It is common for critics of Islam to be accused of blind hatred, ignorance, or deliberately insulting a religion that is supposed to be “the true faith.” But what many Muslims fail to realise is that this very religion places us — those who have left its cloak — directly in opposition to it, not just as a religious system, but as an all-encompassing project that claims monopoly over truth and rejects any alternative or competitor.
Islam, as presented and believed by its followers, is not simply one religion among others; it is “the only true religion” accepted by God, and everything else is falsehood, misguidance, and rejected. Therefore, criticising it is not a matter of choice or intellectual luxury but a human and rational necessity.
Having grown up within the Islamic circle, I come from a background where I experienced the details of this religion with all its beliefs, teachings, and practices firsthand — personally, not from outside or through preconceived judgments. Over time, after reflection and reconsideration, I began to realise that this religion is not a divine revelation free from fault but a human system shaped by historical circumstances, reflecting the contradictions and needs of a Bedouin environment from over 1400 years ago, which has no real connection to the intellectual, ethical, or scientific challenges we face today. For this reason, my criticism of Islam was not rebellion or a desire to provoke, but rather a quest for truth, leading me to a clear conclusion: this religion is 100% a human construct.
If Islam — as its followers claim — is a complete, strong, fortified religion built on fixed divine truths, then why is it afraid of criticism? Why is criticism met with shouting, anger, and accusations of apostasy? Only a fragile structure fears criticism; only those who feel their foundation may not hold are disturbed by questions. Truly strong systems do not fear revision, confrontation, or re-examination.
The Islam we confront and criticise is not just a personal spiritual ritual but a totalitarian, comprehensive system that imposes itself on every aspect of life — from food and clothing to social relations, education, thought, and political stances. Worse still, it injects rigid concepts into minds from childhood, rejects development, criminalises thinking, treats doubt as a crime, criticism as blasphemy, and questioning as a gateway to hell.
The irony is that the entire world has the right to criticise everything — from atheism to secularism, from Christianity to Judaism and Buddhism — without the ground collapsing beneath their feet, except when someone approaches Islam. Only then are blasphemy laws invoked, the sword of “Islamophobia” brandished, streets incited, embassies burned, and blood spilled. It is as if Islam demands to be treated as a fragile entity that cannot withstand criticism, even though it is presented as a complete divine system capable of leading humanity!
Why don’t we see Jews revolting when Moses is depicted? Or Christians cutting throats over insults to Christ? Why don’t Buddhist temples collapse whenever ancient gods’ stories are criticised? Only Islam declares a global emergency over a cartoon, a critical film, or even a tweet. This is not zealotry for religion but an inferiority complex disguised as fear and weakness that surfaces whenever the “aura of Islam” is shaken.
But those who criticise Islam do not do so out of pure hatred. Usually, there are only two reasons: either they see it as a system that deserves review and purification because it self-sabotages, or they see it as a real threat to freedoms, minds, and societies and want to dismantle this danger before it escalates.
We do not criticise Islam because “it prays and fasts” or “calls for mercy,” as its followers claim, but because this Islam does not limit itself to bowing in mosques; it imposes its dominance on every detail of life — from sleep to dress to the laws of the state itself. Islam does not stop at the mosque door; it invades institutions, streets, education, judiciary, economy, and even people’s bedrooms.
It cannot be presented as a religion of tolerance while it calls non-Muslims names like: impure, infidel, misguided, accursed, bastard, donkey carrying books, dog, and people of hellfire. How can others be asked to respect Islam when its own texts overflow with insults and aggression?
More dangerously, this Islam is no longer just a theory but has materialised in hundreds of groups that have become literal copies of the old caliphate states — from ISIS to Al-Qaeda, from the Taliban to Boko Haram. They all rely on the same Sharia, originate from the same texts, and repeat the slogans once raised by the armies of the Umayyads, Abbasids, and Ottomans. Every invasion and conquest was marketed as a “call to Islam,” but in reality, they were wars of captivity, looting, repression, and bloody expansion, cloaked in a religious banner to give killing a sacred dimension.
This Islam that we fight is a totalitarian authoritarian system wrapped in religion; it does not allow participation, rejects difference, drags societies behind it by force, and enslaves minds before bodies. Woe to anyone who dares to doubt it — hell awaits them, and curses pursue them in this world and the hereafter!
As for the other religions, we do not hold the same confrontational stance, not because we believe in them or fear them, but simply because they do not interfere in our daily lives, do not impose intellectual frameworks on us, and do not invade every little detail of our day. Yes, as secularists and enlighteners, we believe that all religions contain mythical and legendary texts rejected by science and reason, but we do not prioritise this as long as these religions are not used as social weapons to oppress humans or restrict freedom.
In fact, we respect the spiritual side of faith when it is a personal choice. Every individual has the right to find peace in “worship” such as prayer, fasting, meditation, just as others find it in music, travel, contemplation, or even shopping. Personal faith, if it helps a person achieve balance and mental peace, is to be respected and even encouraged.
Because we are part of these societies, we believe the first step toward reform begins with criticism and review of the religion we inherit without thinking, not by fighting other religions that were not the cause of our backwardness. Europeans did not revolt against Islam but against the churchmen in the Dark Ages, against their domination and control over every aspect of life. When they freed themselves from that dominance, they launched the greatest scientific and intellectual revolution history has ever seen and built the greatest civilisation known to humanity on the ruins of oppressive religion.
Although this discussion is about “peaceful criticism” relying on the pen, ideas, and rational argument, criticism that examines the idea from all sides, contemplates its impact, and scrutinises the harm it may have caused, those who reject this kind of criticism rarely face it with logic or proof. Instead, they quickly resort to exclusion, imprisonment, or killing. At best, they resort to declaring apostasy, insults, and personal attacks, as if unable to confront an idea with an idea, responding only with violence and aggression.
We aspire to do the same, not out of hatred, but out of a desire for freedom, reason, and enlightenment. We do not fight Islam as a personal belief but as a political and social monster that stands in the way of any rational, modern, and humane project in our societies. The goal is not destruction for the sake of destruction but to liberate the individual — to be free in thought, conscience, and choices — and for the state to have law, the mind to have a voice, and life to have meaning beyond fear, dependence, and superstition.
إرسال تعليق