It's not that Henry VIII is the only king people heard of.
Well, I often get that impression. Him and George III (who was NOT a "tyrant"!).
He was a staunch "Defender of the Faith" until he decided that the pope was invalid and created a schism and a bloodline that oppressed Catholicism for hundreds of years.
Henry VIII did not "create a bloodline"; he had no grandchildren, and all British monarchs since 1603 have been descendants of his sister Margaret. Of those, Charles I was married to a Catholic and inclined towards toleration of Catholics, murdered partly because he was too catholic for the Puritans; Charles II also married a Catholic and converted to Catholicism on his deathbed; James II converted much earlier and was overthrown on account of his Catholicism. George III granted toleration to the Catholics of Quebec. Since Catholic Emancipation in 1829, no British monarch can be fairly accused of oppressing Catholics in England, Wales, or Scotland.
Look at the problems created in Ireland and Scotland alone because of him
Not exactly. The Irish/English problem is quite complex and actually goes back long before Henry VIII, to Henry II, who was encouraged by the pope
to conquer Ireland.
As for Scotland, that had nothing
to do with Henry VIII; Scotland was still an independent country during the "Reformation," becoming Protestantized largely as a result of the efforts of the Calvinist John Knox, an enemy of the Catholic Mary Queen of Scots.
Well for one thing when is the last time a Catholic Religious in America was burned on the rack or drawn and quartered for being a Catholic?
Come on, that doesn't happen in the European monarchies either, and hasn't for a long time. And there has been plenty of anti-Catholic prejudice in the U.S. The only reason it diminished was that American Catholics were desperate to prove they could be "good Americans," and compromised the fullness of their faith in the process.