"

 Navigational template 

All the other topics have such things. So if there is a ""X and violence"" article, there is usually a ""criticism of X"" navigational template. As a sidebar, it does seems a bit pov-ish and non-WP:TOPIC since articles are often in a ""see also"" type category rather than relating to the article at hand.   

That's my problem with them also. I think we should really get rid of all the criticism sidebars, all except for the the literary, film, etc, ones since criticism in those circles doesn't usually equate to 'very biassed'. It's almost as bad as putting articles on Christian violence under Wikiproject atheism (or vice versa, though I can't see it happening). When I see articles tagged that way I don't need to see anything else to know that somebody or other has a POV to grind and that the article is likely a mess.
  

 Teehan and Dostoevsky 

So the problem here is that we are mixing contemporary academics with great thinkers and writers and also putting Dostoevsky after Teehan when Dostoevsky clearly predated Teehan.  At the core of the problem is the fact that the question of whether Christianity is violent goes back further than Dostoevsky.  Thus, if we are going to use sources that are not from the last half of the 20th century, then we should frame the whole question as a much older debate involving philosophical perspectives such as Dostoevski's.
Note that I am not objecting to including Dostoevski; I'm just saying that we need to put him up against other great thinkers of a similar stature.  I'm thinking that there must be Enlightenment thinkers who would be good representatives of the critical side.

  "