That treatment of Apostasy is a relatively mainstream interpretation. In Saudi Arabia today, the penalty for conversion to other religions is death:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Saudi_Ar...

The problem is that many practitioners do follow texts to a T, and I believe that's the point of most religious systems.

Yeah, but it's like they don't want to lose followers/members. And the only thing they can do about it is just death penalty, like how did the Catholic Church centuries ago.

It's important to note that christian descendant and "allies" control the majority of media. Eg. in Albania there is an estimation of 80/20% of Muslims (majority non practitioners)/Christians, while the government administration 80/20% Christians/Muslims.

EDIT: I was talking about worldwide majority, not national or regional.

You should know that information control, it's one of the fundamental weapons and control powers a government administration has. Every government knows this, and every government uses it (even though some use it less than others).

That's something you should think about. At least the Chinese government stated it publicly, while others mask it as democracy freedom.

I talk about governments and politics, but you should count religion in it. Do you think the Catholic Church (eg. the Vatican) doesn't influence decisions of governments? (I know something about this)

>use the same fucked up interpretations of Quranic texts

100% straw-man, I never quoted the Quran? I was referring to modern day. At least 2006 I recall the U.S. had to get Karzai to intervene in and order the release of a defendent facing execution in Afghanistan.

The claim you need to try and contest is "religion is intrinsically violent"