When religious people do bad things in the name of religion...

[Brettongarcia]

8. Using Sociology, we could call "religion" whatever calls itself that, or is called that, say.

Then note good and bad things, differentiations, within this overall group.

By the way though? This article oddly, almost seems to have in the back of its mind, to support the backbone idea of Liberal religion.

The main idea on which Liberal Christianity is based, seems to be that 1) there is "bad" religion; as in Fundamentalism. Which seems rule-bound and violent. But there is 2) also "good" religion; namely Liberalism. Which might have core traits like Pacifism, spirituality, etc..

Or in the case of the cited article, our attention is drawn to "bad," or defensively autocratic religion, which is found in objectively threatened regions. Vs. more relaxed religion, in friendlier environments.

This article therefore might seem promising. However, there would be a tendency to interpret this results according to the core Liberal religious bias. Reading this as verifying the essential Liberal religious ideal: that conservative fundamentalists are just fear-based people. People who live in "fear" of environments perceived as threatening.

Technically though, this article does not quite say that. It suggests that fundamentalistic, law- or rule-oriented religion, comes from environments that actually ARE more dangerous.

In this sense, the article might almost seem to excuse Fundamentalism.