An actual argument I recently saw:
Person B: “Any site which contains slurs against trans people in its sign up process is unreliable” (was referring to k!wifarms)
Person A: “Slurs aren’t considered bad in most countries”
Person B: “That doesn’t justify their usage. For example, conversion therapy isn’t considered bad or banned in most countries, that doesn’t mean conversion therapy is justified or good.”
Person A: “What are you talking about? Conversion therapy is banned in most countries”
Person B: “Shows a diagram showing that conversion therapy is only banned in a handful of countries”
Person A: “I mean in most civilized countries”
I’ve seen lots of other people refer to countries as civilized or uncivilized in similar contexts. Is this generally considered to be racist?
I agree with you substantially.
But just very recently there was a story in Germany where a male elementary school teacher revealed that he was gay. Many of his students were Muslims who were taught to hate gay people and now refused to respect him in various ways (including refusing to go to his classes).
Who is the “oppressed group” here?
There are no groups in that anecdote, only individuals. Shitty individuals discriminating against someone for an attribute he can’t change. But belief in religion is voluntary.
Belief in religion is not at all voluntary in some places. At least lip service, while still going through all the motions.