[oilbagz]

Expressions of religious bigotry are not conducive to HN's guidelines.

Bigotry on the basis of religious grounds is repugnant wherever you see it, and should be called out wherever you see it, because it always results in atrocities. Casual bigotry like this only grows into collective hatred through complicity.

[sebmellen]

The problem arises when any sort of criticism of a religious system or philosophy results in accusations of bigotry.

Reminds me of Christopher Hitchens's eerily prophetic view of the spreading of the word "Islamophobia" [0].

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EYg8Tgrh0o

[oilbagz]

This would only be an appropriate and accurate response if indeed Islam promoted corruption in its teachings.

It does not. It only takes a bigot to assume it does, however.

[ALittleLight]

It seems much more appropriate to write "Islam doesn't teach people to be corrupt. Corruption is a function of poverty, not religion. For example countries of religion X aren't islamic but report similar signs of corruption." Calling people bigots seems less appropriate and counter productive.

Someone who makes even a rude assumption about a people isn't necessarily a bigot. They could just be wrong and you could correct them without insulting them in the same you would hope people would correct you if you said something inaccurate.

[oilbagz]

I think its very clear that the auto-hatred of Islam is driven by bigotry and fear. Anyone who does even a cursory examination of the subject can see it does not, in fact, promote corruption.

You might be pantywaiste about calling out bigotry online, but I'm not.