Don Firth, Bill D has neatly put his finger on the problem. No one is pretending that all religions are equally to blame for various religion-inspired abuses - any more than all religions can take the credit for various religion-inspired kindnesses. Though religious apologists make the latter mistake remarkably often!

The problem is that the motives for each are not based on any kind of hard evidence, and this is a worry. If one thinks that God wants you to quietly help help hurricane victims, one does so. If one thinks God wants you to murder abortion doctors,one does so. One points to 'faith' as a motive in each case.

This is why I condemn religious thinking in general, except for the rare occasions when it stays harmlessly between the thinker's ears and does not influence action.

It is unevidenced and thus simply too open to abuse.

Things are made worse by the general feeling - ably articulated on this thread by Little Hawk - that religion should somehow be out of bounds to criticism. If an individual, corporation, government or dictatorial regime behaves badly one may criticise. But if one criticises a religion, or (more importantly) the archaic mindset that underpins all faith-based religion, one can (in general, not from Little Hawk) expect personal atacks and accusations of bigotry.