This string of statements, which is posted over, and over, and over on this site might seem convincing, but the great thing about them is that each denies some complexity, while rightfully illuminating aspects that need to be addressed.

Just think about the first statement: "Christians often complain that atheists balance each discussion about 'Islam' with a discussion of extremist Christianity (jihadists <-> abortion doctors). I think our Christian neighbours (even the craziest!) are right to be outrageed about this pretense of even-handedness. Islam is atm scarier and more culpable for needless human misery."

This is very short, but it relies on a ton of assumptions. If religion is really what people believe and practice (as it relates to the supernatural), then are not our truly liberal Muslim neighbors right to be outraged when they are accused of being part of something more dangerous and harmful than even abortion clinic terrorists? Of course they are! The only condition is that they need to acknowledge that Islam is not a single, monolithic set of beliefs and practices.

There are no moderate religious people. They all falsely claim to know fundamental truths that no-one can possibly know. Their holding of these beliefs, combined with the customs that accompany them affect society, BUT this is not a simple process in many cases. Christians aren't compassionate peaceniks. Muslims aren't selfless charity machines. In any case, this is why religion is radical, and the more (fundamental) certainty they claim to possess, the more radical they are.

But there's a different side. There are choices. Both the very radical and the less radical have the fundamental freedom to define how they ought to think and act. It's because humans aren't rational. To a believer this ability to double-think is a gift. Just because scholars claim to possess the holy collective Islamic/Catholic/Jewish/... knowledge of generations doesn't mean that anyone should, or that most do completely accept these narrow (nuanced) rulings in all their specificity.

Islam, like all Abrahamic faiths, is not a single beast with lesser and greater parts. People who believe in the Islamic faith are EXACTLY the same as "our Christians neighbors" in their ability to hold personal religious views. Six percent of Turks believe in the death penalty for Muslim apostates. More than 75 percent of Egyptians believe in the death penalty for muslim apostates. Are Turks simply less religious/radical? Do they not possess the ability to read the Hadith or Koran? No, Turks live in a different political climate. They have their own history. Their own brand of secular nationalism. Turks are a different kind of Muslims. In turn, every Turk has his/her own take on Islam.

People like Harris believe that it is distasteful and downright stupid to look at some obvious truths concerning socio-economic reality, political repression and the polarizing effects of our taking sides in religious conflicts (Israel). He loves to present Muslims as relatively(!) mindless drones. Instead, let's give all credence to the viability of Muslim religious leaders' plans for peaceful conquest of the West. Let's pretend that they can achieve their stated goals by the, be it violent or non-violent, means they have chosen. Let's all forget the inconvenient truths, they say. Only then can we view and contemplate reality in a rational fashion.

http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/

This all sounds very familiar. You sure this hasn't been posted yet?

Never mind. If someone squeaks, we know it was a dupe.

****