Does this strike you as fair?

I’m attempting to summarize the Harris-Dawkins case for religion causing war. Does this sound correct? If not, please suggest a correction:

1.Religion causes division between people.

2.Religion provides the dominent label by which divided groups of people identify each other.

3.Wars are fought between divided groups of people with different labels.

4.Therefore, religion is the root cause of war.

I’m also looking to create an analogy for it to demonstrate its silliness to the non-logical. If you have any ideas, fire away. I constructed one about birds eating fish, but something isn’t quite right about it and I’m not sure what.