The secular Left mostly hates Christianity and the Christian heritage of Western Culture. To that end, it favors just about anyone who will attack or defame it. Being mostly secularized, it also doesn't particularly care if you defame any or all religions, though Buddhism is often strangely embraced, and you have to be careful going after Judaism. Memories of another nation that did so are still too near to our day and age.
Still, on the whole, the secular Left makes its pennies by declaring itself the safe harbor for the endless demographic groups who have been victims of the evil Christian West from which it is out to save the world.
But what happens when victimized demographic groups collide? We all know that the narrative of the Left is that there are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world who only want to embrace John Lennon songs and the values, such as they are, of the secular Left. There are simply a few bad apples who only hate us because the evil conservatives who cling to the evil Christian Western tradition made them hate us. And those who mock and deride Islam? Need I bother? Simply charge Islamaphobic Bigot. If you aren't a liberal, you're by definition a bigot. Duh.
Well, every now and then, there comes a collision between the various groups that the Left ostensibly is here to protect. Sort of like when homosexual rights activists were incensed at the idea that a woman could abort a gay baby if the woman didn't want a gay child. Abortion rights activists were quick to bare their claws and teeth, warning folks not to infringe upon the sacred right of women to flex their superior muscles by aborting the hell out of any baby for any reason. It was quite funny, in a sick and evil spawn of Hell sort of way.
Now, today, it looks like Richard Dawkins has put Salon into a bit of a sticky situation. When contemplating an interview with a Muslim, Dawkins more or less showed his typical contempt for Islamic religious beliefs in a way not surprising. But doesn't that mean he's an Islamaphobe?
No! According to the always balanced and reliable Salon.com. You see, basically, in a nutshell, the problem is that we're upset at the wrong type of person who simply speaks the truth. Religion, being a foul and malicious set of bullshit fairy tales that need to be exterminated from the planet, in itself has no right to be offended when someone speaks the truth. Hence Charlie Hebdo, that made its meat off of blaspheming and mocking various religious beliefs. Islamaphobic? Heck no. Simply brilliant and enlightened.
The basic approach that the secular Left has toward religion is condemning various religions for calling each other wrong or evil, when in fact they are all wrong and evil and all need to be eradicated from the human condition. So at the end of the day, from the POV of the esteemed Salon.com, all is right with the world. Dawkins is no Isamaphobic bigot. That term is reserved as an attack phrase for those who fail to embrace liberal policies, narratives, or ideals. As Dawkins does all of those things, and more to the point, hates all religions equally, he is off the hook.
Remember kids, don't try to pin adherents of the modern, secular Left, on some consistency of principles or morals. It won't work. Trying to glean consistency from the Left is as likely as locating a flying spaghetti monster.