To think that the religion one identifies with is inherited in one's genome, and that it has nothing to do with belief or choice.
Similarly, the fact that Barack Obama’s father was a Muslim Kenyan, descended from a long line of Muslims, will remain true until the day he dies, and nothing he ever does in his life can change half of his genes that he inherited from his father. His genes are for keeps. The fact that he has attended Christian church for the past 20 years is not going to change that. Michael Jackson looked white much longer than Barack Obama sat in the pews of Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s church. Obama is still as (half) Muslim as the day he was born.Quite frankly, I find it embarrassing that a scholar would conflate what it means to be a Muslim with genetics. Kanazawa can define what it means to be a Muslim any way he wants, but if he doesn't define it as based on what one believes in, then he just isn't communicating well with the rest of us. If Kanazawa would have his way, there would be no need for missionaries and rules of death against apostasy. You could not convert to Christianity at all, then. Can I not be an atheist, because ancestors of mine were Christians, then?
Pure idiocy, if you ask me.
P.S. Given such views, I find it unsurprising that Kanazawa has elected not to allow comments on his blog.