What I mean is, if LN's lack of redundancy allows for hacks and cheating transactions or some kind of weak link... wouldn't it weaken bitcoin, in general?
In a technical sense, no, because LN is specifically
not Bitcoin. It's a different protocol with a different security model. LN isn't for value storage; it isn't for permanent censorship-resistant transactions. That's what the Bitcoin blockchain is for. In fact, LN leverages Bitcoin's redundancy in the case of dishonest actors -- the blockchain is used to arbitrate disputes.
People will lose money from bitcoin because LN was hacked in some way, and they won't blame LN... it'll just fall on bitcoin. That's how the media and people's minds work. There will be headlines like: "For the first time, Bitcoin gets hacked" or whatever. You know how FUD operates.
You're laying it on a bit thick. Sure, growing pains for LN would encourage some FUD for Bitcoin since it's often touted as the ultimate scaling solution. No big deal, though.
But if LN's ledger system is as infallible as bitcoin's, then I guess there's nothing to worry about.
It's not, but that's irrelevant. The Bitcoin blockchain entails the entire mining infrastructure and redundant transaction storage. Lightning doesn't. They shouldn't be judged as one and the same.