The problem is one of objective fact. Islam IS a religion.

Islam is also a system of (shariah) laws and a health/lifestyle guide. It’s also a warrior’s code. One engineer I know pointed out that mosques are constructed like armories.

The Japanese samurai code, Bushido, is considered by some to be a religion. Confucianism can also be considered to be a religion. If they are, these lifestyle/legal codes are probably more comparable to Islam than Christianity.

Since Muslim laws are based on the idea that Muslims (especially Muslim men) are superior to all other human beings, and since that unprovable thesis is (according to Muslims) “God’s word”, it’s not surprising that even the most moderate Muslim will assert their belief that Islam (and all laws based on it) is unquestionably God’s word.

I don’t think the argument that Islam is an ideology, not a religion, has any political or strategic value in the war against terrorism. As I said, this argument won’t work unless Wilders can convince many people that it’s true. He can’t, because it’s not.

But looking at Islam as an ideology, a legal system, and a warrior’s code could be an interesting exercise. Is something defined as a religion because the followers say it is? Does a religion have to have God/Gods or a holy book? Unitarian Universalists don’t have a holy book, but they’re a religion.

If communists unanimously declared that their ideology was a religion, would we have to respect that?