‘If religion and politics are both largely ideological in nature, why is religion in general seen as something that shouldn’t be criticized but politics can be?’
Paul Russell, a professor of philosophy at both the University of British Columbia and Gothenberg University, as written a thoughtful piece at Aeon magazine that I commend to your attention: “The limits of tolerance.” Perhaps the thesis is self-evident to many of us—you can choose how tenaciously you hold your politics and religion, but not your gender and ethnicity—but it bears reading by those who zealously call out “Islamophobia” when Islam is criticized, or defend all religions against attack because, after all, it’s religion.
The thesis is based on the idea in this paragraph:
Some claim there is an analogy between the identity politics of religion and the issues that arise with other excluded groups based on race, gender, sexual orientation, disability and the like. What is supposed to hold these divergent identities together is that the groups in question have been treated unequally, or do not receive…
View original post 1,581 more words