An Ex-Muslim Examines the Highly Questionable Term ‘Islamophobia’

Islamic theology teaches that apostates from Islam are to be put to death. Speaking as an ex-Muslim who lives with the realities of Islam’s formal and informal death penalty for apostasy, I believe that is my right to both scrutinize and criticize Islamic doctrine, along with the worlds’ deeply flawed approach to what has become known as “Islamophobia.”

While examining the term “Islamophobia,” let us first establish the fact that a phobia is considered to be an irrational fear of something. But is it not completely rational, for example, for Muslim females to fear the Quran’s directive that disobedient women are to be beaten by their husbands?

Quran 4:34: “Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them. Indeed, Allah is always high, exalted, great.”

Hadith, Sahih Bukhari (72:725): A woman came to Muhammad and begged him to stop her husband from beating her. Her skin was bruised so badly that it is described as being “greener” than the green veil she was wearing. Muhammad did not admonish her husband, but instead ordered her to return to her husband and submit to his sexual desires.

And are six-year-old girls not to fear being married off to adult Muslim males and to have these “marriages” be consummated when the child reaches the age of 9 years of age, as per Muhammad’s example, the man whom Muslims are instructed in the Quran to emulate?

Hadith, Sahih Muslim (8:3309): “Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine.”

Quran 33:21: “Indeed in the messenger of Allah you have an excellent example for him who looks to Allah and the last day, and remembers Allah a great deal.”

Secondly, it is important to acknowledge that criticizing the Islamic texts that inspire and instruct Muslims to commit certain crimes in no way equates to harming or harassing innocent Muslims. The civilized secular world already has laws in place protecting its citizens from being harmed or harassed, regardless if a person is religious or non-religious. It has become clear to many that the term “Islamophobia” is being used as a weapon by those who want to shield Islam from scrutiny and criticism.

It should be obvious that it is not a hateful or bigoted act to criticize the many problematic texts and teachings found within the Islamic religion. While it is reasonable that innocent Muslims should never be harassed or harmed, the hateful and often murderous texts that the believers of Islam subscribe to must continue to be examined and discussed if the world is to avoid the harm that inevitably arise from these teachings.

Furthermore, the doctrines of any ideology (be it political or religious) should not be sheltered from scrutiny and denied public discussion. For example, when acts of terrorism and moral evils are committed by religious zealots, more scrutiny, not less, should be applied to the teachings of the religion involved. This principle most certainly ought to be applied to the enormous amounts of terrorism and civil unrest being generated by Muslims who themselves claim to be following Islamic dictates.

In a critical examination of Islamic theology, we quickly discover its jihad doctrine, Muhammad’s call to kill homosexuals, the barbaric doctrines surrounding the permissibility of sex slavery (Quran 33:50) among other problematic Islamic doctrines. I further explore these disturbing aspects of Islamic theology in this series of articles found HERE.

Tragically, the despicable practices mentioned above are considered by Muslims to be the infallible teachings of Islam, and therefore are expected to be acted upon. These harsh realities raise grave concerns for the free and democratic societies of the world. As Muslim populations increase within non-Islamic societies, and devout Muslims demand that certain troublesome Islamic practices be permitted to take place, legal challenges will inevitably arise, as many Islamic traditions contravene the laws of civilized secular societies. Conflict is inevitable.

This leads us to the heart of why the fatally flawed term “Islamophobia” is so fraught with problems. If the many immoral and illegal practices found within Islamic teachings are not to be tolerated in civil societies, then how are we expected to prevent them, when the basic process of publicly examining and detailing them is viewed as being bigoted and racist, and deemed to be an illegal hate crime? It makes no rational sense whatsoever.

Perhaps “Muslimphobia” would be a better term to use than “Islamophobia.” This way, Islamic doctrine could be criticized, and harassment of innocent Muslims be made illegal (as it actually already is). Just as the harassment of innocent Jews, Christians, and Hindus, etc. is illegal, while the theological teachings of all religions remain open to scrutiny and criticism.

The challenge facing humankind going forward is that many Muslims will choose to remain in the fold of Islam. Sadly, there are millions upon millions of adherents of the death cult of Mohammedanism wanting to impose the many evils of Sharia law. Laws consisting entirely of the fictitious Quran and Muhammad’s often deeply depraved saying and doings found within the Sunnah.

The great ex-Muslim and author of Why I am Not A Muslim, Ibn Warraq, further examines HERE the profound falsity and disturbing legal ramifications of legitimizing the highly questionable term “Islamophobia.”