Clearly you’re right. But you’re right because since the Enlightenment European Christianity has submitted to ideas of tolerance of other religions and separation of church and state.

Is it surprising that many Americans should be protective of these concepts?

Left by Preston on September 13th, 2006 at 9:50 am

I seem to remember abortion clinics being bombed in the name of Christianity. That seemed to be extreme, and certainly a comparison to car bombings by Muslims.

Left by Garcia on September 13th, 2006 at 11:44 am

And yet a google search for “abortion clinic bombed” turned up only 284 hits — almost every single one of them pointing to info about serial bomber Eric Rudolph.

Yeah, I can see how one lone whacko (who’s abortion clinic bombings all took place 10 years ago) can be compared to the daily bombings, beheadings, and other terror acts committed be Islamists.

Quick guess: When was the last abortion clinic bombing? Answer: ten years ago.

When was the last Islamist terror bombing? There’s probably one occuring this very moment.

Why does the Left have such difficulty with moral equivalence?

Left by Robbie on September 13th, 2006 at 12:07 pm

Done with the View. Barbara Walters really screwed up. I predict she is off the air within a year. There is no way Elizabeth (of the View) will put up with this. Sometimes you have to draw the line and the line just turned into the Grand Canyon…Rosie…you did it to yourself..Barabara..I thought you were smarter than that…alas

Left by dianne on September 13th, 2006 at 12:12 pm

[...]That’s weird, because I can’t even remember the last time some reporters were forced to convert to radical Mormonism at gun point, nor do I remember the last time some crazed Presbyterian threatened to saw a hostage’s head off if his demand weren’t met. … [...]

Left by Tailrank - Five Years On, take 2 on September 13th, 2006 at 11:29 pm

Right on, Robbie.

…”thereligionofpeace.com” monitors terrorist acts. The list is updated *daily*.

Left by Christina on September 13th, 2006 at 11:48 pm

Eric Rudolph has stated that he is not a Christian and that his criminal acts had nothing to do with Christianity.

Left by Anonymous on September 14th, 2006 at 7:36 am

I’m not a Christian, but still even I recognize there is a big difference between radical Muslims and Christians. Even the worse Christians, such as Fred Phelps, barely begin to be as obnoxous, bloodthirsty, or unreasonably dangerous as the typical fundamentalist Muslim. Even so-called moderate Muslims are arguably more intolerant than Christians such as Falwell or Dobson.

As for O’Donnell, she is so far out of the mainstream of American thought and philosoph, there really is no need to take her that seriously, or to get that upset by her. I know it’s hard to keep from it though.

Left by Patrick Kelley on September 14th, 2006 at 9:09 am

Right on, Patrick.

But I’d like to know what your definition of “reasonably dangerous”would be.

Left by Preston on September 14th, 2006 at 9:18 am

[...] A Challenge to Rosie O’Donnell Number of comments: 9 Rosie O’Donnell thinks that “Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America.” [...]

Left by BlogNetNews.com » Texas » Conservative on September 14th, 2006 at 9:54 am

Preston-Anybody can be dangerous, if they feel like they have just cause, or if they feel they or their families or loved ones, etc., are in danger. But most people can be reasoned with, to a point, as long as you demonstrate good faith and a willingness to address their concerns.

In my view, radical Muslims can not be reasoned with, therefore I contend that they are unreasonably dangerous. There just is no compromising with them in any way, and it is dangerous and actually foolish to make the attempt. They have already demonstrated a cruelty, vicousness, and vindictiveness towards their enemies, both real and perceived ones, that clearly show them to have a mindset I can only describe as remarkable in the severity of it’s brutality.

I consider myself, unlike most people that comment on this blog, to be for the most part liberal. I have some conservative beliefs, but in most matters, I consider myself as far to the left as they come. That includes a basic belief in civil rights, womens rights, gay rights, and a lot of other things. Yes, I am what most people here would consider a “moonbat”.

Yet, this is precisely the reason that, anytime I look into the face of a Muslim-even most so-called moderates-I find myself filled with revulsion. I find nothing in their religion or philosophy or outlook towards the world that is in the least bit commendable. In fact, they stand firmly against everything I am for, and are for almost everything I am against.

