But true Catholics don’t become homicidal when they fully embrace their religion.
It’s a pretty fundamental difference.
Neither do Sufis.
As I mentioned earlier, the Albigensian Crusade, which killed between 200,000 and a million French for being heretics, was initiated by a Pope and it was a Papal legate who, when asked by a Crusader how he could make sure he was only killing heretics, was told, "Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius" - "Kill them [all]! Surely the Lord discerns which [ones] are his". Do you think the Crusader, following a Papal decree and asking for moral guidance from a Papal legate, wasn't fully embracing his religion? How about if he followed the Papal legate's advice?
It's a pretty fundamental difference.
OK. So let's go back to one of my original concerns which was Constitutional protection for religion. How does one distinguish a religion that promotes homicide or is a cult (and remember that the Old Testament includes quite a few calls for death) from a legitimate religion? Where do we draw a line between a legitimate religion worthy of Constitutional protection and a death cult?