Upholding Universal Human Dignity in Islamic Thought- A Response to Robert Spencer

By V.A. Mohamad Ashrof, New Age Islam 26 September 2025 Robert Spencer, a prominent Islamophobe and outspoken supporter of the Gaza genocide, authored an article titled “Islam Upholds the Dignity of All Human Beings: It Does Not Condone the Labelling of Non-Muslims as ‘Animals’” in Jihad Watch on September 22, 2025. This paper provides a detailed hermeneutical response to Spencer’s recurring claim that Islam inherently dehumanizes non-Muslims, particularly through his selective interpretation of Quranic verses such as 7:179 and 8:22. Employing a rigorous framework of classical and contemporary Islamic hermeneutics (Tafsir), contextual analysis, linguistic precision, and an examination of the Quran’s overarching ethical objectives (Maqasid al-Shariah), this study demonstrates that Spencer’s readings are profoundly flawed, decontextualized, and polemically motivated. Rather than promoting dehumanization, the Quran’s metaphorical language in these verses serves as a moral critique of spiritual heedlessness and the wilful rejection of divine guidance—applicable to all individuals, irrespective of their religious affiliation. This paper reaffirms Islam’s foundational commitment to universal human dignity (Karamah), justice (Adl), compassion (Rahmah), and inclusive governance, as exemplified by the Prophet Muhammad and emphasized by progressive Muslim thinkers such as Tajuddin Rasdi, whom Spencer references. It argues that a faithful understanding of Islam necessitates the rejection of reductionist literalism and a renewed focus on its profound humanistic and liberatory principles, thereby countering Islamophobic narratives and promoting genuine interfaith understanding. The Enduring Challenge of Islamophobia: In an era of increasing global interconnectedness, the rise of Islamophobia poses a profound threat to social cohesion and mutual understanding. Robert Spencer, a prominent figure within the anti-Islam movement aligned with the Zionist–Christian Zionist nexus, has consistently promoted a narrative portraying Islam as inherently violent, supremacist, and dehumanizing. His methodology frequently involves isolating specific Quranic verses, removing them from their historical, linguistic, and theological contexts, and presenting them as definitive evidence of Islam’s alleged malevolence. A central pillar of his argument, as highlighted in his article, relies on the misinterpretation of Quranic verses 7:179 and 8:22, which he claims depict non-Muslims as “animals” or “the worst of creatures.” This paper seeks to dismantle Spencer's assertions through a comprehensive hermeneutical engagement. It is not merely a defensive apologetic but an academic endeavour to clarify the nuanced layers of Quranic meaning, demonstrating how a proper interpretive methodology reveals a profoundly ethical, egalitarian, and humanistic message. The aim is to show that Spencer's readings are not only inaccurate but actively contradict the Quran's broader ethical framework, the prophetic example, and centuries of Islamic scholarship. Furthermore, I will integrate the progressive and inclusive vision articulated by professor Tajuddin Rasdi, lecturer of Islamic architecture at UCSI and Mara Technological University, whose call for "true Islamic governance" resonates deeply with the foundational principles of justice, magnanimity, and universal human dignity inherent in Islam. The need for such a detailed response is paramount. Misinterpretations of religious texts, whether accidental or intentional, have severe real-world consequences, fuelling prejudice, discrimination, and conflict. By engaging with Spencer's claims at an academic and scholarly level, we contribute to a more enlightened public discourse, challenging simplistic narratives and promoting a nuanced understanding of Islam as a faith that cherishes the dignity of every human being. The Misapplication of Quranic Verses 7:179 and 8:22: Robert Spencer's methodology hinges on taking Quranic verses out of their linguistic and historical contexts, thereby distorting their intended meaning. His claims regarding Q.7:179 and Q.8:22 are prime examples of this interpretive malpractice. To effectively counter these assertions, a deep dive into the verses themselves, informed by established Islamic hermeneutical principles, is essential. The verse in question states: "And We have certainly created for Hell many of the jinn and mankind. They have hearts with which they do not understand, and eyes with which they do not see, and ears with which they do not hear. Those are like cattle; rather, they are more astray. Those are the heedless." (Quran 7:179) Spencer interprets "Those are like cattle; rather, they are more astray" as a blanket condemnation and dehumanization of non-Muslims. This is a fundamental misreading. In classical Arabic, as in many Semitic languages and indeed in numerous global literary traditions, animal metaphors are frequently employed as rhetorical devices to illustrate moral or spiritual states, not as literal descriptions of inherent being. The term ka'l-an'am (like cattle/livestock) here is a powerful metaphor. Cattle, by their