So I guess you can sum it all up this way. The liberal part of me finds them repugnant and I am not in the least bit interested in helping them or defending them in any way. Both the conservative and liberal parts of me makes me want to keep them the hell out of this country, and do whatever else is necessary to minimize their influence both here and in the rest of the world, by any means possible.

Left by Patrick Kelley on September 14th, 2006 at 3:38 pm

Regarding abortion clinics…who do you think ends up prosecuting the rare occurances of abortion clinic bombings…Christians..

Left by Melissa on September 14th, 2006 at 8:25 pm

I have never seen such anger and hatred in a person. This lady needs help. I found nothing in what she said valid or worth pondering. Rosie is irresponsible and out-of-control. Poor Barbara is probably wondering how long the show will survive this major screw-up. I don’t see the View lasting very long with uninformed outbursts from Rosie on the state of the world. Rosie…..go to anger management or better yet ….. get off the air.

Left by Judy on September 14th, 2006 at 10:56 pm

In fact, they stand firmly against everything I am for, and are for almost everything I am against.
Though, collectively the Muslims of the world could in no way be labeled ‘liberal’ I think painting 1 billion with the same brush is a bit broad.

Left by Preston on September 15th, 2006 at 6:09 am

One attempt to understand Rosie O’Donnell:

Fundamentalist Christians have done much more to, for instance, keeping her from making medical decisions if her partner is the hospital or inheriting her property without undue legal process or taxation.

(Of course as a Hollywood celebrity she should be grateful she can’t get married thus avoids being Paul McCartneyed)

Left by Preston on September 15th, 2006 at 6:16 am

I think what Rosie was getting at is if you let the radical christian right take over and turn this country into the theocracy they want to create, then they will be just as bad.

Left by Anonymous on September 15th, 2006 at 10:17 am

Preston-I am not attemtping to paint all actually 1.3 billion Muslims with the same broad brush. They supplied the paint and the brush, and they apply the paint on just about a daily basis, either by their actions, or the lack thereof. Judging them by these facts, you can divide Muslims up into two major categories-

1. The roughly twenty percent that are either terrorists, or are terrorists supporters and/or sympathizers. This amounts to, by conservative estimates, roughly twenty percent of the overall Muslim population. If I am correct in my math, twenty percent of 1.3 billion people amounts to 260 million people. Not far from the overall total population of this country. Now that’s scary.

2. But what is almost as scary is the vast majority of the remaining eighty percent, who have absolutely no influence whatsoever, and who are therefore irrelevant. Because the truth of the matter is, you don’t know where they stand. One thing that is obvious though, is that if the other twenty percent gained total control of the world tomorrow, they wouldn’t raise any objections.

All this is because of the religous leaders. They are raised from birth to be “submissive” to their religion-which means their religous leaders. To not make waves, to not protest-just go along with what they are told. That’s why you seldom and rarely hear any objections from them now. And the vast, vast majority of the time that you do, it is when their own have been attacked by the terrorists, such as what recently happenned in Jordan, and Egypt. Almost never will you hear or see them raise any objections when an atrocity is committed against a group of “infidels”-non-Muslims.

When you see large groups of people demonstrating en masse and calling for the destruction of an entire continent becasue somebody drew a cartoon, you know you are dealing with some sick fucks.

Left by Patrick Kelley on September 15th, 2006 at 11:24 am

When you see large groups of people demonstrating en masse and calling for the destruction of an entire continent becasue somebody drew a cartoon, you know you are dealing with some sick fucks.

Truly.

The sad thing is that if the Palestinians had simply followed the examples of Gandhi or MLK they would have had their state by now.

Left by Preston on September 15th, 2006 at 11:40 am

I want to know what the difference is between what Mel Gibson said WEEKS ago (and we haven’t heard the end of it) and what Rosie O’Donnell said last week (and it’s already dying away) — Oh, sorry, I know the answer: Mel was DRUNK when he said what he said!!!

Left by Anonymous on September 17th, 2006 at 11:21 pm

The difference between what Mel said and what Rosie said was the time and place they did so. Rosie was full well making a public statement of her opinions on National Television.

Left by Laurie on September 20th, 2006 at 11:34 am

rosie showing her child in bullets guess next she will show her how to be a lesbian.

Left by bill on June 27th, 2007 at 2:01 pm