Here's why:
* It's a statement, not a question: The sentence structure suggests a statement of fact, but the intent is likely to emphasize that terrorism is not tied to any specific religion.
* Ambiguity: The sentence could be interpreted as saying that terrorism itself is not a religion. This is not the intended meaning.
To clarify the intent, you could rephrase the sentence in several ways:
* "Terrorism is not a religion." This clearly states that terrorism is not a religious concept.
* "Terrorism has no religious basis." This emphasizes that terrorism is not justified by any religion.
* "Terrorism transcends religious boundaries." This highlights that terrorism is not limited to any particular religion.
Choosing the best rephrased sentence depends on the context and the specific message you want to convey.