How can those opposed to DWOC say that Christianity and Islam are about love, peace and understanding when both doctrines possess a innate belief in Hell and consider all other theologies to be evil, sinful, and worthy of eternal torture post-mortem?

This scenario is just like how a Christian group in Chicago, led by Andrew Marin, has had "apology marches" at Chicago Pride to demonstrate that not all evangelicals are homopohbic, but that same group has also espoused the ideology of repairing gays, lesbians and bisexuals to the "better" state of heterosexuality. That scandal, which commenced back in 2006 when radio host and writer Mike Signorile exposed the group to fierce criticism for its perceived duplicity, has apparently failed to silence the group for long, because the group came back to participate at Chicago Pride this year, with initial coverage by Change.org and Towleroad that was later corrected and, in some cases, partially retracted because of Signorile’s revelations about the Marin Foundation. 

So if even supposedly liberal evangelical groups like the Marin Foundation can both say that they are accepting of homosexual Christians in their midst and still espouse the ideology of reparative therapy when in major evangelical circles, then I would call that a blatant example of Christian taqiyya (an Arabic word which has been interpreted in modern popular usage as "lying for the faith").

So the Muslims who also state that their faith is all about love, peace and understanding [!] are in the exact same boat as those Christians who, like the Marin Foundation, exclaim loudly that LGBT people are not as much the little shits that their fellow ideologues have depicted us as for millenia. 

So I really don’t mind about the DWOC burning Qu’rans or Afghans burning effigies of the Roman Catholic Pope, just like how I merely find it funny and bit tiresome that they both believe in conspiracy theories about supposedly-nefarious ideologies (oh, the Zionists! oh, the Crusaders! oh, the Terrorists! oh, the liberals! oh, the Bilderbergs!). They’re acting out the creed of belief in Hell and eternal punishment by fire and brimstone for unbelievers; they’re acting out representations of the Christian and Muslim beliefs which result in such psychotic expressions. 

Why should we care, lest we call the Hell-believers in both Christianity and Islam what they really are: psychotics in need of treatment and extraction from the belief in Hell, if nothing else, before they do end up in a "clash of civilizations"? If the Qu’ran can be considered by Geert Wilders as comparable in psychotic, culture-damage-inducing bullshit as Mein Kampf, then why don’t we follow up on Christian fears and declare the Bible as hate speech? I think it would make sense to just come out and make it plain that the New Testament is potentially damaging to liberal multicultural societies if imbibed in similar quantities like wine by an alcoholic.

Probably print such a warning in future copies as a foreword.