Reply #33: well I will be completely honest here

[sui generis]

not to put myself up for flaming. I have been an atheist my entire adult life and so I automatically bypass reading the CSM or anything I might even remotely construe to be associated with religion - let's be honest there are every kind of news input out there, so my personal "filter" is avoid it if it has ANY overt relationship to anything religious in any way, and the title is enough for me. That may be both principled and irrational at the same time, I understand, but that's an entirely different discussion.

So that takes care of explaining my personal bias against them, whether they are a great news organization or not. If CNN or the major news networks started adding "christian" to their title, I would likewise stop listening to them, just as I don't listen to Fox, however rational or irrational that is.

But enough about me - if I don't distinguish for my own possibly irrational reasons, why would somebody on the street in Baghdad distinguish?

I'll revise my opinion about her particular case based on the level headed responses here, but as someone who honestly has a dislike of christian missionary and evangelical goals (actually not limited to christians!), it does bother me that every single person who makes the news as an abductee has "christian" mentioned in the same breath by the news and it's starting to seem like a pattern.

I'm not trying to change anyone's mind about anything here - just explaining my own view.