Relatively simple, my tolerance of homophiles only extends insofar as to not agitate on the basis of criminalizing the act for as long as I remain a guest in my host country; I wouldn’t be against it either, but I’ll respect the secular nature of law-making here. That’s tolerance, simply accepting the reality of the fact without accepting the fact in and of itself.
But to ask me to consider them morally or religiously upright? If their tolerance of me is contingent on me going against my beliefs then they’re not really tolerating me, are they?
Racism & Islamophobia in the West are largely the same thing—expressions of tribal in-group identity which is entirely separate from religious axioms. Imagine telling a person who seriously believes in hellfire that they should ignore God to celebrate with degenerates waving dildos. To “accept” them—whatever that means, and their “lifestyle” on the grounds of a fledgling “objective” system of morality developed in the Occident during the past century. You can have societal pressures to dissuade away from the biological reality of in-group preferences, with varying success, but it is foolish to think that biology and religious prescription come from the same place and can be equated. Religion often even prescribes against things we’re biologically inclined to like such as pre-marital sex & adultery, certain foods, for some: Homophilia, arguably alcohol etc.
Islamophobia though can exist in a person without disliking Muslims on an ethnic basis & can have nothing to do with in-group preference, rare as that is, but they would still be arguing from an empirical standpoint; i.e “I dislike Muslims because of these ideas they possess and here’s why I believe them to be wrong”. These empiricisms whether they are true or not are then not as intrinsically unquestionable as religion and are then subject to change without changing the nature of it. If you take something some Islamophobes believe e.g that Taqiyya is lies Muslims tell to subvert societies they find themselves in, and prove it not true, they would have to alter their belief on that front after the fact. Otherwise, they would be acting from something other than a straight dislike, or fear if you will, of Islam.
Muslims in opposition derive their morality from God i.e “God is all-powerful, therefore all Good and Evil is what God commands or forbids. What God does or commands — as revealed in the Quran and ahadith — is by definition just. What He prohibits is by definition unjust. Right and wrong are not objective realities.” and is thus necessarily dogmatic. If you remove that element from Islam, which as you probably know means Submission to that Truth, you have essentially removed Islam from Islam.
