What's new
Off Topix: Embrace the Unexpected in Every Discussion

Off Topix is a well established general discussion forum that originally opened to the public way back in 2009! We provide a laid back atmosphere and our members are down to earth. We have a ton of content and fresh stuff is constantly being added. We cover all sorts of topics, so there's bound to be something inside to pique your interest. We welcome anyone and everyone to register & become a member of our awesome community.

Sure, You Can't Be 'Racist' Against a Religion...

identityissues8

Gold Member
Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Posts
2,437
Reaction score
28
Points
1,525
I was reading through the article Why would anyone believe in the "Islamophobia Industry"? when I came across a certain point that I have heard people try to make before. I've just never seen it attributed to Dickie Dawkins. :P
High profile names such as the atheist Richard Dawkins have said that racism against a religion cannot exist (“It is not a race… Islam is a religion and you can choose to leave it or join it”).
And I understand that. Islam is a religion and not a race, therefore you cannot be racist against it.
Though, the main problem I have is between what he says and the reality. People don't simply choose to 'leave it or join it'. Many people choose to throw (metaphoric) stones from the sidelines and be generally discriminatory in a way that comes from the same place as racism. It may not strictly speaking be racism. But it's still bigotry.

Kind of how in the same way agism, sexism etc. are not racist. But are they not bigoted and discriminatory, therefore unacceptable in the same manner?

Alhamdulillah. I've been very lucky. I have only had a few run ins, online and in person with Islamophobes. A few comments in person, when dressed in Islamic clothing - the worst of it wasn't too bad, when I was getting cash out at an ATM and a couple of teenagers were riding their bikes past, then turned around, came back and screamed some incoherent nonsense at me.

By the same token, online I've had a few death threats on the basis of my religion.
Oh, and this lovely message in my Facebook inbox yesterday evening (read at your own discretion, it is quite gross):
wow all these days at work and i didn't need to be there i could have just been a welfare cheat like you muslims. You social retard. You'd know all about little dicks wouldn't you being a muslims. Hahha the reason muslims are so angry and treat woman the way they do is they want to have big white Aussie cock. Not a little pin dick like all muslims have lol the reason they all have little dicks is Muhammad rapped so many woman that his little dick gene spread through Islam. Hahahah
(To clarify, in the single preceding reply I sent this clown, I did say he had a bad case of 'little dick syndrome.')

I was just wondering. Do you agree with Richard Dawkin's assertion, or while not necessarily strictly speaking 'racist', do you agree with me that being bigoted in this manner is no better at all and absolutely inexcusable?
 
I think the term you are looking for is religism(there's a nice page on wikipedia about the word and its meaning) which is the basically discrimination based on religion.

This is why I don't like labels in general as they come with a lot of baggage that you are forced to answer and atone for by those that believe the baggage applies to everyone in the group especially when it's a label you chose for yourself. They already have a picture of who you are as a person before you can even speak and then they speak to you based on that picture and not who you actually are. This is why that person was so mean to you so I wouldn't take it personally. I also wouldn't hurl insults at him regardless of who started it as is hardly productive in changing someone's mind. If he assumes you are not a good person then why provide evidence to support the assertion? IF anything, I want to provide evidence to the contrary and make them think "why didn't they act like I expected them to?" They might not change overnight but they may over time.
 
Ignorance and bigotry are neither cultural nor racial traits.

One can be as stupid as one wishes to be, and belong to any race, social class, or religion there is going.

However. Just judging from U.S. 'Reality' television shows such as "dancing moms" and the "boo boo" one, "Loud and Stupid" is apparently an acceptable personality.
 
identityissues8 said:
I was just wondering. Do you agree with Richard Dawkin's assertion, or while not necessarily strictly speaking 'racist', do you agree with me that being bigoted in this manner is no better at all and absolutely inexcusable?
These are not mutually exclusive options.
Racism is simply the wrong word to use, that doesn't mean discriminating against someone because of their religion is right. Bluezone said it quite well.
DrLeftover said:
"Loud and Stupid" is apparently an acceptable personality.
I suspect people would feel bad about speaking out against it.
 
You can't be racist in terms of the definition of the word but one could be discriminatory.

Regardless, what an idiot that sent you that. Unfortunately, there are bad apples in every group and these idiots too, make the rest look bad. It's sad that ignorant people use the bad ones as examples of the group when there are plenty of positive ones.

I think a lot of it has to do with the lack of real interactions with certain groups as well, I've been fortunate enough to have been friends with people of various races.
 

Create an account or login to post a reply

You must be a member in order to post a reply

Create an account

Create an account here on Off Topix. It's quick & easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom