As the newest member of Barbara Walters’ chat show “The View,” Rosie O’Donnell in a discussion of the events of September 11, 2001, stated that “radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam.” She actually received applause from the studio audience upon making this statement.

 

Most of you have some idea of my views on this topic, I’m interested to know what you all think.

 

Is old Rosie out in orbit, or is she right on the money?

As the newest member of Barbara Walters’ chat show “The View,” Rosie O’Donnell in a discussion of the events of September 11, 2001, stated that “radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam.” She actually received applause from the studio audience upon making this statement.

 

Most of you have some idea of my views on this topic, I’m interested to know what you all think.

 

Is old Rosie out in orbit, or is she right on the money?

I dont hear of radical Christians out cutting peoples heads off.

I dont hear of radical Christians out cutting peoples heads off.

 

No - well, at least, not in this century.

 

Make no mistake - I'm not attacking Christianity (or any other faith, for that matter), but let's not forget that EVERY organized religion has had followers that have done some incredible things in the name of God:

1) The Crusades

2) The Spanish Inquisition (with tortures that are off of the charts)

3) The bombing of abortion clinics

4) The bombing of black churches in the south (killing four of the most innocent little girls that have ever been martyred - for any cause)

 

Now, in answer to FB's question, yes, I think Rosie has gone too far in her attempt to compare the current state of these two religions (Islam and Chrisitianity).

 

Let me ask this of you now, Fastbreak - in your opinion, would the followers of Christianity be justified in attempting to wipe Islam from the face of the earth? I'm not speaking in the abstract here - I'm asking you if you believe that under the current circumstances, Christians should literally try to eliminate every Muslim from the face of the earth?

 

If we understand that the KKK, David Koresh, Pat Robertson, Jim Jones, Torquemada, James Kopp, and Eric Rudolph don't speak for Christianity, then I would think that we are capable of understanding that the extremists from the faith of Islam do not speak for all of its followers.

 

 

 

Frances

She's right on the money if the show was about the Spanish Inquisition or the Crusades.

She's right on the money if the show was about the Spanish Inquisition or the Crusades.

 

 

I think it's obvious that her point was that EXTREMISTS from any religion are "threatening". I don't think you could find many black people that lived in Birmingham in 1963 that would argue with the point. Terrorism is terrorism - putting the mask of a religion (any religion) on it does not change that fact. Simply because the majority of the people that live in this country are Christians does not absolve us of our past, nor does having a short memory wipe the slate clean.

 

For my money, the biggest difference is that Christians (as a whole) are capable of denouncing the atrocities that are committed in the name of God than the average Muslim would appear to be.

 

My biggest problem with Islam right now isn't that they have extremists, but the fact that the followers that don't embrace this "jihad of the day" mentality don't openly denounce the terrorists. If they do speak out against them, it is only quietly, and without any teeth.

 

In America, when you shoot a doctor because he performs abortions, we still put you on trial when we catch you, and you don't get extra credit for claiming that you killed in the name of God. The same is definitiely not true in the countries that are heavily influenced by Islam.

 

 

Frances

Any "extremist" is dangerous in either their actions, their words, or their thoughts. So, by definition, exteme (or radical) Christians would be dangerous in various ways.

I think rosie's butter slipped off her biscuit alonggggggg time ago

No - well, at least, not in this century.

 

I must have missed the part where Rosie excluded this century.

Any "extremist" is dangerous in either their actions, their words, or their thoughts. So, by definition, exteme (or radical) Christians would be dangerous in various ways.

 

Socrates, Jesus Christ, Galileo, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Frederick Douglas, and Martin Luther King were all radicals in their day. So were Henry VIII, Karl Marx, V.I. Lenin, Adolph Hitler, and Osama Bin Laden. Strictly speaking, being a radical means you advocate drastic change and says nothing about whether that drastic change is for good or evil.

Socrates, Jesus Christ, Galileo, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Frederick Douglas, and Martin Luther King were all radicals in their day. So were Henry VIII, Karl Marx, V.I. Lenin, Adolph Hitler, and Osama Bin Laden. Strictly speaking, being a radical means you advocate drastic change and says nothing about whether that drastic change is for good or evil.

 

"Good" and "evil" are relative terms, when it comes to spreading ones religious views to others that don't share them. Rosie (and CSHS) weren't talking about people that view God, religion, or the world in a radically new way. They were talking about extremists, not radicals. The extremism that is being referred to here, is the use of violence and terrorism to force ones views of God (and what one thinks God wants) onto people that don't share that particular point of view.

 

 

Frances

"Good" and "evil" are relative terms, when it comes to spreading ones religious views to others that don't share them. Rosie (and CSHS) weren't talking about people that view God, religion, or the world in a radically new way. They were talking about extremists, not radicals. The extremism that is being referred to here, is the use of violence and terrorism to force ones views of God (and what one thinks God wants) onto people that don't share that particular point of view.

 

 

Frances

 

So what modern-day Christian "extremists" are we hearing about these days that Rosie might be referring to?

Some of the democratic strategists interviewed and asked about her comments were very troubled. They claim that moderates who are undecided about the upcoming election and are straddling the fence may be turned off by remarks like this. These strategists are worried because Rosie wears her political beliefs on her sleeve and some people might equate her views to those of other liberals. They raise a good point imo.

 

Rosie used to be a skilled comedian. Now, it seems that her cynicism has taken over her very being.

Socrates, Jesus Christ, Galileo, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Frederick Douglas, and Martin Luther King were all radicals in their day. So were Henry VIII, Karl Marx, V.I. Lenin, Adolph Hitler, and Osama Bin Laden. Strictly speaking, being a radical means you advocate drastic change and says nothing about whether that drastic change is for good or evil.

 

When mentioning Marx or Lenin in evil I assume are trying to equivocate communism with evil? Marx was a social philsopher who was observing the industrial revolution in Europe so I am not quite sure where you get that on his case. If we are going by what the result OF Lenin's revolution was under Stalin then I suppose I can agree with you on that account. As it was Lenin was dead before the true slaughter began in Russia.

Some of the democratic strategists interviewed and asked about her comments were very troubled. They claim that moderates who are undecided about the upcoming election and are straddling the fence may be turned off by remarks like this. These strategists are worried because Rosie wears her political beliefs on her sleeve and some people might equate her views to those of other liberals. They raise a good point imo.

 

Rosie used to be a skilled comedian. Now, it seems that her cynicism has taken over her very being.

 

 

I agree that it is a valid point. Unfortunately for the Dems, some of their proponents who have a soapbox are extremely thin skinned and say things that may rub the majority of America the wrong way. Not to say that the Republicans don't have similar issues.

1) The Crusades

2) The Spanish Inquisition (with tortures that are off of the charts)

3) The bombing of abortion clinics

4) The bombing of black churches in the south (killing four of the most innocent little girls that have ever been martyred - for any cause)

From an historical viewpoint, these things did happen, and I’m certain that those so involved felt they were doing the Lord’s business. On the other hand, I defy anyone to find one single teaching in which Jesus Christ genuinely… or even remotely advocated violence as a means of propagating the Gospel.

Let me ask this of you now, Fastbreak - in your opinion, would the followers of Christianity be justified in attempting to wipe Islam from the face of the earth? I'm not speaking in the abstract here - I'm asking you if you believe that under the current circumstances, Christians should literally try to eliminate every Muslim from the face of the earth?

No.

 

The significant difference IMO is that radical Islamo-fascists are willing to sacrifice themselves and their children to kill others while Radical Christians as defined by Jesus Christ are willing to sacrifice themselves to save others.