be free to ask a Muslim woman to remove her veil at work. Why is that Islamophobic? Or the claim that resistance in some planning departments to the building of mosques is Islamophobic? I wonder if the Scottish Parliament would produce a report which states that anyone who refuses to let people wear a cross to work is racist, or that when a church is refused planning permission it is the result of racism? Yes, mosques being vandalised is wicked, but I have lost count of the number of churches I know that have been vandalised – even to the extent of being forced to close. Yet no Parliamentary committee writes reports about such Christophobia?
What quantitative and qualitative data is there on Islamophobia? The report itself laments the lack of data. In the survey, 75 per cent of respondents said that Islamophobia was a regular or everyday issue in Scottish society. I am astonished the figure is so low. The survey itself has just 447 respondents (60% from Glasgow) with all the weaknesses that such an approach has. It is impossible to extrapolate from such a limited self-sample survey, any qualitative data. We are just left with anecdotes and impressions, and with the political prejudices of those who drew up the report.
Is Brexit Responsible for Islamaphobia?
As an example of this, we are told that one of the reasons for Islamophobia is Brexit because it ‘gives a voice to those who hate’. Could the same argument not be used for Scottish nationalism? (I reject both arguments – but what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander!) We are dealing here with political opinions, rather than objective fact.
Should the Scottish Government Promote Islam?
Making government policy on the basis of anecdote and sentiment, with limited data, is not wise. Especially when the recommendations are as sweeping as those in this report. Amongst other things, they argue that the Scottish government should fund research and projects that adopt an intersectional approach to Islamophobia; the Scottish Government should fund and support initiatives that educate the people of Scotland about the damage that Islamophobia does to Scottish society; the police force should seek to recruit more Muslim officers; school pupils and teachers should receive compulsory education in Islamophobia; the government should fund and support initiatives that demonstrate the positive contributions of Scotland’s Muslim population to Scottish society, politics, culture and history; that all educational institutions should be required to create safe spaces for discussion, prayer and reflection; and that schools be required to establish dress-code polices that are sensitive to the needs of Muslims.
Just read over those recommendations again and put the word Christian in place of Muslim. Can you imagine the outrage from politicians, media and others if such recommendations were made? The Muslim population of Scotland is just 1.5%. Why should taxpayer money be used to promote the Muslim faith in a non-Muslim country? Will the government be offering the same financial, political and educational largesse to other faith groups?
Can Scotland Become Islamic without Changing Identity?
Another ‘evidence’ of Islamophobia cited by the report is that 41 per cent of people agreed that Scotland would begin to lose its identity if more Muslims were to come to live in Scotland. Scotland, by rejecting its Christianity, is already losing its identity, but that identity will again change if Sharia law, or Islamic traditions become the norm.
You can argue that it would be a good change of identity – but you cannot logically argue that there will be no change of identity. Douglas Murray’s The Strange Death of Europe is a brilliant exposé by a gay atheist of what will change if a country loses it’s Christian identity. I suspect that in the new Scotland such books, if not directly banned, will certainly not be permitted in any educational or media establishment!
The suggestion that the government, media and education systems should be used to teach just one narrative about Islam, is a suggestion for state propaganda. The report asks that all media should consult with the Islamic community before it publishes certain stories. They also ask for a ‘more rounded approach to history’ – which really means a rewriting of history which I suspect will leave out the fact that Scotland was largely founded on Christian principles. Will anyone who questions this now be considered to be Islamophobic and subject to Scotland’s new hate speech laws? Ominously, the report itself asks for “more harsh punishments and penalties on those who are found to have committed Islamophobic crimes or hate crimes against Muslims in any form.”
Is There any Connection Between Islam and Islamism?
The report claims that “in certain quarters, an unfounded association has been made between terrorist networks, human rights violations and Muslim communities”. But the assertion that this is “unfounded” is itself an unfounded assertion. There is a connection between ISIS, al-Qaeda and Islam. There is a connection between the repressive treatment of Christians, women and homosexuals in many Muslim countries, and the fact that they are Islamic. It is foolish and wrong to claim that all or most Muslims, or Muslim politicians are potential terrorists, but it is just as foolish and wrong to deny that there is a link between Islam and Islamism.
