The priest-child-abuse thing is more than "associated with" being christian, it's a christian priest child abuse thing. Doesn't make christians child abusers, or make them priests, although to be a priest you do have to be a christian and to be a child-abusing priest you have to be a priest. Doesn't mean christians are child abusers any more than moslems are terrorists that terrorists are moslems and priests who abuse children are christian - the latter doesn't mean christians are either priests or child abusers.   It doesn't even mean that *priests* are child abusers that child abusing priests are priests. You can't go in that direction. That's what I'm saying. But you can't divorce the two just because inclusion is one-way either, there is that inclusion you have to allow for. Not to end too many sentences with prepositions.

But this thread has morphed into a version of the Islamic Radicalism thread and I'd really, really like to get back to the question of the Caliphate. If people followed them, would that make them legit?