Why I am Islamophobic

islamophobicWhether radical Islamic terrorists are distinguishable from mainstream Muslims depends upon your species.

A sheep, goat, or a camel whose throat is being cut in Halal slaughter or Islamic sacrifice is just as terrified, in just as much pain, and just as murdered as is an American journalist or a Syrian refugee having his throat cut by Jihadi John or any ISIS thug.

Mainstream Islam is a terrorist plague on animals. The sick religion requires animals to be murdered as sacrifices to Allah and slaughter to be done to fully conscious, frightened creatures.

I abhor all slaughter. I abhor all religions which require and practice animal sacrifice. Santeria, orthodox Judaism, Armenian Orthodoxy, Hinduism. Any religion which teaches such barbarism is my enemy. Islam murders more animals than all the world’s religions combined, by orders of magnitude.

Personally, I would ban all religions. They are anathema to science, reason, empathy, human and animal rights.

While that is an unlikely prospect, we do the animals no service by distinguishing between religious lunatics who murder people and religious lunatics who murder animals.

Some are demonizing Islam. I do not have a problem with demonizing any belief system that advocates killing animals. Most critics of Islam, however, do not give a damn about animals. In my opinion, Islam is deserving of being demonized, it is a demonic religion. But so are most.

Whether ISIS attacks innocent people in Paris or suspected Islamic terrorists shoot innocent people in San Bernardino, CA, political opportunists are quick to use the tragedies to advance their own careers and agendas.

We hear Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Hillary Clinton, and others posturing to convince voters that they are best able to fight terrorism and protect the American public.

As an animal rights advocate, I recognize that all sentient life is equally valuable, all have the same right to be on Earth, the same right to live, to be free of exploitation, slavery, torture, abuse, and murder. Speciesism, which elevates humans over all other life, is the cause of the greatest horrors in history.

Which makes me Islamophobic. To be otherwise I would be a speciesist.



Author’s Notes:

I am unaware of any other blog with the Armory’s mission of radicalizing the animal movement. I certainly hope I am not alone, and that there are similar sentiments being expressed by comrades unknown to me.

If you know of other blogs dedicated to animal rights and the defeat of capitalism, please comment with a link.

• Be sure to follow the Armory and share it with your Facebook friends and email contacts, as well as on Twitter, Google, and all other social media platforms. Our influence and effectiveness is dependent upon you!

Natasha Sainsbury, of Good Karma Graphic Design, has joined Armory of the Revolution as Editor, and is responsible for the transformation of the blog’s appearance. Visit and follow her blog V Kind.

If you are not already subscribed to the Armory, please do so before you leave.

There’s a button to Follow us in the upper right sidebar.

• Be sure to visit Armory of the Revolution’s new commissary and bookstore: The Supply Depot

You will find recommended reading on Animal Rights, revolutionary theory, politics, economics, religion, science, and atheism. There is also a section of supplies for animal liberationists, hunt saboteurs, and social revolutionaries. This is all brand new, and we will be adding lots more merchandise in the near future!

Feel free to comment. I encourage open discussion and welcome other opinions. I moderate comments because this blog has been attacked by hunters and right wing trolls. I approve comments that are critical as well as those which agree with me. Comments that I will not tolerate are those that are spam, threatening, disrespectful, or which promote animal abuse and cruelty


35 thoughts on “Why I am Islamophobic

  1. Abusing animals for religious ritual and sacrifice is reprehensible to many people. Engaging in bloodshed seems incongruent with an institution that is considered the arbiter of morality and that usually promotes mercy and justice. The constitution demands that people be free to exercise their religion even if results in animal victims. But that does not mean that those outside a faith must respect or approve of all its practices and rituals.

    Islam is not the only religion with practices that harm nonhumans. As noted, kosher slaughter also requires animals to be conscious when killed. Kaporos mistreats and kills chickens in a ritual of atonement. A branch of the Hindu religion in Nepal held a ceremony, Gadhimai, every five years. The sacrifice of animals was a bloodbath, a massacre. In 2009 more than 20,000 buffaloes were killed, and it is estimated that 250,000 animals in all died in that ritual. The ceremony has now been canceled due to increasing global protests over the brutality involved. Those who worked to close it down were not bigots or ‘phobes. They were people who were appalled at the massive suffering and loss of life. They did not attack Hinduism itself or the people who practiced the faith.