No politician will challenge this. Nor will most church leaders – or journalists. Because to question this kind of report in the simplistic binary world of today’s culture is to open yourself up to the accusation that you are Far Right and that you support Muslims being beaten up.
Why Does it Matter?
What does it matter if the new state doctrine is to teach that Islam is the religion of peace and that anyone who questions Islam in any way is being racist? It matters because there are consequences in effectively regarding all criticism of Islam as racist. For example, the official review into the Manchester Arena bombing, where 22 young people lost their lives, was released last week. It contained the extraordinary testimony of a young security guard, Kyle Lawler, who saw the bomber, Salman Abedi, behaving suspiciously for over an hour. Yet he testified that he did nothing because “he stated that he was fearful of being branded a racist and would be in trouble if he got it wrong”.
Or what about the police, social workers, politicians and others who turned a blind eye to the hundreds of Rotherham girls being abused because they did not want to be considered racist? Ironically the fear of being called racist is a great deterrent to treating everyone the same.
Let’s return to the couple in the café. They were not Muslims – they were Christians. And the kind of abuse they received is the kind of abuse, mockery and discrimination I have faced all my life in modern Scotland. That’s one of the reasons why I fully support my Muslim neighbours and their right to be free from such abuse. It’s why I have written on this website defending the rights of Muslims to build mosques.
But you don’t defend or protect people by telling lies. We need to be able to tell the truth – the good, the bad, and the ugly. The kind of propaganda, intimidation and silencing proposed by this report will only aid extremist anti-Muslim groups.
Speak the Truth in Love
I have experienced what happens to some Muslims who become Christians. For example, a few years ago a young Muslim girl converted and had to go into protective custody – the police even had a special sub unit set up for such incidents – in Scotland! I think, too, of the teacher who lost his job and is now in hiding because he was perceived to have blasphemed Islam? Or the Muslim students in a ‘liberal’ Islamic further education establishment who told me that anyone apostasing from Islam should be punished by the state? To deny such incidents, or even the possibilities, does not help.
I am thankful that the Lord has brought so many Muslims to the UK. Because it gives Christians here a tremendous opportunity to do what we would be banned from doing in most Islamic countries – tell them of the love of Christ. We have the opportunity to speak the truth in love. Let us pray that our politicians don’t make this a hate crime.
Thank you. A very helpful article.
I agree, Islam is constantly referred to as a “race/ethnicity” and that error needs to be repeatedly corrected.
An excellent article spoken with truth and love. In the name of tolerance and equity I am awaiting the publication of a report of Christphobia in Scotland!
I’m pleased that the now reformed, former Anything But England (ABE) David Roberston has been civilised in Australia.
Perhaps the SNP should remove to Australia to overcome their, real or perceived, hatred of the English.
What a curious comment! I have known David for many years, but have never been aware of any “ABE” tendency! Perhaps he has carefully protected me – but I very much doubt that. Perhaps you are referring to his days at University (before I knew him), but most of us have moved on from many views that we held in our youth – and it did not take a move to Australia to achieve this.
The only other conclusion at which I am able to arrive is that you are ‘talking’ through a bodily orifice that is not your mouth!
His recent tweet
about the England soccer team win explains!
I don’t twitter! However, I would not judge any man by one “tweet”!
Brian,
I’m not on twitter. Nor did I judge DAR.
You really need to scroll down the blog to his tweets to see if it is still there.
While I appreciate that this illustrates the dangers of internet communication, what I don’t appreciate is being slagged off, as a result of getting a hold of the wrong end of rhe stick, as you continue to judge me without even attempting to find out about the tweet. Your apologies are a ccepted, thanks.
How could David, as a devotee of fine football fail to be converted to the England team, after Scotland’s exit!? Even as Italy has played some wonderful stuff in this tournament.?
The entire concept is ill conceived & abused inappropriately.
A “Phobia” is basically an irrational fear of something or someone. It has no direct connection with hatred or prejudice, and has sadly been hijacked by the ‘trendy lefty woke’ brigade & the LGBTIQ+ brigade & activists to close down debate & further their cause of indoctrination etc.
