The official, politically correct point of view says that Islam is just another monotheistic religion, not that different from Judaism or Christianity.
If that is true, then moderate Muslims must exist, just like moderate members of other faiths.
However, moderate members of other faiths do not require sacrificial mollification -- that's basically how we tell moderates from extremists.
Therefore, either moderate Muslims are mythical creatures, or we need substantially different criteria to identify them.
That dilemma alone should make us suspicious as to whether Islam is "just another religion".
Obviously, it is important that we determine how a moderate Muslim can be distinguished from a Muslim extremist.
Why not ask Muslims themselves?
Irshad Manji, a young Canadian author, has published a book titled The Trouble With Islam.
Since we don't hear too many Muslim voices criticizing their religion, her book deserves our attention.
This is what the author herself says on her promotional Website:
"I appreciate that every faith has its share of literalists. Christians have their Evangelicals. Jews have the ultra-Orthodox. For God's sake, even Buddhists have fundamentalists. But what this book hammers home is that only in Islam the literalism is mainstream."
Apparently, the terms literalism and fundamentalism in the quotation above are used interchangeably, as synonyms of religious extremism. Unfortunately, the author fails to mention the most important difference between "literalists" in Islam and other religions. Evangelical Christians may believe that heaven is reserved for them alone.
Ultra-Orthodox Jews may display intimate understanding of the murkiest places in the Talmud.
I have no idea what extreme fundamentalist Buddhists do that sets them apart from their moderate coreligionists.
What I do know however is that no religion except Islam pursues the idea of physical extermination of those who believe differently.
The concept of holy war is unique to Islam.
Jihad is the absolute monopoly of Muslims.
There is no parallel to it in any other religion in the world. (Yes, I have heard about Crusades, but Christianity does not mandate them, and do you know when the last Crusade ended?)
So, here we have it in plain English, as simple as A, B, C:
1. According to the Koran, holy war against the infidels is a sacred duty of every Muslim.
2. According to Ms. Manji, mainstream Muslims interpret Koran literally.
The conclusion is inevitable:
3. Mainstream Muslims perceive war against the infidels -- meaning you and me -- as their sacred duty.
Manji fails to note that in "literalist" "fundamentalist" Christianity, the hermeneutic is such that the Old Testament injunctions that might be said to support violence are vacated by the New Testament dispensation. As for the Jews, the rabbis have the power to reinterpret by their own hermanuetic, and they have done exactly that.
Only Islam is busy trying to carry out a "scriptural" mandate of violence against "unbelievers."