The comparison? That both recognize that there is a tension between the way of God (Allah) and the ways of the world or mankind. I pointed out that jihad means, basically, "striving in the way of God".
Of course, someone like that man hears the word "jihad" and thinks a suicide bomber is right around the corner. He would also denounce--rightly, I believe--a fatwa calling for the murder of somoene deemed an infidel. The difference, though, is that I would abhor the killing but he would hate the one who ordered it.
More accurately, he would be upset at the use of the word "fatwa", just he went ballistic over "jihad". I wonder, though, how he feels about an American president's order to kill someone he deems an enemy of this country or a governor's order to execute someone deemed guilty of a particular crime.
I pondered this question after reading the resolution Denny Burk proposed to the Southern Baptist Convention. Burk teaches Biblical Studies at Boyce College, the undergraduate division of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. In many ways, it's just a long-winded version of the "love the sinner, hate the sin" argument you hear from those who use cherry-picked Bible verses (or merely their own religious ideas) to rationalize their homophobia and transphobia.
But the last part of the resolution is what makes it as dangerous as any order to kill issued by an Ayatollah:
RESOLVED, That we oppose efforts to alter one’s bodily identity (e.g., cross-sex hormone therapy, gender reassignment surgery) to refashion it to conform with one’s perceived gender identity; and be it further