That said, a helpful report by David Robertson. The situation is typical of the corruption that’s inevitable when the Christian Gospel is rejected & reviled.
So. Let me understand your logic.
There is definitely a link between Islam and Islamism.
But there is definitely no link between complementarianism and domestic violence.
Hrmmm. Okay.
Yes – there is a link between Islam and Islamism. DO you deny that? I’m not quite sure of your logic re complementarianism (the Christian teaching the men and women are equal but different – and complement one another) and domestic violence – the view that one human being has the right to abuse another – neither equal nor complementarian. I understand that there is no logic to this position, and you thought you would just make a snide, smart comment. But next time – think before you post…
“They also ask for a ‘more rounded approach to history’”
Such as: In the seventh century a prophet called Mohammed appeared and called for the liberation of Moslems from the tyranny imposed by Christians. He and his successors had great success in liberating the Middle East, North Africa and large parts of Europe. Unfortunately the liberating Moslem armies were defeated at the Battle of Tours (732) and so the large Moslem population in much of Europe remained under the yoke of their Christian rulers. The long-term consequence of the Christian victory at Tours can be seen today in the widespread occurrence of Islamophobia throughout European countries. Furthermore, Ali Pasha (1740-1822) was a benevolent ruler who was always kind to his subjects. Stories about supposed atrocities he committed must be seen as simply the invention of people who opposed him. As to stories of Moslems forcing captured Christians into slavery, that also must now be seen in a new, more rounded, light.
It’s very noticeable that there are frequent calls for Christians to apologise for actions committed many centuries ago but when it comes to Islam all that is required is a ‘more rounded approach to history’.
I simply cannot get my head around the way leftism and Islam have become allies. What do they have in common? Oh wait – a desire to destroy Western Christianity.
When they eventually come to blows, I can only see one winner. Leftism has power only as long as it owns the culture. As the culture is Islamised, that will dwindle.
‘And so when an official report says this is rampant…’
David, where does the report say that?
Another week…another Bruce gripe and nitpick! Read the report – that is precisely what it is saying – and precisely what commentators in Scotland are saying it says.
Dear, Thanks for writing this piece. I am a Muslim living in Scotland. Ironically, I stumbled upon your article while researching ‘Islamophobia in Scotland’ for a workplace presentation on the topic.
While I enjoyed exploring your thoughts, I must admit I found much of your arguments rather troubling. The reason being that you frame ‘Islamophobia’ as a comparison between Islam, and by extension Muslims, in Scotland and Christianity, and by extension Christians, in Scotland. Which I believe to be rather dangerous because it implies that Muslims are ‘Others’ that intend to take the place of someone else in Scotland, whereas the report, and most of the public discourse about Islamophobia, is trying to highlight a simple truth that Islam and Muslim ARE part and parcel of Scottish society. Muslims do CO-EXIST with Christians, and non-religious folks, perfectly. In fact Muslims have been here and done that for the past 300+ years. Islam is No recent phenomena in Scotland, or UK for that matter.
I personally know friends and community members that are 4-5th Generation Scots. They wear kilts in graduation ceremonies, and drink IRN-Bru, as silly (or wonderful) as that may sound!
Thus, the questions in your article and the way you are framing them present ‘Islamophobia’ as an issue of Muslims VS Christians.. whereas, it really is about hate, discrimination and freedom of belief and freedom of practice (what ever the belief is) that are enshrined in the constitution. And unlike what you have mentioned, Muslims have never asked for any privileges… we ONLY ask for a fair shot at life, at opportunities, to be respected in public places, and allowed to positively contribute to this country we choose to call home, the same as everyone else should.
Lastly, the way you argue ‘Islamophobia’ is an attempt to promote Islam, or even to shut down intellectual debate and reasonable criticism, is completely off point. Because Muslims and Islamic community centers are the first to ALWAYS call for and encourage open debate and interfaith dialogue… yet very few of our Christian brethren do actually attend unfortunately.
So to end, again I thank you for this article, I respect your views, and I would like to send you and your readers a warm friendly invitation to your local mosque to meet fellow Muslims in your neighbourhood, to see the ‘human’ behind all the media drama, and overly-politicized reports. We do share a lot more in common than the media or the reports make us believe after all.
