I'm sure I've read things by Richard Dawkins in which he says that he has much more sympathy for religious fundamentalists than he does for religious liberals, because at least the fundamentalists recognise that faith and reason are opposed, whereas the liberals want to have it both ways. However, he seems not to recognise that this doesn't exactly put him in good company. I'd agree that the extremists on both sides have more in common with each other than they do with the moderates on their own sides - as is so often the case. After all, soldiers on opposing sides in a battle are in agreement on pretty much everything, including the belief that there's a war going on in the first place. They just happen to be on opposite sides of that war. They would be united in their disagreement with anyone who denies that there's a war at all.