Sorry but I'm failing to see your point. It's all meaningless unless you can compare it to the number of Christian conquests which I'm sure far exceed those of the Islamic world.
Also I can quote a stuffton of offensive Bible verses. You complain that the Quran is anti-gay, so is the Bible. Would you say that Episcopalians aren't real Christians for accepting gay marriage? Seems perfectly acceptable to me to look at a religious text and say that it mirrored the viewpoints of the time and must be adjusted for a new age, like everything else.
show me intentional religious christian genocides that weren't catholics killing protestants. show me your offensive new-testament bible verses (which i will agree are a thing), and consider if they're really just as bad as offensive qu'ran verses.
the new world was genocided by disease and the european ideas of tribals being savages. most missionaries in the new world spread christendom peacefully when they could. the expansion of russia against the ex-mongol turkic peoples was basically just a forget you for the expansion of mongolia against the ex-kievan rus' slavic peoples.
and yes europe did conquer the world. but consider this: europe had the best technology and its militant ideologies were due to having to deal with eachother and the islamic world. christ never said "hey jews. worship me and then put china in your sphere of influence lol remove kebab"
btw im an atheist but i just simply don't see a habitual violence in modern christendom like you do in the modern islamic world. they need a schism, just like christianity did, before western ideals and modern liberty can truly spread