nature, are guided primarily by instinct, lacking the capacity for conscious moral reasoning or abstract thought. The Quran, in this verse, is not asserting that certain humans are biologically equivalent to animals. Instead, it is critiquing individuals who, despite possessing the divine gifts of intellect (Aql), sight, and hearing – the very tools for understanding, reflection, and moral choice – choose to wilfully ignore or misuse them. They are spiritually heedless (Ghafilun). The phrase "rather, they are more astray" (hum adall) further emphasizes the gravity of this choice. An animal, acting on instinct, cannot be held morally culpable for its actions or lack of understanding. However, a human being, endowed with intellect and free will (Ikhtiyar), who deliberately turns away from truth and guidance, is in a more profound state of error. Their spiritual negligence is a greater loss than an animal's natural limitations, because they squander their unique human potential. It is a cautionary tale about the consequences of intellectual and spiritual inertia, not a categorization of an entire group of people. The verse is part of a larger section in Surah Al-A'raf that discusses the consequences of wilful rejection of divine guidance and the historical narratives of prophets warning their communities. It is a critique of those who have been given ample opportunity to understand and accept the truth but choose to actively conceal or deny it (kufr). It is crucial to note that the Quran uses such strong language as a rhetorical device to awaken moral conscience and emphasize personal responsibility. It is a warning against a chosen spiritual state, not an inherent quality of non-Muslims. The second verse Spencer utilizes is: "Indeed, the worst of animals in Allah’s sight are the deaf and the dumb, who have no sense." (Quran 8:22) Spencer again takes this literally, asserting it as proof that Islam views non-Muslims as "the worst of animals." This interpretation is equally flawed. Similar to 7:179, the terms "deaf and dumb" (Al-Summu Wal-Bukm) in 8:22 are profoundly metaphorical. They do not refer to individuals with physical disabilities; rather, they describe those who are spiritually deaf to the truth and spiritually dumb in acknowledging or articulating it. They possess the faculties of hearing and speech but refuse to use them for divine guidance or to speak up for justice. The phrase "who have no sense" (la ya'qilun) directly links this spiritual condition to the failure to use intellect and reason. The comparison to "the worst of animals" (Sharru Al-Dawabb) serves as a powerful rhetorical device. Humans are endowed with intellect and free will, distinguishing them from animals guided by instinct. The verse highlights the tragic paradox of those who, possessing these higher faculties, choose to behave in a manner that negates them, thus spiritually debasing themselves through wilful ignorance and defiance. It is a condemnation of spiritual paralysis and obstinate disbelief, not a blanket label for non-Muslims. The verses condemn those who actively oppose truth and justice, even when confronted with compelling evidence. It is a specific rebuke directed at a particular type of antagonist, not a universal decree on the inherent worth of all non-Muslims. The Quranic Affirmation of Universal Human Dignity (Karamah) and Inclusivity: Spencer's selective readings fundamentally contradict one of the most foundational principles of the Quran: the inherent dignity (Karamah) of all human beings. This principle is not contingent upon religious affiliation, race, gender, or social status. It is a divine bestowal upon the "children of Adam" (Bani Adam), encompassing all of humanity. The Quran explicitly declares: "And We have certainly honoured the children of Adam and carried them on land and sea and provided for them of the good things and preferred them over much of what We have created." (Quran 17:70) This verse is a cornerstone of Islamic anthropology. The term Karramna (We have honoured) signifies inherent nobility, worth, and distinction. The "children of Adam" is a universal address, underscoring that human dignity is a birth-right, a divine endowment bestowed upon the entire human race. It is not something earned or lost based on one's faith or actions in this world. This theological principle cannot be overridden by isolated, metaphorical verses. Any interpretation that suggests Islam permits the dehumanization of others fundamentally contradicts this core tenet. Moreover, the verse highlights several aspects of this honour: being carried on land and sea (mobility and dominion), provided with good things (sustenance and resources), and preferred over much of creation (intellect, free will, moral agency). These are universal blessings and responsibilities, not exclusive to any one group. The Quran also celebrates human diversity as a sign of God's wisdom and a catalyst for mutual understanding: "O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted." (Quran 49:13) This verse is a powerful antidote to any notion of racial, ethnic, or religious supremacy. It explicitly states: • Common Origin: All humanity originates from a single male and female, emphasizing shared