Yes, Carol, it's a word of extreme negative labelling. It's a word intended to intimidate and brand those it is directed at. That's why I'm getting tired of it being so frequently used in the public dialogue.

It's like calling someone a heretic during the days of the Spanish Inquisition. It immediately puts that person in the very nasty spot of trying to prove they aren't a heretic...which is not too damned easy, I can tell you... ;-) For instance, I think it is probably true that there is some degree of racial prejudice hiding in the breast of about 99.9% of the human race at any given time! Does that mean they are all "racists"? Where does "racism" begin and where does it end in that case? I think the epithet "racist" could be thrown at almost any person, if one chose to, on the basis of some preference or reaction in that person to someone or something, some idle remark they made, some choice they made, but how useful or appropriate is that? It's getting way out of hand, that's my opinion.

Look, I don't think you and Dianavan really have anything of substance to be arguing about here. You both agree that Muslims are being unfairly labelled and discriminated against by a lot of people in the media and elsewhere these days, and that this is a problem that should be addressed. Why have a big falling out over differing interpretations of the appicability of the word "racism" to the problem? What good will it do?

Why not just agree to both agree on the main point...that Muslims need to be treated as fairly as other people are. That would be more productive, would it not?