And here’s the point: since when must an apostate be nuanced in their denunciation of religion? Since when is the onus on the heretic to be measured? (A measured heretic is almost a contradiction in terms.)

Is religion measured, with its assertion of dominion over humanity?

However odious or discriminatory some of Ali’s prescriptions may be — and they should be subject to rigorous critique — it is both absurd and dangerous to cast her as an opportunistic, white-bread bigot who just happens to be black. Those who refuse to see Ali as a necessary corrective to totalitarian Islam simply underscore why we need her. History shows that progress depends on the embittered radical as much as the incremental reformer.

A secular society must reject special pleading for religious dogma. And why should the religion that’s at this moment in history the most dogmatic be the one shielded from attack and marked “fragile”?