Personal Ethics and Islamophobia

February 27th, 2008 By: marc moore | Tags:

ABC recently placed actors “undercover” in a Waco, Texas bakery to observe Texans’ reactions to public anti-Islamic discrimination. Not surprisingly, the outcomes ran the gamut from Islamophobic to outstanding personal behavior.

Our actor, Sabina, walked into the bakery in search of apple strudel. When she reached the counter, an actor posing as a sales clerk was quick to greet her with hateful anti-Muslim language.

“Get back on the camel and go back to wherever you came from,” he said.

“You got that towel on your head. I don’t know what’s underneath your dress. Just please take your business and go elsewhere with it.”

The other customers seemed to hear the exchange but they barely looked toward our actors. When no one came to her defense, Sabina made a direct appeal to one customer.

“Sir, would you mind ordering me an apple strudel? That’s why I am here,” Sabina said.

Though visibly shaken by the hateful words, the man gave Sabina the cold shoulder, completed his purchase, and walked out of the bakery. “I really think that a person who owns his own business should be able to say who they sell to,” he said after we told him about the experiment.

Legally that debate was settled long ago as part of the civil rights movement; however, in the hearts and minds of many Americans the freedom to discriminate based on arbitrary preferences remains a powerful force.

Which - however offensive personal choices may prove to be - is as it should be. No government can make me like people with red hair if I am phobic about hating them; any attempt to legislatively mandate my love for them is foolish and doomed both to fail and diminish the people’s perception of the government’s authority, moral and otherwise.

That said, Americans are arguably the most blessed people on Earth simply by virtue of the accident of their birthplace. Is it so difficult for us to rise above our fears - fears which are, in truth, partially justified - to treat Muslims as we would want to be treated?

Not for everyone, as ABC demonstrates. In the matter of personal ethics it seems best to error on the side of courtesy rather than rudeness when in doubt. That’s as true as ever, even though violent Islamic attacks on U.S. targets and pictures of Islamic anti-western demonstrations have increased that doubt significantly.

Of course, this courtesy is assumed to be obligatory for all parties, regardless of race, religion, or color - Muslims included. Those who expect westerners to conform to Islamic codes of conduct when in a Muslim nation should return the favor by assimilating peacefully into other countries when abroad.

Failure to do so is the point at which common courtesy ends.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. PatHMV
    February 28th, 2008 at 05:30
    Reply | Quote | #1

    I read about this stupid media stunt earlier. I think it’s one of the most offensive pieces of "journalism" I’ve ever seen. It’s up there with the news show that demonstrated the dangers of a truck by placing explosives to make SURE it exploded on impact. All the actual offensiveness was done by the actors. In the particular scene you describe, the bystanders were stuck witnessing (an actor) being cruel to the "victim" (another actor). It wasn’t like they all started chanting "death to Muslims"; even the most decent people often prefer not to get involved when strangers start accosting each other. That’s not a sign of bias, but of intelligence and rationality. I think the TV station is who should be ashamed of themselves

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500