ancestry and fundamental equality. • Purpose of Diversity: Nations and tribes exist "that you may know one another" (li-Ta'arafu). This is an active call for engagement, mutual respect, understanding, and learning, not for division, segregation, or dehumanization. Diversity is a means of enrichment, not antagonism. • True Measure of Nobility: The only criterion for superiority in the sight of God is Taqwa (righteousness, piety, God-consciousness). This is an internal, moral, and spiritual quality, not an external marker of faith, race, or social status. It completely demolishes any basis for bigotry or claims of inherent worth based on identity. The Sanctity of Life and the Condemnation of Violence: The Quran places immense value on human life, condemning unwarranted violence in the strongest terms: "Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely." (Quran 5:32) The killing of a single innocent person is equated with the destruction of all humanity, underscoring the sacredness of individual life. This universal pronouncement is irreconcilable with any interpretation that would permit the dehumanization of entire groups, as dehumanization often precedes violence. Theological Pluralism and Respect for family of the Book: While affirming the finality of Prophet Muhammad's message, the Quran also acknowledges and respects previous monotheistic traditions, particularly the People of the Book (Jews and Christians). "Indeed, those who believed and those who were Jews or Christians or Sabeans - those who believed in Allah and the Last Day and did righteousness - will have their reward with their Lord, and no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve." (Quran 2:62; similar in 5:69) These verses establish a principle of salvation based on ethical monotheism and righteous action, transcending formal religious affiliation. They refute any notion of exclusive salvation for Muslims alone and underscore that piety and good deeds are universally recognized by God. Furthermore, the Quran commands Muslims to engage with People of the Book with wisdom and the best of manners: "And do not argue with the People of the Book except in the best manner, except for those who commit injustice among them, and say, 'We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you. And our God and your God is one; and we are in submission to Him.'" (Quran 29:46) This verse sets a high standard for interfaith dialogue, emphasizing common ground and mutual respect. It is a clear directive against contempt, insult, or dehumanization. The principle of religious freedom is unequivocally stated: "There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the error." (Quran 2:256) This verse champions freedom of conscience and rejects forced conversion, confirming that faith is a matter of conviction, not coercion. This principle reinforces the idea that religious difference does not diminish human worth or justify contemptuous treatment. Forced conversion inherently strips individuals of their agency and dignity. The Quranic corpus, thus, consistently upholds the intrinsic dignity of all human beings, regardless of their religious identity. It celebrates diversity, mandates justice and kindness even towards those who differ in belief, and condemns violence and dehumanization. Spencer's selective verses, when properly contextualized and understood within this holistic framework, emerge not as instruments of dehumanization but as moral admonitions for spiritual accountability, applicable to all who possess intellect and free will. The Prophetic Model and Inclusive Islamic Governance: The theoretical principles of human dignity and inclusivity articulated in the Quran find their practical manifestation in the life and teachings of Prophet Muhammad and the historical practices of early Islamic governance. The Prophet's Sunnah (tradition) serves as the living embodiment and primary interpretation of the Quran, demonstrating how its principles were applied in a pluralistic society. Prophet Muhammad's life was characterized by a profound sense of justice and compassion, extending beyond the Muslim community. He famously stated: "All creatures are the dependents of God, and the most beloved to God are those who are most beneficial to His dependents." (Musnad Ahmad 22812) This hadith is a powerful declaration of universal humanism. It makes no distinction between Muslim and non-Muslim, emphasizing that service and benefit to humanity, in its entirety, is the highest form of worship. This teaching directly contradicts any notion that only Muslims possess dignity or are worthy of beneficence. His treatment of non-Muslims, even in times of conflict, was marked by adherence to ethical principles. He guaranteed the safety and religious freedom of Christian communities, as seen in his treaties with the Christians of Najran and St. Catherine's Monastery. These covenants ensured their protection, freedom to worship, and the autonomy of their ecclesiastical structures, explicitly prohibiting their persecution or the destruction of their places of worship. Even when confronted with hostility, the Prophet frequently sought dialogue and peaceful resolution. His magnanimity after the conquest of