    In Florida, Richard Couto is working to shut down the sacrifices of Santeria. He recently found a dog who had all four legs broken and then was tied to a cross in mock crucifixion. The dog had a stake forced into his mouth to keep him from fighting back and was left suffering for five days before he was decapitated. Trying to stop such torture should not be labeled bigotry.

    And what about Christianity, e.g., Catholicism? It is not guilty of animal sacrifice. But it is guilty of the sin of silence. That is the sin of omission rather than commission. Catholicism consistently refuses to condemn the torture of animals in countries where it is the major faith—Spain and Latin America. Obviously, bullfighting is one example. But there are festivals of the saints where animals, especially bulls, are tortured. One example is the El Toro Embolado event, celebrated in Valencia. Balls of flammable material are attached to the bull’s horns and then set on fire. The burning pitch can flame for hours and drips over the bull’s face, into his eyes and nostrils. Eventually the animal is blinded, “much to the delight of the villagers and the mayor of Medinaceli.” In another “festival” in Coria, a bull runs loose through the streets while people throw darts at him. When he weakens from loss of blood, he is shot but not fatally, so that his testicles can be removed while he is still alive. The festivals devolve into an orgies of macho sadism, each one trying to devise worse suffering for the animals.

    The Catholic Church has not condemned those specific spectacles, and Christianity in general has not spoken out against other cruel “entertainment” such as circuses, rodeos, horse racing, hunting, even dog fighting. But its sins of silence speak loudly.

    So if all religion, ritual, and superstition were abandoned for the realm of science and rationality, would the animals fare better? Well, probably not.

    Millions of animals suffer and die in laboratories run by Big Pharma, the National Institutes of Health, and the research universities around the country, all for the advancement of science and the betterment of humanity. Mechanical engineers design the technology for slaughterhouses that speeds up the process of turning the commodified and living units of production into steaks and hamburgers. The results of the speed are similar to kosher and halal slaughter, with conscious animals having their throats slit and their hides ripped off while still conscious. Pigs and chickens are sent still alive and aware into scalding tanks. Male chicks are ground up alive in macerators, another product of technology.

    The sad fact is that animal abuse is entrenched throughout all of human culture. So advocates who fight that cruelty also have the right to criticize its source.

    I don’t have a problem criticizing religious rituals that kill animals. But I also support criticizing religions that refuse to condemn the killing, the institutions of science that participate in the killing, the technology that abets the killing, the economic system that profits by the killing, and the people who create the demand for its products.

    Finally, in this blog the word “terrorism” is appropriate but more widely applicable. The whole history of H. sapiens on this earth has been a reign of terror for virtually every other species. When it comes to animals, we are ISIS.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Wonderfully stated, could not agree more! And Homo sapiens being the ISIS to the animal world, why would any animal advocate give a fig about “suffering humanity.” I personally don’t care if ISIS fighters and their families get incinerated or decapitated or water boarded or buried alive in ant mounds. Why should I? Those who show no mercy to their victims deserve the same amount in return. Likewise, if humanity seems, as it does, intent on making the entire planet a living hell for every other animal species, what possible rationale other than religious superstition can there be for wishing to bestow any favors upon the victimizers? Lachrymose appeals to our shared “common humanity” with our wayward brothers by those who Margaret Thatcher referred to as the “wets” fall on deaf ears in this quarter. It’s like attorneys representing children who have slaughtered their parents asking the judge to show mercy because they are orphans!

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Islam as practiced by believers is indeed evil from an animal rights point of view, and Christianity is hardly better. Ironically, though, both Jesus and Mohammed taught a nonviolent, nonharming way of relating to God with no sacrifices. There are numerous OT prophets who said, essentially, God does not require nor want or approve of your sacrifices, He just wants you to be kind, and just, and humble. Jesus was the culmination of this prophetic tradition. He was, in my view, not “the Lamb of God”, the sacrifice to end all sacrifices, but a man, a prophet, and probably a Nazorean, which was a pacifist, vegetarian sect of Judaism. I think he would have been appalled by what the religion named after him became.

