Slott believes comics are for every ideology, no matter the components

In his continuing apologia for Marvel's promoting Islam via taqqiya, Slott posted the following:

If you haven't twigged to it yet: Comics are for every race, creed, color, religion, gender & orientation. And everyone deserves a hero. :)
— Dan Slott (@DanSlott) July 3, 2014

For every creed and religion? Whoa, seriously? By that logic, even Vikings, Vandals, Nazis, Ottoman Empire savages, Spanish invaders who slew the Aztek and Incan empires, Confederates, Communists and Marxists deserve heroes too. And I guess he also thinks Neturei Karta, NAMBLA and the Scientologists deserve heroes. Say, maybe he thinks white supremacists and Islamic homphobes deserve "heroes"! And I thought he was against them! Gee, how much more illogical can Slott get? A great medium should not be abused by approving the notion that barbarian movements should be encouraged to exploit it.

And curious how somebody who writes a tweet like that's never argued in favor of introducing heroes and co-stars for mainstream books inspired by apostates from Islam like Brigitte Gabriel, 9-11 Families members like Tim Sumner, or even right-wingers who aren't depicted one-dimensionally.

Since we're on the subject, a tweet by one of Slott's cultists...

@DanSlott Amazing How can an Xmen fan remain so filled with hate and fear due to a handful of individuals within a minority.
— mrj (@mrjafri) July 3, 2014

...made me think of a little something originally published in The New Mutants #25 in the mid-80s, featuring a character named David Charles Haller, aka Legion and illegitimate son of Charles Xavier, and the following panel should give an idea what his premise involved:

Chris Claremont may have been a leftist, but back at the time, unlike many you see today, he did address the subject of jihadism, and how Haller's backlash at the terrorists who attacked the embassy he was at backfired when he absorbed the brain energy of the leader, Jemail Karami, who later tried to take over his brain, but faced competition from at least two other dormant brain patterns inside Haller's head to boot (in early 90s, when this story was followed up on, they really botched it). It may not have named Islam directly, but the criticism was there. I've got a feeling that tweeter knows Claremont did this story, and if so, I think he was just trying to score brownie points while remaining oblivious. If he didn't know about this story, but does own the issues, I'd suggest he sell them off before the retail value gets too low, and besides, he wouldn't want to make a laughing stock of himself by upholding a franchise that did once depict Islamofascism negatively, now would he? LOL. If that tweeter really thinks I'm full of hate/fear, he should get a good look at Claremont and even Louise Simonson back in the 80s! And "minority"? We're talking about those who embrace the worst content of the Koran/Hadith, including such chillers as Sahih Muslim 6985 and Sahih Bukhari 4.52.177. Stuff that Slott, in all his obsessive blindness, deliberately turns a blind eye to.

It'll be interesting to see how many of the would-be readers bowing before Slott still want to read Claremont's X-books after they realize he did more or less write something they consider anathema to their narrow beliefs. And one can only wonder what Slott thinks of the same scribes now, no matter what their political standings today.