If one is careful to distinguish between people and ideas (Muslims vs. Islam), I think there's an awful lot that you can objectively criticize about the tenets of Islam, without comparing it to other religions or delving into racism (Islam is a set of ideas, not a race).
Muhammad was a murderer, a warlord, and a pedophile. [Muhammad said] “Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah. Do not be deceitful with the spoils; do not be treacherous, nor mutilate nor kill children.” (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992). He consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was only 9 years old! Though he was clearly a charismatic and great leader, I must question his position as role model.
Islam also does very little to prohibit murder. The only passage I have heard to this effect is Quran 5:32, which states: "“If anyone slays a person, it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people." This is, of course, ambiguous at best and conflicts with other passages of the book, such as Quran 8:60 "Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies and others besides, whom ye may not know."
There are many other passages in the Quran which are relevant, but in the interest of brevity, I'll omit them here.
Even the practical history of Islam is littered with violence (I am aware that Christianity has a great deal of horrible events in its history. In keeping with my thesis of examining Islam independent of other religions, I will ignore Christianity). Mecca and Medina were functionally conquered at the point of a sword. This was the pattern of Islamic expansion until the Moorish armies were turned back by Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours in 732.
Islam even includes a sharply detailed philosophy of conquest, including developing the concepts of Dhimmis (conquered infidels under Islamic rule) and the Jizya (a tax paid by conquered infidels to the Islamic overlords...that is, unless the conquered wish to become Muslim). Concepts such as these helped make Islamic expansion one of the more successful sustained military campaigns of the last two thousand years. Combine this with the fact that Islam prescribes the death penalty for apostasy (converting away from Islam), and it's no wonder that most countries with Islamic majorities have almost no protected religious minorities.
In the modern age, one can anecdotally see that Islam conflicts with its neighbors everywhere it has neighbors. In western China, the Uyghurs are a constant thorn in the side of the Han majority, with violent riots in 2009 causing the internet in the country to shut down briefly. In Egypt, the Coptic Christians are more and more frequently being violently attacked. Pakistan has executed many people under ethically reprehensible laws regarding blasphemy. These kinds of conflicts are rare between other religions. Buddhists committing suicide bombings against Christians? Hindu blasphemy laws carrying the death penalty in India? Adherents of Shinto declaring a fatwa of violence against Daoists? These things are unheard of.
Until Islam opens itself up to correction, until the bad parts of Mohammed's character are openly reviled, until the Jizya and Dhimmis are but embarrassing relics of a forgotten past, until apostasy does not carry the death penalty in Saudi Arabia, until there is no country where you can be killed for preaching the modern relevance of Buddha or the Tao Te Ching, Islam cannot command my respect. Muslims have my respect by virtue of our common humanity, and I would never advocate violence, oppression, or discrimination against them. However, I stand philosophically opposed to Islam.
