Amstrong’s interpretation here confuses the issues.
One should first note the title of this article: Is the promotion of violence inherent to any religion?
We live in one of the most militaristic societies in history, and this is the kind of question that is asked. It springs from the false distinction of religion and non-religion. The real issue is the birth of ‘religious war’ in finite segments of world history. But to castigate religion for violence while condoning violence in all other sectors of society is somehow imbecilic. Partly it is a consequence of the way the new atheists are trying to redefine the debate.