Forced into either Islam or Christianity TODAY 2012

[99percentatheism]

This is manily directed at Atheists and Agnostics:

If you were forced by some sort of new social and political paradigm that arose IN TODAY'S WORLD, that you MUST be either a Muslim or a Christian, in the scope of having to live in a structured religious way, which would YOU choose if you ONLY had that choice:

Islam, with it's two dominational structure Sunni or Shiite, or Christianity with its myriad of denominations?

Now remember, you MUST choose a religion based on the pronouncement that there is a declaration of God. So, you can't choose Unitarian Universalism as a "Christian" denomination.

[Bust Nak]

Islam, with it's two dominational structure Sunni or Shiite, or Christianity with its myriad of denominations?

Pretty easy choice, I choose non-denominational liberal Christianity, I can live pretty much the same as how I am living now.

[McCulloch]

This is mainly directed at Atheists and Agnostics:

That would be me!

If you were forced by some sort of new social and political paradigm that arose IN TODAY'S WORLD, that you MUST be either a Muslim or a Christian,

You mean in TODAY's world that has forgotten human rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
Article 18
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance only with the permission of the person and not by force.

There is “no coercion in religion� [Koran 2:256]

All men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion. [US Bill of Rights]

Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

1. freedom of conscience and religion;
2. freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
3. freedom of peaceful assembly; and
4. freedom of association.

[Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms]

Does not sound like TODAY's world to me. Does it to you?

in the scope of having to live in a structured religious way, which would YOU choose if you ONLY had that choice:

Islam, with it's two dominational structure Sunni or Shiite,

Not quite two only either, eh?

or Christianity with its myriad of denominations?

Now remember, you MUST choose a religion based on the pronouncement that there is a declaration of God. So, you can't choose Unitarian Universalism as a "Christian" denomination.

We couldn't become Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist or Sikh ? Why not ?

I'd look to emigrate from such a backward jurisdiction. Meanwhile associate myself with the most liberal branch of whatever is allowed. I would probably not be alone.

Is there a point or purpose to this question?

[Thatguy]

I'm having difficulty following the question. I have to choose either to be a Christian or to be a Muslem and whichever version of each I choose would have to believe in some sort of literal, personal God? So i couldn't choose the most liberal branches of either religion. And what we are getting at is whether a religion with lots of denominations is inherently better than one with just a couple of denominations?

That's what I think I'm being asked.

I'm not going to be happy having to pick between two religions I don't agree with. While on the face of it I might choose the one with more denominations, hoping to find a denomination that imposes the fewest requirements on my that I don't agree with but am being forced to espouse, I don't think number of denominations would really matter.

I know liberal Muslems who see their religion as boiling down basically to having respect for each other and being kind. I see Christians believing the same. That breakdown between humanistic practitioners and more fundamentalist practitioners seems to me to exist in either and I can find practitioners of either faith that I'd like to hang out with. In fact, i could find practitioners of either faith who I could hope to support me in my revolution to overthrow whatever regime forces people to adopt religions they don't believe in.

So my decision may boil down to which church or mosque is closest and which has the best picnics. The liberal Episcopalian church is nearest me and has the nicest architecture, so i might join that. The Unitarians and the well known liberalish mosque are about the same distance from me, but you've ruled out Unitarians. The Christian Scientists are second closest, but would probably impose more dogma on me, if I had to guess, so they are out. Get me the lunch menus of the mosque and the episcopalians and i'll get back to you. Or are they Presbyterians? I never can keep that straight.

[connermt]

This is manily directed at Atheists and Agnostics:

If you were forced by some sort of new social and political paradigm that arose IN TODAY'S WORLD, that you MUST be either a Muslim or a Christian, in the scope of having to live in a structured religious way, which would YOU choose if you ONLY had that choice:

Islam, with it's two dominational structure Sunni or Shiite, or Christianity with its myriad of denominations?

Now remember, you MUST choose a religion based on the pronouncement that there is a declaration of God. So, you can't choose Unitarian Universalism as a "Christian" denomination.

It would be best to research each one in detail to see which one you could get away with more - which one is more liberally pleasing.
In lieu of that, I'd say christianity simply because it seems more likely to be the one you could "fake" your way through the easiest.

[99percentatheism]

Thank you all for taking the time to answer. Although I thought there would be far more takers.

[preacher]

the asker only wish to know which will gain more sympathy between christianity and moslem. I'm quite sure he/she wishes to know if the behavior of one of the group which love to play "fireworks" will shift favoritism toward the other group. but that's just my guess. not necessarily reflect asker's true intention. I myself am a christian, so my choice couldn't be much clearer.

[McCulloch]

Thank you all for taking the time to answer. Although I thought there would be far more takers.

There might be more takers if you respond to the obvious deficiencies pointed out in the wording of the OP.