With Love and Peace,
Ali
Ali – thanks so much for this. There is much in it I agree with. Of course we should live together in peace and harmony. And Muslims should have the same freedoms as other groups – see this article I wrote on Islam in Scotland – https://theweeflea.com/2018/04/24/islam-on-lewis-why-the-church-should-support-muslims-right-to-build-mosques/
I have also visited Mosques and had dialogue and read Islamic works. My neighbours in Dundee were Muslims and they were great neighbours. However there is a negative side as well. Islam means submission – and all Muslims believe that all people should submit to Islamic rule. Islam is not just a religion but also a political system. I once gave lecture at an Islamic institution on the Islamic doctrine of tolerance – although the majority of Muslims there would have described themselves as liberal almost all of them thought that those who left Islam should be punished. Can you name one Muslim majority country where people are free to choose their religion?
I think you could sum up my view as this – Muslim people should be welcomed and loved. Islamic theology should be questioned and challenged. Ultimately it is Christless and therefore hopeless. But I agree with you completely that there should be no fear of Islam from Christian and no prejudice against Muslims…
Dear, Thank you for your response. I appreciate your kind words. We do already live in harmony and peace, and my personal belief is that speaking of and discussing topics such as Islamophobia is essential **to ensure** that peace and harmony is preserved, for the better of all.
To reply to what you’ve mentioned:
1st, you mentioned ‘Islam means submission – and *all* Muslims believe that *all* people should submit to Islamic rule.’
The first part is accurate. Islam, means peaceful submission to God, the unique, the almighty, which so happens to be the same God Christians, Jews and all Abrahamic faiths believe in. Also, one of the core elements of Islam is to believe that Islam is a continuation of Christianity, more of a younger sibling, rather than a rival, as your original article may have (albeit unintentionally) suggested.
The second part of your phrase however, not so accurate because ‘All’ is not part of the Islamic principle of diversity where numerous verses of the Quran (what we believe to be God’s last revelation to humanity) mention that diversity is a ‘factual reality’ that God has Planned, Created and is therefore Accepted as a Fact.
As an example, I would highly recommend you read about the Constitution of Madina, which is considered by many the 1st Human rights declaration in History. This was the agreement Prophet Muhammad had signed with Jews, and locals of different tribes to protect the rights of beliefs and ensure social and economic equality. And by extension, this also applied to Christians of Yemen who later visited Madina, and even pagans, as mentioned in many stories and authentic accounts. So if as you said, Muslims want to forcibly turn ‘all’ people into Muslims, why and how did the Prophet Muhammed sign a constitution to protect the Jews’ rights to freedom of belief?
Please see here: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Constitution-of-Medina
Also, the purpose of diversity in Islam is very much coherent with Quranic texts, because we believe that each and every individual is driven to question, ponder and decide for the themselves the belief system they ought to follow and live by, and therefore to be judged accordingly by God.
Otherwise, why would there be a judgement day where God would judge people? based on what? if we were to ‘all’ be ‘forced’ to believe in the same thing by the same few people.
This also leads to your later statement about ‘Punishing’ those who:
1) decide for themselves, 2) after research and intellectual questioning, 3) to leave Islam.
Here, I wouldn’t go into the general public belief system or what they culturally deem acceptable or not .. however, if you look closely, you will see a clear discrepancy between the logic of ‘punishing’ an individual in this world based on the choice of belief and on the other hand God’s awaited judgement of individual choices, which ultimately awaits in the hereafter, and thus directly leads to respecting freedoms in ‘this’ world.
The first is driven by cultural norms, while the later is embedded in the belief system.
In passing, it might also be worth noting that ‘not everything that lambda muslims’ think is ‘Islamic’ is actually Islamic in nature or from an Islamic source, simply because Islamic societies have gone through way too many cultural changes where influences from new muslims from Perisan, Indian, Chinese, and even Western backgrounds have become accepted norms without much scrutiny relating to their ‘Islamic’ness’ (if I may coin the term), and remain largely to be the case today.