    Similarly, Mohammed taught that the best way to be was vegetarian, and Islam teaches that every creature, killed or hurt, directly or indirectly, will have justice from the one that killed or hurt him on Judgement Day. It is incorrect to say that Islam “requires” the slaughter of animals. I would invite you to read (or maybe skim, it’s very wordy) this article http://www.harekrsna.de/artikel/islam-vegetarianism.htm .
    The first Muslims I knew were a wonderful community of vegan, back-to-Africa (not literally, but in traditions) African-American converts who I got to know working at my favorite job, the now-defunct Magnolia Wholefoods Cooperative Warehouse in Atlanta. So it always shocks me that people believe Islam “requires” slaughter and meat eating.

    Just as Christianity fell far away from the actual teaching of Jesus to become a mishmash of imperialism, pagan celebrations, and special pleadings, so the kosher and halal slaughter practices, originally decreed to try to reduce the slaughter of animals and gently move adherents toward vegetarianism, were almost immediately watered down and cherry-picked so as not to impede people’s appetites for meat.


  3. Islamophobia, as with any other irrational fear of reality, is indefensible, especially if self-proclaimed and touted. Is there any religion not fraught with evil ways? Too many here in the U.S. are identifying with the fools in American politics who wish to foment the so-called clash of civilizations. For those of us who want to protect animals and wilderness from the destructive ways of humanity, scoring points with the mainstream in order to attempt more legitimacy is doomed to fail.


  4. I agree with Luis. Humans, regardless of religion, have been terrorizing the planet and non-humans since they climbed down from the trees. Homo sapiens is fatally flawed. I am concerned about the anti-Muslim rhetoric on this blog, which is exactly what the U.S. military and its “coalition partners” want, so the endless wars against people few Americans no anything about, except the propaganda about “Islamic Terrorism.” This country is once again beating the war drums, bombing Syria to hell. The National Front in France aims to restore the glories of racism and genocide of the Nazi occupation. As bombs fall continually in Syria, and Afghanistan, and Iraq are in social ruins, do xenophobic Vegans realize just how many innocent animals and ecosystems have died because of U.S. hegemony?
    Americans are once again marching right in step with the war drums,against cultures they no little or nothing about, just as they did with the bombing of Afghanistan–have we learned nothing. There always must be an enemy to continue endless war, and governments will invent them, just like in “1984.”

    Liked by 1 person

  5. As a religious believe it’s O-K for the slaughter to be kosher ? o.O

    Slaughterhouses are required by law to stun animals before they are killed to minimise suffering. But there are exemptions for Muslim and Jewish producers to respect their religious traditions. For meat to be considered kosher under Jewish law or halal under Islamic law, the animal must be conscious when killed.


  6. I would be in complete agreement, but you know, humans don’t need (or generally use) Islam or any other religion to justify cruelty to non-humans (or even humans). I doubt that abandoning all religion would even diminish cruelty.


  7. I have been wondering when animal rights activists would finally have this conversation and am happy to see it here. Halal slaughter is one of the biggest of the multiple abuses we have to face and fight in an era of multiculturalism and political correctness.

    Halal is so significant in that it involves the class of animals who undergo the most suffering and the greatest numbers of deaths—“food” animals. It is a method of slaughter that demands the animals be fully conscious when their throats are slit and they are hung upside down to bleed out. It is an ancient tradition, as is kosher slaughter.

    Only a few countries have seriously fought halal/kosher. Denmark banned it in February 2014, prompting an immediate and angry backlash from Jews and Muslims who were outraged by restrictions on their freedom of religious expression. In the July 29, 2015, edition of Time Magazine, Imam Khalid Latid complained that any prohibition of halal slaughter was an infringement on minority communities.

