I'm sorry, my reading comprehension is lacking today. What exactly is the author upset about?
Dawkins favouring Christianity over Islam?
Islam not being given more rights in non-islamic countries?
That all religions should be hated equally?
Cultural nationalism?
US batshit crazy fundamentalists?
All of the above?
In particular, I find it a little silly that someone asking for their identity to be respected doesn't like it when someone else would prefer their own cultural identity over others.
More so when their argument against this is that only a few extremists in power killing people are at fault, while the rest are peacefully living their lives.
I get why the author would be upset with Dawkins, I understand it. But their exposition is seriously flawed.
I think he’s getting at how Christianity fundamentally teaches turn the other cheek and Islam teaches eye for an eye. Also there’s a lot of stuff about killing infidels which is selectively at odds with the living peacefully. Don’t really know though, happy to be enlightened
Christianity fundamentally teaches people: worship Jesus or else face an eternity of torture. Something Dawkins should be aware of when he calls it decent.
What's your point? That Christians are good because there aren't any Christian countries in 2024 where atheist specifically aren't given capital punishment?
All the murder and oppression in their god's name as long as it doesn't involve atheists is all that it takes to be "fundamentally decent?"
I thought hell as we know it with the fire pits and burning flesh was inserted in the Middle Ages to scare people, not by Jesus. I don’t think he mentioned it in that sense at all. Please someone tell me if this is wrong
There's plenty of killing infidels on either side.
Maybe Christianity already having passed several reformations might make it fundamentally more stable than Islam, but it depends on what the interpretation of fundamental is.
Alternatively, the evolution of society when dominated by Christian beliefs over Islamic might seem more favourable to him.
Perhaps not being stoned in the streets for promoting atheism might also be a deciding factor.
Or maybe he likes churches, architecturally speaking.
There are multiple aspects that can be considered and i don't know the guy well enough to say exactly what he means.