Lastly, about our beloved Jesus Christ… where do I begin. There’s an entire chapter in Quran named after Mary the Virgin (Mariam, is her Arabized name). That’s how much we, Muslims, love Jesus. The love of Jesus is deeply rooted in Muslim beliefs, and no amount of politicized historical events driven by instrumentalization of religion (Christianity by Christian kings, and Islam by Muslim emperors/Khalifs) would change the fact that Muslims love Christ, and live by his teachings of love, peace and brotherhood. Even Prophet Muhammed called Jesus ‘my brother’ on numerous occasions in Hadiths (reported prophetic sayings/traditions), as can also be seen in the story of the Christian king of Habashah (nowadays Ethiopia) who the early Muslims took refuge in his kingdom for protection, and the Prophet Muhammad prayed for him and called him a ‘brother’ and a ‘believer’ when the king passed away.
Is our love for Jesus the same as that in Chrisianity? I wouldn’t say so .. is that an issue? I sure hope it wouldn’t be … but when we talk about Islamophobia (or ChristianoPhobia that also exists in different parts of the world) it is certainly to ensure that diversity and freedom to intellectually question is preserved, and even championed.
Lastly, I must say that agreeing to disagree should NEVER be a pretext for hate, discrimination or even harming people. It is a sad reality that we see ‘cancel culture’ becoming the norm nowadays, where one can barely speak of anything or start an intellectual debate without being shut down.. which, as a Muslim, I strongly believe goes against the desired and encouraged reality of diversity that God had wanted.
And by the way, I, or my views, are no exception to the everyday Muslim you might run into at the workplace, school or the shops. The issue is when people speak ‘About’ Muslims, and not ‘To’ Muslims, and come up with their own conclusions, which may be very far from reality.
Again, thank you for this discussion. I really appreciate your response and wish you and your readers all the very best. I’ll now go back to preparing my presentation. 🙂
Sincerely,
Ali
Thanks Ali –
Responses below…I asked a friend who knows a lot more about Islam than I do and this is what he suggested….Feel free to respond – Your are in quotations…
“1st, you mentioned ‘Islam means submission – and *all* Muslims believe that *all* people should submit to Islamic rule.’
The first part is accurate. Islam, means peaceful submission to God, the unique, the almighty, which so happens to be the same God Christians, Jews and all Abrahamic faiths believe in. Also, one of the core elements of Islam is to believe that Islam is a continuation of Christianity, more of a younger sibling, rather than a rival, as your original article may have (albeit unintentionally) suggested.”
– It is true that Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion and a continuation of Christianity but this does not make it one. There needs to be some evidence for this claim. For instance, the Bahai religion claims to be a continuation of Islam. Do you accept this?
“The second part of your phrase however, not so accurate because ‘All’ is not part of the Islamic principle of diversity where numerous verses of the Quran (what we believe to be God’s last revelation to humanity) mention that diversity is a ‘factual reality’ that God has Planned, Created and is therefore Accepted as a Fact.”
– Yes and no. Muhammad did not send out missionaries inviting people to Islam. He sent out Jihadist who gave people three choices: convert, pay the terms of surrender, or fight. There is only diversity under Islamic rule.
“As an example, I would highly recommend you read about the Constitution of Madina, which is considered by many the 1st Human rights declaration in History. This was the agreement Prophet Muhammad had signed with Jews, and locals of different tribes to protect the rights of beliefs and ensure social and economic equality. And by extension, this also applied to Christians of Yemen who later visited Madina, and even pagans, as mentioned in many stories and authentic accounts. So if as you said, Muslims want to forcibly turn ‘all’ people into Muslims, why and how did the Prophet Muhammed sign a constitution to protect the Jews’ rights to freedom of belief?
Please see here: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Constitution-of-Medina”
– This was a temporary agreement and later the Jews and Christians were expelled from Arabia. There are hadiths showing the opposite of what you say.
“Also, the purpose of diversity in Islam is very much coherent with Quranic texts, because we believe that each and every individual is driven to question, ponder and decide for the themselves the belief system they ought to follow and live by, and therefore to be judged accordingly by God.
Otherwise, why would there be a judgement day where God would judge people? based on what? if we were to ‘all’ be ‘forced’ to believe in the same thing by the same few people.”
