Ben Affleck, Sam Harris, and a Viral Clash Over Islam, Liberalism, and Free Speech

A resurfaced debate featuring actor Ben Affleck, neuroscientist Sam Harris, and comedian Bill Maher has once again ignited controversy online, following commentary by Rabbi Daniel Schonbuch, LMFT, a psychotherapist and author who focuses on psychology, faith, and culture. The exchange, originally aired on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher, has gone viral under headlines claiming Affleck “freaked out” after defending Islam as a peaceful religion.

The discussion centers on a sensitive but recurring question in Western discourse: whether criticism of Islamic doctrine is being unfairly labeled as bigotry against Muslims as people. Sam Harris argued that liberal societies must retain the moral clarity to criticize ideas—especially religious doctrines—that conflict with liberal values such as freedom of speech, women’s rights, equality for LGBTQ individuals, and the right to leave a religion without fear of violence. According to Harris, conflating criticism of ideas with racism or bigotry shuts down necessary conversations.

Ben Affleck strongly objected to Harris’s framing, accusing him of stereotyping Muslims and engaging in rhetoric that resembled racist generalizations. Affleck emphasized that Islam, like other religions, is practiced by over a billion people worldwide, the vast majority of whom are not violent extremists. He argued that focusing on the actions or beliefs of radicals risks painting an entire faith community with a single brush.

The debate grew heated when Harris cited polling data suggesting that in some Muslim-majority countries, large percentages of respondents support harsh punishments for apostasy or blasphemy. Harris proposed a “concentric circles” model, distinguishing between jihadists, Islamists, conservative believers, and secular or reform-minded Muslims. His controversial claim was that extremist and illiberal beliefs may be more mainstream in parts of the Muslim world than Western liberals are willing to admit.

Affleck pushed back, insisting that highlighting such statistics without equal emphasis on Muslim reformers, dissidents, and victims of extremism distorts reality. He pointed to activists like Malala Yousafzai and lawyers and journalists in Muslim countries who risk or lose their lives opposing fundamentalism. For Affleck, the core divide is not between Islam and the West, but between extremists and moderates within every religion.

Rabbi Daniel Schonbuch’s commentary frames the debate as a failure of modern liberalism to confront theocracy consistently. He echoes Harris and Maher in arguing that fear of being labeled “Islamophobic” has led many liberals to avoid criticizing illiberal practices within Islam, even when those practices harm women, minorities, Jews, Christians, and moderate Muslims themselves. Schonbuch contends that moral clarity is essential to defend victims of religious extremism and empower genuine reformers.

The viral clip continues to divide audiences. Supporters of Harris and Maher praise them for addressing uncomfortable truths about ideology and violence. Critics argue that their approach oversimplifies complex global realities and fuels prejudice. What remains clear is that the debate reflects a larger cultural struggle—how to balance free speech, religious tolerance, and the defense of liberal values in an increasingly polarized world.