    Poland banned halal and kosher, but the law was overturned by the courts: The Polish High Court stated the protection of animals “does not take priority over constitutional guarantees of religious freedom.” The judge ruled that “religious freedom is a supreme value in accordance with the constitution of Poland and stands above any other law and is not restricted.” https://www.rt.com/news/213527-polish-ban-kosher-halal-slaughter/

    In Sweden a group of parents demanded that halal chicken not be served in schools, and some schools have complied. There has been discussion in France about the issue, but it appears most people do not care about how animals are slaughtered.

    The topic of ritual slaughter of “food” animals has not been raised seriously in this country, but a ban on ritual slaughter in Florida has already been ruled as an infraction of religious freedom by the Supreme Court, and the ban was overturned.

    So worshiping God by torturing animals is a travesty that has been accepted by some religions and upheld by the courts and the constitution. This begs the question, how many other kinds of abuse will we be asked to tolerate? How much abuse could be ignored or covered up to avoid litigation and accusations of bigotry?

    Obviously every culture has its own forms of animal abuse, and for decades we have been condemning traditional cruelties of the United States and other industrial societies: bullfighting, sport and trophy hunting, experimentation, fur farming, entertainment in the form of circuses and rodeos, etc., dog fighting, and the euthanasia of unwanted pets. We believe that just because some behaviors have become customs does not mean they should be allowed to continue.

    However, some of the abuses we are being faced with leave us more worried about the race or ethnicity of the abuser than about the abuse. We have seen some of this in the halal issue, as well as in the reluctance to condemn the depletion of the shark population for shark fin soup and the horrific killing of dogs and cats for food in Asia. Some hesitate to criticize the killing of animals to use their parts as medicines for traditional medicine, or to protest trophy hunting in Africa in the belief it benefits the poor. I fear there is a possibility of moving backwards in our quest to make the world better for animals. We have to ask if, in the current atmosphere of political correctness, we will stand up and fight for the ones who have no power to help themselves and who suffer the most. Will shelters and sanctuaries continue to call out and condemn cruelty where they find it or will they fear offending some members of the community and relegate the abuse to “a cultural issue.” Will even the big animal rights organizations capitulate to maintain membership and avoid the stigma and consequences of being labeled racist, bigoted, and xenophobic .

    No one questions that racism and bigotry are bad. But we should not allow the words themselves to be used as weapons against those fighting abuse.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Excellent post! The thing that is so galling about Political Correctness is that it is the demi-religion of the political Left, folks who purport to always-and-everywhere champion the disadvantaged, the abused, the underdogs, society’s castaways. It confers, apparently in their mind, an aura of morality without actually having to do anything material to earn it. You could add to your litany the “liberal” members of the US Supreme Court, including the “wise Latina” and the duck-hunting Harvard lesbian, who voted down additional state protections for downer animals at slaughter. And media icons like Rachel Madow who when they are not lachrymosely decrying “human rights” violations or promoting gay marriage are off sport fishing. Unfortunately, when you ignore the plight of the most disadvantaged, the most abused, the truest underdogs (figuratively and literally), you expose yourself as a poseur and a hypocrite. And what creatures walking the planet are more contemptible than that?

      Liked by 2 people

    • It is an odd sort of ahimsa which buys into the propaganda campaign for the war against Islam. ISIS may use religious propaganda, but it is largely a result of US, British and French military operations in the Arab world, which destroyed any attempt to establish secular governments in the region. A likely result of the current confrontation between US allies and Russia is a nuclear war. This would finally end all human practices of slaughtering cows and chickens, as there would be no humans, cows or chickens. Is this what vegans really want?