Mecca, where he granted general amnesty to his erstwhile persecutors, stands as a testament to his inclusive and forgiving spirit, prioritizing unity over retribution. The Constitution of Medina: A Blueprint for Pluralistic Governance: Perhaps the most significant historical evidence for inclusive Islamic governance is the Constitution of Medina (Mithaq al-Madinah). Drafted in 622 CE, this document established the first Islamic state in Medina, a city with a diverse population of Muslims, Jews, and various pagan tribes. The Constitution was a ground-breaking social contract that: • Established a Unified Community (Ummah Wahidah): It declared all signatories, regardless of faith, as "one community" (Ummah Wahidah) distinct from other peoples. This explicitly included Jewish tribes, affirming their shared citizenship and mutual responsibility with the Muslims. • Guaranteed Religious Freedom: It ensured the religious freedom of all signatory groups, stating, "The Jews of Banu Awf are a community with the believers... The Jews have their religion and the Muslims have theirs." • Mutual Rights and Responsibilities: It outlined mutual rights and obligations, including military cooperation against external threats and a shared system for resolving disputes. • Justice for All: It established the Prophet as the final arbiter of disputes, ensuring that justice would be administered impartially among all communities. The Constitution of Medina provides a powerful historical counter-narrative to Spencer's claims. It demonstrates that from its very inception, Islamic governance embraced pluralism, recognized the rights and dignity of non-Muslims, and fostered an environment of peaceful coexistence. The idea that Islam inherently seeks to dehumanize or exclude others is directly refuted by this seminal document. Inclusive Principles in the Caliphates: The rightly guided Caliphs who succeeded the Prophet continued to uphold these principles. During the early Caliphate, non-Muslims living under Muslim rule were granted protected status as Ahl al-Dhimmah (People of the Covenant). This status, far from being discriminatory, provided them with: • Security and Protection: Guarantee of safety of life, property, and honor from internal and external threats. • Religious Freedom: The right to practice their religion, maintain their places of worship, and administer their communal affairs according to their own laws. • Autonomy: Legal and judicial autonomy in matters of personal law. • Fair Taxation: A special tax (Jizyah), which exempted them from military service and other taxes levied on Muslims. Historically, this was often lighter than taxes imposed in other empires. Examples abound throughout Islamic history where non-Muslim communities flourished under Muslim rule, contributing significantly to advancements in science, philosophy, medicine, and administration. The Golden Age of Islam, particularly in Andalusia and Baghdad, was characterized by unparalleled interfaith cooperation and intellectual exchange. This historical reality stands in stark contrast to Spencer's portrayal of an inherently intolerant Islam. Tajuddin Rasdi's Vision of "True Muslim Leadership": Tajuddin Rasdi's assertion that "a true Islamic governance must embrace inclusivity" and that "true Muslim leadership... is to govern with magnanimity and moral clarity" is profoundly aligned with the Prophetic model and the core principles of the Quran. His critique of narrow-minded interpretations that label others as "kafir" as a "weapon for exclusion" echoes the historical and ethical imperative within Islam. Rasdi rightly emphasizes that the term Kafir, often mistranslated and misused, refers to a state of disbelief, a theological concept, rather than an indictment of a person’s inherent worth or humanity. It is a descriptor of a worldview, not a license for dehumanization. When Muslims use such terms to foster bigotry, they deviate from the Quranic command to "Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction..." (Quran 16:125). True Islamic leadership, therefore, must prioritize the welfare of all citizens, regardless of their beliefs, fostering environments where diverse communities can coexist harmoniously. This vision directly challenges any form of nativism or exclusionary nationalism masquerading as "true Islam." Spencer's attacks often thrive on such distortions, projecting the shortcomings of certain political actors onto the entire faith. It is crucial to distinguish between the actions of individuals or regimes and the immutable principles of Islam. In essence, the prophetic model and the history of inclusive Islamic governance provide irrefutable evidence that Islam, far from being a dehumanizing ideology, champions universal human dignity, religious freedom, and justice for all. This historical reality serves as a powerful counter-narrative to Spencer's decontextualized and polemical assertions. Addressing Misinterpretations: The persistent misinterpretations of Islamic texts, whether deliberate or born of ignorance, underscore the critical role of sound hermeneutics in countering Islamophobia. Spencer's assertions are not just interpretive errors; they are part of a broader strategy to construct a fear-mongering narrative about Islam. A robust response requires not only debunking his specific claims but also providing a framework for understanding Islamic texts that promotes nuance, context, and ethical engagement. Spencer's method is a classic example of decontextualized literalism, a dangerous approach to any scripture. It involves: 1. Cherry-picking: Selecting verses that, in isolation, appear to support a predetermined negative narrative. 