Way to dodge the question, bigot.
The Qu'ran is no more violent than the Bible, so you complaining about one and not the other is the very definition of bigotry.
OK - I'm not a christian but I'll do my best to answer. There are two diferent views on the bible in Christianity, Sola Scriptura and Sola fide. Sola fide (as practiced by catholics and orthodox) says that the bible does not give a clear complete and unabiguous message but must be interpreted by faith, divine revelations to certain limited people (e.g pope in catholicism), and tradition. To these christians it would not matter even if the bible contained commands to kill unbeleievers, take sex slaves, etc (it doesn't) as long as the pope or a tradition said it was wrong.
For christians following sola scripture it is a universally held belief that the new testament represents a new covernent. Hence in any contradiction between teh two the new testament takes precidence. So for them all the "turn the other cheek" guff invalidates the accounts of violence in the old testament.
Now for the Jewish interpretation I am really out of my depth, but my understanding is that they see the bible as a historic account of a maturing understanding of God, and that the accounts of the old testament show a young and impetuous race jumping to conclusions. (If anyone can correct or explain this further I'd appreciate it).
A final point - there certainly were some other religions that were violent too - the aztecs in later times spring to mind. personally I don't hold with the Muslim apologists view that if someone else has behaved badly then its OK for them to do it.