It also tells us to remove the log from our own eye, before attacking the speck in someone else's eye.
Swapping those two teachings inappropriately has led to the protection of a lot of ignorance, by letting people blame others when they should have blamed themselves.
And historically, that exact mistake has led to wars - over and over and over again.
I cannot speak for "most people." I can only speak for myself, as an LCMS Lutheran. I have doctrinal differences with Catholicism--if I didn't, I would be a Catholic--but I do not assume that because a person is Catholic that somehow makes it impossible for him/her to be a Christian. On the contrary, if someone claims to be a Christian, my only two questions are, do you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus Christ, and do you believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead. Answer yes to both, and you have my hand of Christian fellowship.
Now here's where the problem lies for me with the original topic of this thread, MLK. The Bible, in the Romans passage hinted at above, says that you are saved if you believe in Jesus' resurrection. The Bible also says, in I Cor. 15 among other places, that not believing in the resurrection is a bonehead thing, because not believing in Jesus' resurrection logically leads to not believing in our resurrection, which removes the main incentive to accept Jesus' salvation. The Bible does not say, however, that a person who does not believe in Jesus' resurrection is thereby damned: "stupid" and "damned" are not mutually reflexive (for which I daily thank God, but I digress). Salvation is a divine act, made available by the blood of Jesus shed on the cross, and it is quite possible that someone could accept Jesus' offer of salvation, and still be stupid enough to not believe Jesus' resurrection, or His offer of resurrection for His people--whether that would be sufficient for salvation is a deeper theological question than I have time for this morning, as I prepare to go to church, read the Scripture, and play the pipe organ :-)