- Atheist Freethinkers - https://www.atheology.ca -
Blog 109: British Secularists Reject “Islamophobia” Definition
Posted By jean.meslier On 2019-06-03 @ 22:00 In | No Comments
The British National Secular Society [1] (NSS), along with several public figures, has signed an open letter addressed to the Home Secretary Sajid Javid expressing concern about a definition of so-called “Islamophobia” proposed by an all-party parliamentary group (APPG). The proposed definition, already endorsed by several British, Scottish and Welsh political parties and by the mayor of London, declares that:
“Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.”
The open letter argues that the definition is “unfit for purpose” [3] and could seriously threaten both freedom of speech and counter-extremism efforts. Fortunately the UK government recently rejected the definition [4], as did Lancashire County Council [5] subsequently. However, the issue is not off the table and the APPG may eventually propose another definition.
The open letter’s criticisms of the “Islamophobia” definition cover several essential points:
Finally, the letter illustrates these concerns with numerous examples of how the term “Islamophobia” has already caused serious problems which would only increase if the proposed definition were accepted:
“The accusation of Islamophobia has already been used against those opposing religious and gender segregation in education, the hijab, halal slaughter on the grounds of animal welfare, LGBT rights campaigners opposing Muslim views on homosexuality, ex-Muslims and feminists opposing Islamic views and practices relating to women, as well as those concerned about the issue of grooming gangs. It has been used against journalists who investigate Islamism, Muslims working in counter-extremism, schools and Ofsted [Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills] for resisting conservative religious pressure and enforcing gender equality.” […]
“If this definition is adopted the government will likely turn to self-appointed ‘representatives of the community’ to define ‘Muslimness’. This is clearly open to abuse. The APPG already entirely overlooked Muslims who are often considered to be ‘insufficiently Muslim’ by other Muslims, moderates, liberals, reformers and the Ahmadiyyah, who often suffer persecution and violence at the hands of other Muslims.”
Thus, the open letter signed by the NSS puts forth solid arguments against the “Islamophobia” definition, arguments which are more than enough to justify rejection of that definition. Nevertheless, I find certain aspects of the letter somewhat timid, in particular:
Furthermore, from a secular perspective, it is inappropriate for a government to make any official pronouncement about a religion, other than to declare its autonomy and independence from all religions. The fact that the British government would even consider a possible declaration about Islam or about any other religion is an indicator of just how non-secular the British political system is. The same observation applies to the Canadian system; one only has to consider the infamous Motion M-103.
To summarize, accusations of “Islamophobia” are always unacceptable because the word simply means an irrational fear of the religion Islam. But to fear any religion, especially a monotheism such as Islam, Christianity or Judaism, is eminently justifiable because any religion which seeks political influence is dangerous, and the monotheisms in particular are extremely dangerous. I can think of only two uses of the term “Islamophobia” which might potentially be legitimate, and even in those two cases it should be rejected:
In conclusion, the word “Islamophobia” should be rejected in general. When used as an accusation, its purpose is to promote political Islam by stifling any and all criticism of Islam. It serves no other purpose. On the contrary, by suppressing necessary discussion, its use increases any unresolved antipathy towards Muslims in the general population, with a subsequent risk of an increase in anti-Muslim violence. The British National Secular Society, despite its somewhat hesitant approach to this issue, has understood and communicated the essential elements of this important observation.
Article printed from Atheist Freethinkers: https://www.atheology.ca
URL to article: https://www.atheology.ca/blog-109/
URLs in this post:
[1] National Secular Society: https://www.secularism.org.uk/
[2] Website dedicated to this definition: https://islamophobia-definition.com/
[3] open letter argues that the definition is “unfit for purpose”: https://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2019/05/islamophobia-definition-unfit-for-purpose-say-campaigners
[4] the UK government recently rejected the definition: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48283337
[5] Lancashire County Council: https://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2019/05/council-rejects-islamophobia-definition-after-nss-lobbying
[6] persecution of Christians by Muslims has, by some reports, reached near-genocidal levels: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48146305
[7] Blog 094: Islamophobia: There Is No Such Thing: https://www.atheology.ca/blog-094/
[8] Blog 093: NO to a Day Against “Islamophobia”: https://www.atheology.ca/blog-093/
[9] Blog 077: Islamophobia is Inevitable!: https://www.atheology.ca/blog-077/
[10] Blog 022: Rethinking “Islamophobia”: https://www.atheology.ca/blog-022/
[11] : https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.atheology.ca%2Fblog-109%2F
[12] : http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Blog%20109%3A%20British%20Secularists%20Reject%20%E2%80%9CIslamophobia%E2%80%9D%20Definition&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.atheology.ca%2Fblog-109%2F
Click here to print.
Copyright © 2015 Atheist Freethinkers. All rights reserved.