bonbonbonj

That is unfortunately a feature of modern-day progressivism. There are a number of other 'blasphemies' that it condemns (that are actually often censored on HN too, in the name of civility) as well.

I miss the progressivism of old, where there was more of an emphasis on tolerance even when one disagrees.

What if the commenter is female, or disabled, or doesn't own property, or is subject to the many other axes of marginalization?

It's not all about race and sexuality.

Or on anti-Nazi media like the Wolfenstein series of computer games. For Wolfenstein 3D at least, Germany made them replace all the swastikas with neutral imagery before the game could be released there.

I think there's a reasonable argument to be made that being Islamophobic is actually a good thing overall, given the content of Islam as written in the Quran and Hadith, and the actions of Mohammed.

If it were to be implemented in full in any of our Western societies today, it would result in a misogynistic, brutal, intolerant regime that infringes severely on what we understand as universal human rights. Just look at Afghanistan for an example. We should definitely be "phobic" of this.

Perhaps the bigger question is, should purportedly liberal institutions feel obliged to implement their own version of Islamic apostasy law, as is the case here?