the only caution i would offer is that i think the “hostility” toward muslims is wider, but much shallower. that toward muslims is probably deeper, but somewhat narrower, at least avowed/consciously. now, if a bunch of atheists blow up the sears tower i hope i see my neighbors wearing darwin pins the next week in solidarity cuz we’ll need it….

Now that is weird and telling.

meant catholic.

but there’s also another angle, and that’s that people feel comfortable with people like them. we’ve been a 25% protestant nation since the last 19th century only had one catholic president, and he was killed! people want fellowship with a eye toward preference with people like themselves, so it naturally leads to the fact that they will prefer someone like themselves, all things being equal. if 25% of america’s were muslim, “so what” would be a more powerful talking point since many more americans are muslim. as it is, very few are (the same issue crops up with mormonism).

of course, that’s not a apologia for bizarre conspiracy theorists. but as you imply, it’s not a black and white issue; you can prefer a co-religionist without assuming that other religionists are malevolent. a co-religionist is expected to know “what you’re about” with a greater degree of likelihood than a non-co-religionist. by analogy, “so what if he’s an atheist?” well, assume that being accused of being an atheist wasn’t a political poison pill, i think it is a plausible case that a politician who does not experience a living god in their life might be perceived to be “out of touch” with the values of the major who do believe in god. i think it’s not really factually correct, but a democracy is about the art of the possible.