looking back, i can see i didn't explain my view very well. i just think those 'Muslim Extremists' can't be classed with other thousand-year-old religions or systems that have survived and are therefore fit in the scheme of nature, because 'Muslim Extremists' aren't (from what i've read) actually very good Muslims.

i don't think the aggression is a side-effect of religion. more, the religion is a means by which to propagate that aggression that's already there.

are child molesters and terrorists actually useful because they've survived today? or are they perhaps just a bad mutation that we'll always have?

julz