I've been concerned for a while with the attitude some of the "New Atheists" have displayed towards Islam, unfairly singling it out in a way that borders on Islamophobia. (Anyone who says the religion of Rumi and Hafez is at its core a religion of hate, doesn't know what the hell they're talking about.) Over at Salon, Nathan Lean has a good look at the problem: Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens: New Atheists flirt with Islamophobia
Until 9/11, Islam didn’t figure in the New Atheists’ attacks in a prominent way. As a phenomenon with its roots in Europe, atheism has traditionally been the archenemy of Christianity, though Jews and Judaism have also slipped into the mix. But emboldened by their newfound fervor in the wake of the terrorist attacks, the New Atheists joined a growing chorus of Muslim-haters, mixing their abhorrence of religion in general with a specific distaste for Islam (In 2009, Hitchens published a book called “God Is Not Great,” a direct smack at Muslims who commonly recite the Arabic refrain Allah Akbar, meaning “God is great”). Conversations about the practical impossibility of God’s existence and the science-based irrationality of an afterlife slid seamlessly into xenophobia over Muslim immigration or the practice of veiling. The New Atheists became the new Islamophobes, their invectives against Muslims resembling the rowdy, uneducated ramblings of backwoods racists rather than appraisals based on intellect, rationality and reason. “Islam, more than any other religion human beings have devised, has all the makings of a thoroughgoing cult of death,” writes Harris, whose nonprofit foundation Project Reason ironically aims to “erode the influence of bigotry in our world.”
It certainly is strange to claim that Islam has more reason to be labeled a "cult of death" than any other religion, especially when considered from the perspective of Easter Weekend: a time when Christians -- to be blunt -- celebrate a human sacrifice. Leviticus commands both Christians and Jews to go and put all sorts of offenders to death. There are radical elements in ultra-Orthodox Judaism as hateful as any religion on Earth. One of Hinduism's highest holy books is at it core a justification and glorification of war. Even Buddhism has its violent elements (which I touch on at some length in Why Buddha Touched the Earth.)
That said, it may be true that hateful and violent sects currently make up a larger portion of Islam than these other religions. (I say *may* be true; I have no evidence of this, and we'd have to come to some mutually agreeable definitions before we could answer the question.) But if this is so it would be more sensible to attribute it to the geopolitical history of the past century or so in the Middle East, not to the nature of Islam itself.
Adam (not verified)
Sun, 04/14/2013 - 14:27
Permalink
The New Witch-hunt
"Phobia" of whatever is the new "bigotry", which is the new "racism," which is the new witch-hunt. In other words, this is just more witch-hunting, as ignorant and intolerant as is claimed of the ones who are hunted.
"Homophobe!" "Islamophobe!" These are just the contemporary form of, "Witch!"
It all boils down to labeling and *real* intolerance. *Real* tolerance lets people disagree with whoever for whatever reason without criticizing them and calling them names.
For some reason, it seems that the loudest voices in our society are unable or unwilling to comprehend the difference between disagreement and intolerance. It's ironic, because these voices which are so critical of "intolerance" are the same ones who want to control what others think and say! Hypocrisy at its finest.
"It certainly is strange to claim that Islam has more reason to be labeled a 'cult of death' than any other religion, especially when considered from the perspective of Easter Weekend: a time when Christians -- to be blunt -- celebrate a human sacrifice."
...Really? You're comparing the willing sacrifice of one man for the sake of saving all people to jihad and suicide bombers and killing and maiming infidels to receive the reward of eternal sexual fantasy? Who's being disingenuous now? Do you even understand what you're saying?
"...it would be more sensible to attribute it to the geopolitical history of the past century or so in the Middle East, not to the nature of Islam itself."
To what, then, do you attribute the geopolitical history of the past century or so in the Middle East? Are you saying Islam came from that? Are you saying Islam didn't cause these holy wars? You have it backwards, friend.
This is, if I may turn a phrase, Islamophobiaphobia. You're bending over backwards to avoid criticizing those who have committed and advocate committing evil acts. No, not all Muslims have murdered unbelievers, but their scripture commands it. But oh, no, we mustn't criticize Islam!
Christianity, now that's the evil religion! Telling people to love their enemies, to make sacrifices for the good of others...those ignorant, intolerant, hateful bigots! They're dragging us back into the stone age, throwing out all scientific advancement, and causing wars with those peaceful countries in the Middle East--you know, the ones whose national religions advocate blowing people to smithereens because they disagree!
I continue to be amazed at the logical disconnect that seems to exist in many people's minds today.
Robin (not verified)
Thu, 04/18/2013 - 16:27
Permalink
Sam Harris's
I am really only familiar w what Harris says on this subject and I wonder if you truly are? Not being snarky but have you really listened to the man speak at length or really read w more than a perfunctory glance through his writings. He is absolutely not a racist/bigot. He seems like one of the most compassionate people I have ever come across. It's not logical to infer someone is a racist because they have the guts to stand up and say that a belief system is directly responsible for terrible acts against humanity.