2. Ignoring the Context: Disregarding the historical occasions and specific audiences for which verses were revealed. Many verses, especially those related to warfare or specific social conditions, are highly contextual and cannot be generalized universally. 3. Disregarding Linguistic Nuance: Overlooking metaphors, allegories, idioms, and rhetorical devices common in classical Arabic and Quranic discourse. 4. Neglecting Intertextual Coherence: Failing to read verses in light of the entire Quran's message, especially its foundational ethical principles. This method, when applied to any religious text (as demonstrated in the comparative scriptural usage of animal metaphors in the introduction), can easily generate a distorted and hostile image. For instance, selective literalism could portray the Hebrew Bible as endorsing genocide (e.g., Deuteronomy 7:1-2) or the New Testament as advocating violence (e.g., Matthew 10:34). Such readings are universally rejected by mainstream Jewish and Christian scholars who emphasize context, genre, and overarching theological principles. The same scholarly rigor must be applied to the Quran. The Imperative for Intellectual Engagement: To grasp the Quran's message accurately, a multifaceted hermeneutical approach is necessary, encompassing: • Linguistic Accuracy and Semantic Depth: Understanding the rich polysemy of Arabic words and the various layers of meaning. For instance, the term Kafara (root of Kafir) means "to cover, conceal, deny," and in a theological sense, "to deliberately deny truth after it has been made clear." It is not an arbitrary slur but a descriptor of a spiritual disposition, often associated with active hostility towards truth or its proponents. • Contextual Analysis: Examining the socio-historical circumstances of each revelation. Many verses were revealed in response to specific events, conflicts, or questions, and understanding these contexts is crucial for accurate interpretation. Contextualist approach highlights the importance of understanding the socio-historical matrix of scripture to derive principles rather than literal, anachronistic applications. • Thematic Coherence (Maqasid al-Shariah): Recognizing the Quran's overarching themes and universal principles, particularly its emphasis on justice, mercy, dignity, and human welfare. Individual verses must be interpreted in harmony with these higher objectives. • Traditional and Modern Perspectives (Tafsir): Integrating insights from classical exegetes (like Al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir, Al-Razi) with contemporary scholarly approaches that address modern challenges and nuances. This ensures both rootedness in tradition and responsiveness to contemporary realities. • The Prophetic Paradigm (Sunnah): The Prophet Muhammad's life and teachings provide the most authentic practical interpretation of the Quran. His example of justice, compassion, and inclusive governance is paramount. By applying these principles, one can move beyond superficial readings to a deeper, more nuanced understanding of the Quran's message, demonstrating its consistent affirmation of human dignity and its call for compassion and respect for all individuals. Challenging Islamophobia and Internal Bigotry: It is crucial to recognize that Spencer's Islamophobia often finds an inadvertent echo in certain segments of the Muslim world that adopt similarly literalist, exclusionary, and bigoted interpretations of Islamic texts. When Muslim leaders or groups use Quranic verses or Islamic terminology (like Kafir) to demonize, dehumanize, or exclude others based on dress, culture, or lifestyle, they are not only betraying the spirit of Islam but also providing ammunition for Islamophobic narratives. As Tajuddin Rasdi rightly points out, true Islamic leadership demands magnanimity and moral clarity. It means rejecting interpretations that foster bigotry and actively promoting inclusivity, dialogue, and understanding. The responsibility lies with Muslims today to embody the values of their faith – compassion, justice, wisdom, and respect – through their actions and their interpretations of sacred texts. This requires: • Promoting Scholarly Literacy: Encouraging deeper engagement with Quranic studies and Islamic ethics that moves beyond simplistic understandings. • Emphasizing Ethical Conduct: Highlighting that true faith is manifested through righteous actions, justice, and kindness towards all, as commanded in Quran 60:8. • Fostering Interfaith Dialogue: Actively engaging with people of other faiths to build bridges of understanding and dispel misconceptions. • Reclaiming the Narrative: Actively countering Islamophobic narratives with well-reasoned arguments, historical evidence, and ethical Islamic teachings. In