I’ll have another listen, but I swear he claimed Islam was a religion of peace because the majority of muslims are peaceful.

I reckon the scriptures would have to be radically changed and cut to take all the bad stuff out. That’s what they base the religion on. If some people can cherry pick the violent passages then it can’t be a religion of peace. The writings they all profess to believe is their religion.

Which Sam Harris Podcast, specifically?

At least there is a dialogue happening but the apologists should be taken to task on such blatant distortions of the truth.

I expect you listened to that Sam Harris Podcast. What is your view on it?

Maajid is clearly a thought leader, a shining light, and a breath of fresh air in this type of discussion. His words should be amplified at every opportunity.

I do have a problem with the reform agenda though. Its a perfectly good thing for a Muslim to try to achieve, but for non-Muslims any attempt to get people to believe in a different version of Islam is insincere, since they don’t actually believe that any version is really true themselves.

So, Maajid and Osama Hasan can use that argument, but David Cameron, Sam Harris and Ayaan Hirsi Ali can’t.

I’d rather hear a moral argument against slavery, FGM, rape, beheadings, etc. and a logical argument against Islam (and religion in general). For someone like Cameron, educated to the highest level in philosophy and debating, this should be very simple, instead he seems now to be entirely reliant on self-taught Maajid.