1,000Can you please define "Islamaphobia"?
Do you believe it's legitimate to disagree with the holy book of Islam, which instructs Muslims that they should fight the Christians and Jews (the people of the Book/Scripture) until they are forced to pay tribute and are humiliated? (Surah 9:29) Surely it is not irrational to oppose such a violent ideology if you are a potential target, correct?
Do you believe it's legitimate to object to the fact that one of the top 3 most trusted hadith collections (treated as authoritative scripture by all Sunni Muslims) says that Muhammad, the moral pattern of conduct for all Muslims married a 6 year old and then had sex with her at 9 years old? (Sahih al-Bukhari 5134)
Surely you can understand that a large number of people can have a legitimate objection to the teachings of Islam even if there are plenty of good hearted Muslims who may not necessarily agree with their holy books?
@PhantomHazard I don’t agree with that stuff, and that’s not islamophobic. What is islamophobic is when people think that every Muslim believes the worst stuff. Eg. Look at attacks on Zohran Mamdani. He Is a liberal and they act like he’s a terrorist who wants to impose sharia law. But his social views are very liberal
@Jack1 I don't think the term "Anti-Christian" is a well defined term.
I think plenty of people bound to disagree with the Bible, which is of course their personal opinion. The critical issue is that the Bible doesn't command New Testament believers to execute anyone or subjugate nations and people groups, nor does it teach that child "marriage" is permissible.
Unfortunately, no matter how many good Muslims don't practice the views found in their holy books, there are guaranteed to be some Muslim believers who do, which poses a threat to those that they are commanded to target.
Maybe I understood the question wrong. I was thinking for example how some people say Zohran Mamdani is going to ‘implement sharia law’ when it’s obvious he’s socially liberal (pro lgbt, abortion, freedom etc). So those attacks seem just based on his race? Cause sharia law isn’t what he believes. But if I think about what they are more ‘phobic’ of it’s probably the religion.
@Jack1
I agree that Zohran is certainly not a practitioner of Sharia based on his public positions. The reason some people get that impression is due to his occasional public support of Islamic terrorists.
For example, during his failed wrap career, he released a song in 2017 which included the line "My love to the holy land 5, you better look em up".
Here's context for the holy land five:
The "Holy Land 5" refers to the five leaders of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), once the largest Muslim charity in the U.S., who were convicted in 2008 for funneling over $12.4 million to the terrorist group Hamas. While the defense argued the funds were purely for humanitarian aid (such as food and medicine) distributed through Palestinian zakat (charity) committees, the U.S. government successfully proved that these committees were controlled by Hamas. Prosecutors argued that this support allowed Hamas to divert its own funds toward terrorism and "win the hearts and minds" of the local population through social services. Following a 2007 mistrial, a 2008 retrial resulted in convictions on all 108 counts, including money laundering and providing material support to a designated terrorist organization, leading to prison sentences ranging from 15 to 65 years.
@PhantomHazard https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/03/11/after-israels-designation-human-rights-groups-terrorists-biden-should-release
Human rights watch says they should be released. Based on my quick glance I believe they are wrongfully imprisoned. They were supporting charities and aid, not supporting terrorists. Zohran did nothing wrong.
@Jack1
Here's some additional context that the article doesn't debunk:
The U.S. government (Department of Justice and FBI) presented evidence that HLF funneled over $12 million to Hamas-controlled zakat (charity) committees in the West Bank and Gaza from 1995–2001, after Hamas was designated a foreign terrorist organization by the U.S. in 1995. These committees allegedly supported families of suicide bombers, Hamas prisoners, and militants, helping Hamas build grassroots support and freeing up resources for its violent activities (a form of material support under U.S. law, 18 U.S.C. § 2339B).
Evidence included FBI wiretaps of HLF leaders discussing hiding ties to Hamas, internal documents showing links (e.g., family connections like Ghassan Elashi's relative ties to Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook), and proof of routing funds through Hamas-affiliated committees.
In case you aren't aware of the way many Muslim terror groups operate, if a family's breadwinner is killed during an act of terror, then charity funds will be allocated to pay for that family, which incentivizes further terrorism.
@Jack1 well ideally the father should be there to look after the kids because ideally he shouldn't be going and committing acts of terror and killing innocent people. Someone needs to look after his victims' kids too.