why not religionism ?

[Ferrocyanide]

Questioning a religion is important. It helps to develop argumentative skills and encourages exchange of information. Each party learns from each other. If a muslim is calling a person who criticizes islam an islamaphobe (in the same sense as racism) then that muslim has not developed the skills yet to deal with the criticisms or simply, there is no proper response at all.

100% agreed on this. 

Each of us should be able to discuss and defend his beliefs in a temperate way. This of course includes religious people as well as atheists whose beliefs cause them to reject religious claims. 

But if the criticism is unfair or just flat out bigoted, then we're allowed to say that. There is criticism which is over the top, unrelated to fact, and unfair, and it's good to call this bigoted.

If islam claims that it should not be criticized and claims that violence should be used when I criticize it, then I have a large problem with that. It is a religion that does not belong in my sector.

Agreed. Violence is not the way. Muslims should react temperately to fair criticism, Americans should stop using Islam as an excuse to do violence in majority-Muslim countries, the US should stop supporting al Qaeda for political purposes, etc. 

I agree. Islam is often on the news when it comes to terrorism. There sure are a lot of islamic terrorist groups.

This may say more about the news sources you watch than Islam.

Where did muslims get this idea that a woman should cover there body parts?
Is it cultural or is it something that is said by one of their "prophets".

All cultures say that women should cover their body parts. Get your wife to walk naked into Walmart and see if they're OK with it. 

Different cultures have different rules about how many body parts. 

Women are treated as second class citizens in judaism, christianity, islam, mormonism. 

And in many pagan cultures. It predates any of these religions. 

Women are often nameless in these "holy" books. There is very little information about them. Often, the story revolves around the males.

Even the son of the jewish god is a male and so are his 12 followers.

The Bible gives detailed biographical information for very few of its characters. There are a number of important female characters. The lives of Ruth and Esther are more extensively described in the Old Testament than that of most male characters. Since the vast majority of Christianity has not been sola scriptura, detailed accounts of the lives of many female characters are well known from other sources, including figures from scripture itself and later saints and holy figures. 

See for example the Legenda aurea by Jacobus de Varagine.

"This may say more about the news sources you watch than Islam."

==You mean to say that there is an equal number of christian terrorist groups?

You mean to say that there is an equal number of jewish terrorist groups?
You mean to say that there is an equal number of religion X terrorist groups?

"the US should stop supporting al Qaeda for political purposes"

==The USA is still supporting Al-Qaeda?

"And in many pagan cultures. It predates any of these religions."

==Yes, it is part of human nature. It's quite universal. I seem to remember a certain culture that was matrimonial.

"The Bible gives detailed biographical information for very few of its characters."

==In terms of names, the males are named while quite often, the wife is not. Even Genesis starts off with a name for the man: Adam. It is later on that the female version of the human is created and her name is not even mentioned until many lines later.
Are you talking about the Book of Ruth. Even in the case of Ruth, the names of the males are mentioned. Her husband dies and that's the end of the line for him.


"See for example the Legenda aurea by Jacobus de Varagine."

==What do you want me to see?

---

Onto Sungula's point, I do agree with him that people here don't seem to take anti-Muslim bigotry serious enough, and seem to dismiss it sometimes, just because they don't like the Muslim poster WinterHold or whatever,

This forum does take it seriously. We simply don't take Winter seriously because he's a tool.

but at the same time, Muslim apologists do call people Islamaphobic just for criticizing Islam. 

This rarely ever happens in contrast to people cloaking their bigotry in criticisms of Islam, And is not a valid reason to reject a term.

Therefore, it only makes sense that we use a different term for criticism of Islam, than the term used for bigotry against Muslims.

Nope, it doesn't make any sense at all. Because some people on ultra-rare occasions have misused a term does not mean a different term should be used. That's absurd. By that logic, Antisemitism should be abandoned because the pro-Israeli group has abused to silence critics. That doesn't change the fact it's a legitimate term that accurately describes a phenomenon.

 Islamaphobia is a sneaky term used to prop up Islam in some instances, so I reject the term.

Virtually never and that's a really silly reason to reject a valid term.

"This forum does take it seriously. We simply don't take Winter seriously because he's a tool."

==A tool? That sounded offensive.

"This rarely ever happens in contrast to people cloaking their bigotry in criticisms of Islam, And is not a valid reason to reject a term."


==Define rarely.