Nearly every week, or at least every other week, I find myself at some university or house of worship, giving some kind of lecture on Islam. Invariably there will be one or two people at these talks who present ideas on Islam they have gained from far-right bigots, and they will reproduce these ideas to challenge and undermine my lecture.

After a recent talk I gave on Islam and America, a man approached me, full of what he’d learned about Islam and eager to share. He began to go on a tirade about taqiyya, which is a favorite of anti-Muslim bigots. Basically, taqiyya is an ethical concept that condones deception in situations of duress. That Muslims should have such an ethical concept shouldn’t be surprising—it’s moral common sense.

For example, under an authoritarian regime, persons are permitted to lie if it will save their life or the lives of others. This can mean lying—or not volunteering information. We shouldn’t even call it lying—think of popular culture. When a character is captured by the enemy, she or he won’t share information. It’s not lying, it’s protecting one’s friends, family, etc. Of course, what is and isn’t permitted is of course always up for debate. Ethics is rarely black-and-white (people who believe in rigid ethics, absent some flexibility, are usually deeply dangerous.)

But Islamophobes take taqiyya as evidence of some kind of Third World duplicity; “their” morality is inferior to ours—we can trust white people, (certain kinds of) Christians, real Americans, etc., but we can’t trust those with brown skin or funny names. The same logic was once applied to women, who were believed to be incapable of the moral and intellectual rigor (some kinds and colors of) men were. So, for the Islamophobe, taqiyya is a means by which Muslims lie to advance their agenda (say, for example, that Obama lies about his faith—he’s a secret Muslim, but isn’t telling anyone.) This is an old racist cliche, now pinned to the chests of a religious group.

Absurdly, the argument of taqiyya so presented means that Muslims are simultaneously profoundly duplicitous, capable say of the calm, patient infiltration of secular institutions, while they are also the very same people who run out into the streets at any perceived insult, burning flags, tires, effigies, and anything else that’s lying around and looks good on fire for the camera (see my essay for this website, “Are Muslims Nuts?,” for my thoughts on this meme.) But, of course, the bigot is not interested in consistency. He engages in moral deception, or perhaps is just incapable of logical thought, in order to advance his agenda.

The accusation of taqiyya is uniquely maddening and frustrating to deal with; how can we prove someone is not lying? It’s impossible to reasonably argue against. Indeed, Islamophobes argue productive, peaceful, civically engaged Muslims are just engaging in taqiyya, and are actually radicals; amusingly, on this argument, Islamophobes themselves could be secret Muslims, hiding in plain sight as anti-Muslim bigots in order to advance some sinister, weird agenda. Perhaps they are radicals who are discrediting the moderates in order to make way for the radicals, in the same way that Obama is at once a secret Muslim and a godless socialist.

Long story short, that man approached me after my lecture, arguing that, because of taqiyya, we cannot trust Muslims—they lie about everything. Allow me to summarize the one-on-one, in which I hit upon a good way to rebut the argument based on taqiyya on the very logic of taqiyya. I’d like to proudly call it my Stephen Colbert moment: