Religion can be blamed for some crimes committed by theists

"Martin Luther King Jr., a theist amongst them all, was one who led for African American civil rights and moderate protection. However, is his religion held accountable for the actions he made? The answer is no he was not. He was held accountable for his actions, and his actions alone." "Gandhi, an activist whom freed India from the British control, was a very religious person. To many, he is now referenced as a God. However, do they get any praise from being nonviolent? No, they do not." They do get praise for being non-violent. This also does not address the issue. I never said people cannot do well while being a theist, I said that SOME crimes can be blamed on religion. "The answer I say is no. We do not uphold the good that comes from religion even though we make sure that the bad is now marked upon theists forever. Good can come out of religion, and it can most definitely outweight the bad that has been done and that it will do." Just because religion can do good does not mean it cannot do wrong. I also do not see how the good has outweighed all the bad that has been caused by religion. "I think that those who go and do terrible deeds for their religion should be punished, but not because of what they believe, but by the actions that they commit. One can choose what to believe. One can choose their own actions. There is always the choice to do an action, and a choice to not do one." Yes, but by that logic person A in this situation is guilty of nothing. Person A bribes person B to kill person C. Person B kills person C. Person B is guilty, but person A is innocent. Is that fair? Person A represents religion, the bribe represents eternal paradise (or other specific rewards). "One can dismiss any influence made by people or religion. One can also choose to allow it to influence them. The question of what influence a religion gives is dependent on reality." And at the same time people can be indoctrinated into religions, and when raised that way they can be influenced for it to become part of their reality. Again, religion does not cause everyone to commit crimes, just like person A cannot convince everyone to kill person C, but those that do decide to be person B are still doing it because of person A. Without Islam there would be no Jihads. Without Christianity there would not have been the Crusades or Inquisition. Just because people have free will does not mean we cannot be influenced. If religion influences someone to commit a crime then religion is also to blame, just like person A is also to blame for the murder person B committed. I am NOT saying that all the blame should go to religion because humans do have free will, but religion does deserve some of the blame in these situations. The late Christopher Hitchens explains this in his book "God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything" I do not agree with everything stated by him or in his book, but there are many good points. Some people might say there is a difference between person A and religion, and there is. Many hardcore theists hold religion as the most important thing. If someone holds religion as the most important thing and they follow the passages in their "Holy Book" about committing those crimes then how can we say religion is not even partly responsible? We hold racial superiority as being partly responsible for slavery, so why not hold religion as being partly responsible for those crimes?