>> To elaborate: Yes, we don't know everything, yes, we may not even know everything but still we have to manage our existence and our survival. So we cannot just indefinitely and naively apply the above mentioned principle of "If there is problem of understanding we embrace the opposite as a being of equal value with the capability to contribute and grow". To some extent we may allow the opposition to expand and we (as liberals) will accommodate some of their demands. But there has to be a recoprocating response of accommodation from the other side. We can wait for "certain amount of time" for the opposition to respond to our calls, but if our very survival and our very values are at stake, we cannot keep on waiting and accommodating the opposition indefinitely.

Yes, reciprocity is certainly required. I would argue it is actually what our existence is about. And yes, you have every right to fight for survival... I am just saying the other person has as well. I think what makes it difficult for you to understand me is that you still view yourself on the 'right' side and then only see a big large group of people demanding you to 'lower' yourself. You are fighting tooth and nail to stop that. As I said before it is understandable, it is your right and it is the same thing everyone on 'the other side' is doing. Stalemate again.

>> So we must raise at least the following points, w.r.t. Islam, for public discussion: Who is considered as innocent in Islam? Is a kaafir (infidel) an innocent in Islam (i.e. according to Islamic scriptures)? What about abrogated verses in the Quran? [1] What is Islam's view on homosexuals?

I get that you are freaked out by some passages in the Quran and believe that it is making believers less tolerant, less worthy, less whatever you wanna have it. But if you look at it without any values the Quran is 'just' a book. A very revered and at the same time hated book with the power to move people. How we behave or what we do does not depend on the book but what we make of it, how it fits to our lives and experiences. It is not the book or the religion that leads to the outcomes that we observe today but our interactions over generations. Of course we need to discuss things. But why not try it this way:

Who is considered as innocent in Islam? => who is considered innocent?
Is a kaafir (infidel) an innocent in Islam (i.e. according to Islamic scriptures)? => How much do we need to respect the other persons world view?
What about abrogated verses in the Quran? => How should we deal with conflict?
What is Islam's view on homosexuals? => What is our view on people with different orientations? What is even our view of women in the society?

If you were really open to discuss those issues you would see that there is arguably much wickedness going on both sides... I could give you lengthy examples relating to non-religious examples in the West where the answers to these questions seem - let's call it - inconsistent.

Anyway, that is just my view and it is necessarily incomplete. You have already enriched it with me being more aware of some of the wickedness in the literal interpretation of the Quran and the feelings that this might cause on both sides. I don't think that this a showstopper, though, it makes things more difficult - as a first step we would still need to demonstrate that 'infidels' are not a threat anymore. That we respect the religion and acknowledge and appreciate the insights in the Quran and also that allah does exist (in their reality)... As I write it like this I know it must read to you that I have lost my mind or that I am very naive. But then again, isn't also naive to think that things will magically get better if we keep on doing what we have been doing? Why not give it a chance? The result might surprise you. :)