– For the first 1000 years Islam conquered everyone it could and gave them three choices. It was diversity under Islamic superiority. I feel that you are trying to hide history and theology from me to make Islam appear peaceful.
“This also leads to your later statement about ‘Punishing’ those who:
1) decide for themselves, 2) after research and intellectual questioning, 3) to leave Islam.
Here, I wouldn’t go into the general public belief system or what they culturally deem acceptable or not .. however, if you look closely, you will see a clear discrepancy between the logic of ‘punishing’ an individual in this world based on the choice of belief and on the other hand God’s awaited judgement of individual choices, which ultimately awaits in the hereafter, and thus directly leads to respecting freedoms in ‘this’ world.
The first is driven by cultural norms, while the later is embedded in the belief system.
In passing, it might also be worth noting that ‘not everything that lambda muslims’ think is ‘Islamic’ is actually Islamic in nature or from an Islamic source, simply because Islamic societies have gone through way too many cultural changes where influences from new muslims from Perisan, Indian, Chinese, and even Western backgrounds have become accepted norms without much scrutiny relating to their ‘Islamic’ness’ (if I may coin the term), and remain largely to be the case today.”
– There are clear hadiths and Sharia that stipulate the death of someone who leaves Islam. I can understand that you may not like this and do not want Scottish people to know about it, but it is there. Are you asking me to ignore the history and theology of Islam?
“Lastly, about our beloved Jesus Christ… where do I begin. There’s an entire chapter in Quran named after Mary the Virgin (Mariam, is her Arabized name). That’s how much we, Muslims, love Jesus.”
– Again, I feel that you are misrepresenting Islam. Yes, there is a chapter in the Qur’an called Mary but the chapter is not about her. Like every chapter in the Qur’an it is about a situation in Muhammad’s life that he is responding to. The Qur’an revolves and evolves around Muhammad’s life. Mary and Jesus are only referred to as illustrations for something in Muhammad’s life.
“The love of Jesus is deeply rooted in Muslim beliefs, and no amount of politicized historical events driven by instrumentalization of religion (Christianity by Christian kings, and Islam by Muslim emperors/Khalifs) would change the fact that Muslims love Christ, and live by his teachings of love, peace and brotherhood.”
– Bahai love Jesus too. Bahai love Muhammad. You cannot be a Bahai if you do not love Muhammad and all the prophets. Do accept that the Bahai truly love Muhammad? Muslims only believe what Muhammad said about Jesus. They do not believe Jesus they believe Muhammad. So I am sorry but it is simply not true what you say.
“Even Prophet Muhammed called Jesus ‘my brother’ on numerous occasions in Hadiths (reported prophetic sayings/traditions), as can also be seen in the story of the Christian king of Habashah (nowadays Ethiopia) who the early Muslims took refuge in his kingdom for protection, and the Prophet Muhammad prayed for him and called him a ‘brother’ and a ‘believer’ when the king passed away.Is our love for Jesus the same as that in Chrisianity? I wouldn’t say so .. is that an issue? I sure hope it wouldn’t be …”
– As I said, do you accept what the Bahai say about Muhammad? Is that an issue for you?
“but when we talk about Islamophobia (or ChristianoPhobia that also exists in different parts of the world) it is certainly to ensure that diversity and freedom to intellectually question is preserved, and even championed.
Lastly, I must say that agreeing to disagree should NEVER be a pretext for hate, discrimination or even harming people. It is a sad reality that we see ‘cancel culture’ becoming the norm nowadays, where one can barely speak of anything or start an intellectual debate without being shut down.. which, as a Muslim, I strongly believe goes against the desired and encouraged reality of diversity that God had wanted.”
– Yes, but we are entitled to know what Islam actually teaches. I fear that people cry Islamophobia against those who take the time to learn Islamic history and theology, just as a way of shutting them down.
“And by the way, I, or my views, are no exception to the everyday Muslim you might run into at the workplace, school or the shops. The issue is when people speak ‘About’ Muslims, and not ‘To’ Muslims, and come up with their own conclusions, which may be very far from reality.”
– That really depends upon the Muslim you speak to. There are plenty of other Muslims who have different views to yours. The only way forward for me is to read the Qur’an and history for myself