If Randall Amster's column about religion sought to give a lesson in hyperbole, he succeeded. But I don't think that was his intent. While I am reluctant to guess what his intent was, it appeared to me that he was trying to equate radical Islam's jihad to behead all those who do not convert to the vast majority of rodeo patrons who liked the invocation and expressed the opinion that the atheist who took offense shouldn't attend the rodeo.
Amster's article didn't succeed because logically-thinking people see no moral equivalence between the act of beheading those that won't convert to the fanatic's religion and telling those offended by an expression of religion at a public event they don't have to attend the event.
R.F. "Buz" Williams