Is it or isn't it?

Harris's argument is about "most believers" (who don't want to know about theological nuances).

Yes those, and it also could include the practice of withholding lifesaving medical treatment due to religious conviction.

Or even something like inducing guilt over sexuality.

I must say though, I think good people do bad things all the time, and vice versa in spite of, because of, and without any relationship to religion.

Are you referring to the topic adequately discussed in this thread?
http://able2know.org/topic/81075-1

Are you saying I have been to tough on RR?

Don't know what you're referring to. Certainly wasn't aimed at you.
I just think it's one of those fairly defined points of difference between good Christians (Muslims, some others) and good non-Christians. I think a good many youth suicides could be avoided through eliminating church induced (or lifestyle induced if that's your side) guilt.

Yes, the JW's quirkiness about blood is included, but there are also the Christian Scientists and many smaller Christian groups that promote faith healing over conventional medicine.

Oddly enough, the mainstream media (here at least) seem quite comfortable, perhaps even excited that a single "act" of faith healing, which she managed to accomplish long after her death, is allowing the canonization of Mary MacKillop.