      • Marc, I don’t take ahimsaforever or any of the other posters here advocating for a “war against Islam”, much less wishing to provoke a nuclear confrontation between Russia and the West. What I do hear, and resonate with, is a strong feeling that the spread of Islamic religion and culture to the West, applauded if not actively encouraged by left-wing politically correct media luminaries, would not necessarily be a propitious development for non-human animals. Christianity is bad enough, but anyone who has witnessed the kind of savagery displayed in the ISIS produced videos on the Internet must surely know that things could only get worse in an Islamic-ruled, or Islamic-influenced, state. Young Muslim men, the media tells us, are being “radicalized” by watching slickly-produced ISIS videos, helplessly drawn in like moths to the flame. But what kind of already-sick mind is seduced by watching images of trussed-up captives being beheaded with rusty bayonets or burned alive in gasoline fires? When the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant makes the Islamic Republic of Iran look reasonable by comparison, you know you are operating at a whole new level of religion-based depravity. Personally, I’d like to see the US completely withdraw from the Middle East a la Bernie Sanders or Ron Paul and let the residents there fight it out to the death. We wouldn’t be there, and hated by the natives, in the first place were it not for concerns, justified or not, about Israel’s security. But non-interventionism does not equate with respect or love for the Muslim world. If one begins from a pro-animal/anti-anthropocentric starting point, what possible attraction does Islam hold? Why would one sympathize with its aspirations or feel compelled to defend its adherents?

        Liked by 1 person

  8. Oh Roland, you’re so Politically Incorrect! Don’t you know that Islamophobia is the latest bogeyman to make it onto the Liberal Shit-List, yet another ‘ism for Ben Affleck to passionately denounce or NPR to endlessly bemoan as anti-humanist. Only Bill Maher among the media elite appears to have the courage to point out the obvious connection between Islam and premature dismemberment: Even in the more “advanced” Muslim countries like Egypt and Indonesia where they aren’t routinely beheading journalists or infidels, conditions in their slaughterhouses are so beyond-belief horrible that it has given pause even to the capitalist Australians involved in the livestock export trade to these nations (but only for a moment). Thank god the Arab Spring, relentlessly-touted at the time in the Liberal media as a “turning point”, came along and made everything right.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Great summation. We aren’t hearing much in this country about the results of Angela Merkel’s decision to open the doors in Germany. But some Germans are getting worried about the extent of the influx of people from the Middle East and fear irreversible changes to their country. Some are fighting back and then are deemed Nazis and xenophobes. Apparently the same factions that were fighting in their homelands are fighting in the refugee camps and they are revealing their distaste of European culture, which is so different from their own. According to the Internet sources, German authorities are not reporting on the extent of the problems. Violence against the refugees is growing in some places, and while that is not something to condone, the politicians should have known that bringing so many people from a radically different culture that does not tend to assimilate would cause problems. Piling on the political correctness shaming and demanding that Germans comply with the demands of the Muslim refugees will eventually cause more resentment.

      I’m waiting for someone to bring up the issue of halal here, but I doubt if even the farm animal, vegan-oriented groups will want to touch it, particularly since it runs into the similar kosher slaughter. They will surely be slammed down by the the political establishment and Big Ag if they do with the usual name calling. It keeps coming down to the same thing–animals are at the bottom of the heap because they can’t fight back. No jihad from the barns.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. Good points. All religions are bad w/ the major ones being anti animal. The issue I see is to figure out a solution, given population and religion adherents are increasing almost exponentially.

    I do not think either religious adherents or religions will ever decrease. So how do we help the collective exploited animals knowing this? Aside from a few individual “saves,” damned if I have a clue.


    • Someone, I do not recall the source, observed that gods are fragile things, easily killed off by a whiff or science or a dose of common sense. We will never stamp out ignorance or religion, but both fall before education, knowledge, science, reason, and human intellect. An educated person can be reasoned with, a religious person can only be dismissed.


      • I agree. That is usually the way it goes. Then we have Syed Farook. He grew up in this country, had a bachelor’s degree, and a government job. Some reporters suggested he was “Living the American Dream,” yet it didn’t seem to take long to radicalize him. There are many people in this country who are not doing well and are struggling, but for some reason the Muslims (both here and abroad) are more likely to take the road of violence and revenge.

        Liked by 1 person

  10. One of the first people who set me on the path to veganism was a devout muslim, therefore how can I hate the religion that set me on the road to compassion? What I do hate is the PEOPLE who interpret the religion in such a way as to hurt animals to further that religion. If you slam religions, you alienate the very people you wish to enlighten. You will NEVER change a religion. You CAN change those who interpret the religion in such a way that it hurts animals. Veganism should be a way of life that wins hearts and minds, not a way of life that makes you look like a crazy cult leader.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.