essence, countering Islamophobia is not merely about defending Islam from external attacks; it is also about purifying internal interpretations from any form of bigotry that may inadvertently align with Spencer's dehumanizing agenda. The hermeneutical imperative is thus a dual one: to defend Islam from external misrepresentation and to ensure its internal interpretations remain true to its universal, humanistic core. Reaffirming Islam's Humanistic Vision: Robert Spencer's critique of Islam, particularly his assertions regarding Quranic verses 7:179 and 8:22, relies on a superficial, decontextualized, and polemical reading of sacred texts. This paper has demonstrated, through a rigorous application of Islamic hermeneutical principles, that his claims fundamentally misrepresent the essence of Islamic teachings. Far from condoning the dehumanization of non-Muslims, the Quran, the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad, and centuries of Islamic scholarship consistently affirm the universal dignity of all human beings. The verses cited by Spencer are not ontological condemnations of non-Muslims as "animals." Instead, they are powerful metaphorical critiques of a specific spiritual condition: wilful heedlessness (Ghaflah), obstinate rejection of truth (kufr), and the failure to utilize God-given faculties of intellect and conscience for moral discernment. This critique applies to any individual, Muslim or non-Muslim, who chooses to ignore clear divine guidance and ethical imperatives. The comparison to "cattle" or "worst of creatures" serves as a rhetorical device to emphasize the tragic paradox of human beings who, endowed with reason and free will, choose to act as if they lack these distinguishing gifts. Islam's foundational texts explicitly articulate a vision of universal human dignity (Karamah, Quran 17:70), celebrating diversity as a divine sign and a call for mutual recognition (Ta’aruf, Quran 49:13). The sanctity of human life (Quran 5:32), the mandate for justice and kindness towards all (Quran 60:8), and the principle of religious freedom (Quran 2:256) are core tenets that unequivocally reject any form of dehumanization or coercion. The prophetic model, exemplified by the Constitution of Medina and the Prophet's compassionate treatment of non-Muslims, provides a practical blueprint for inclusive governance and harmonious coexistence. Tajuddin Rasdi's call for a "true Islamic governance" that embraces inclusivity, magnanimity, and moral clarity resonates deeply with this authentic Islamic tradition. His rejection of using religious labels like Kafir as weapons for exclusion directly aligns with the Quran's emphasis on justice, wisdom, and beautiful preaching in interfaith engagement. Any interpretation that reduces Islam to a narrow, exclusionary ideology that condones labelling others as "animals" based on superficial markers like dress or culture is a profound betrayal of its ethical and spiritual teachings. Such interpretations, whether advanced by Islamophobes or misguided Muslims, must be rigorously challenged. The task for contemporary Islamic thought and leadership is to reclaim and articulate this robust humanistic vision. This requires: • Promoting a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of Islamic hermeneutics, moving beyond literalism to engage with context, linguistic depth, and thematic coherence. • Embodying Islamic values of compassion, justice, and respect in daily interactions and public discourse. • Actively fostering interfaith dialogue and cooperation, building bridges of understanding rather than walls of division. • Critically engaging with and rejecting extremist interpretations that distort Islam's message, whether they originate from outside or within Muslim communities. In conclusion, Robert Spencer's critique of Islam relies on a superficial and intellectually dishonest reading of its sacred texts. A careful, enlightened, and academic hermeneutical response reveals a profound, progressive, and egalitarian Islamic tradition that champions the dignity of every human being. By consistently challenging misrepresentations and reaffirming Islam's authentic humanistic vision, we can counter narratives of hate and division, fostering a world built on mutual respect, understanding, and shared humanity. The Quran calls us not to degrade one another, but to recognize in each person a bearer of divine honour, and to compete in goodness together for the welfare of all of Adam's children (Q.5:48, 2:148). This is the enduring and liberating truth that must prevail against all forms of polemical distortion. ------ V.A. Mohamad Ashrof is an independent Indian scholar specializing in Islamic humanism. With a deep commitment to advancing Quranic hermeneutics that prioritize human well-being, peace, and progress, his work aims to foster a just society, encourage critical thinking, and promote inclusive discourse and peaceful coexistence. He is dedicated to creating pathways for meaningful social change and intellectual growth through his scholarship. URL: https://www.newageislam.com/debating-islam/universal-human-dignity-islamic-thought-robert-spencer/d/136988 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism