Sam Harris raises a valid and increasingly pressing point: why do skeptics and those critical of religion hammer soft targets while shying away from fundamentalist Islam? The answer is self-evident, of course, although many of us will deny it. Being critical of fundamentalist Christianity will get you vilified and possibly punched in the face in Texas, but being critical of fundamentalist Islam can get you into really serious trouble.

The position of the Muslim community in the face of all provocations seems to be: Islam is a religion of peace, and if you say that it isn’t, we will kill you. Of course, the truth is often more nuanced, but this is about as nuanced as it ever gets: Islam is a religion of peace, and if you say that it isn’t, we peaceful Muslims cannot be held responsible for what our less peaceful brothers and sisters do. When they burn your embassies or kidnap and slaughter your journalists, know that we will hold you primarily responsible and will spend the bulk of our energies criticizing you for “racism” and “Islamophobia.”

Unpopular opinions are a mainstay of the right to free speech, although many countries reserve the right to censor opinions they consider inflammatory or hateful. But being critical of religious extremism is essential if we are to preserve a culture of open debate in Europe. In the words of Salman Rushdie: “Democracy is not a tea party where people sit around making polite conversation.”

Popularity: 31% [?]