Interesting that you seem to have an issue with the way I rebutted someone else's argument, yet he didn't seem to take issue with it. Perhaps you should just fight your own battles?
My point is (one....more....time....) that there is a continuum between objecting to someone else's religious beliefs, through persecuting them for them, to the death penalty for apostacy. I know this isn't at the far extreme of that continuum; I never said it was. But it IS a step down that slippery slope. Particularly given the history of torture, murder, and inquisition in the Catholic Church; they have been there before. Combine that with today's Islamic-based censorship; is it so hard to understand the reluctance to give ANY religious based censorship a foot in the door?
Why would religious values be any different than political ones? If its a slippery slope "objecting to someone else's religious beliefs" is the same slope there for political beliefs?
What's the difference in boycotting DVC and Farenheit 9/11?