Gingrich fears atheist country dominated by radical Muslims

[bobalot]

Gingrich fears atheist country dominated by radical Muslims

By Dan Gilgoff, CNN.com Religion Editor

Hours after declaring Sunday that he expects to be running for president within a month, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said he's worried the United States could be “a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists,” in the foreseeable future, according to Politico.

Gingrich was addressing Cornerstone Church, a megachurch in San Antonio, Texas, led by the Rev. John Hagee, an influential leader among American evangelicals. Hagee's endorsement of then-presidential candidate John McCain in 2008 was plagued by controversy.

McCain ultimately rejected the endorsement over remarks Hagee had made about the Holocaust, in which he appeared to say that Adolf Hitler had been fulfilling God's will by hastening the desire of Jews to return to Israel, in accordance with biblical prophecy.

"God says in Jeremiah 16: 'Behold, I will bring them the Jewish people again unto their land that I gave to their fathers. ... Behold, I will send for many fishers, and after will I send for many hunters. And they the hunters shall hunt them.' That would be the Jews,” Hagee had said in an earlier sermon.

“Then God sent a hunter,” his sermon continued. “A hunter is someone who comes with a gun, and he forces you. Hitler was a hunter."

McCain rejected Hagee’s endorsement of his campaign after learning about the comments in May 2008. "Obviously, I find these remarks and others deeply offensive and indefensible, and I repudiate them,” McCain said at the time.

Hagee then withdrew his endorsement of the Arizona senator, which he had offered three months earlier.

One irony of McCain rejecting Hagee’s endorsement over his Holocaust remarks is that the Texas evangelist leads the Christian Zionist movement. Hagee is founder and national chairman of Christians United for Israel, which features Elie Wiesel and other Holocaust survivors at its events.

Here’s what Gingrich said at Cornerstone Church on Sunday evening, according to Politico:

"I have two grandchildren: Maggie is 11; Robert is 9," Gingrich said at Cornerstone Church here. "I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they're my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American."

The former House Speaker held up his own faith (he converted to Catholicism two years ago) as proof of his undying patriotism. He lashed out at the college professors and mainstream media he says are seeking to wipe out the Founding Fathers' Christian values. And he targeted the judges who he charges are effectively re-writing the Constitution.

But Gingrich was mum on his own controversial past, one of martial indiscretions and divorces that have made courting religious conservatives a tall task as he nears a likely presidential run.

Gingrich’s church appearance comes amid a broader campaign to court religious conservatives.

On Monday, Hagee released a statement praising Gingrich's appearance at Cornerstone. “It was such a great honor to welcome Mr. Gingrich to our church, and hear him describe the centrality of faith in our nation,” he said.

The statement also included praise for Hagee and his wife, Diana, from Gingrich.

“It was truly an honor to be with John and Diana at Cornerstone," Gingrich said. "Their dedication to serve is inspirational.”

Please keep in mind, this guy is considered one of the intellectuals of the Republican party.

[Hillary]

Simply playing to the gallery. All the congregation will hear is "Secular", "Atheist", "Islamists" = bad and "American", "Christian", "Patriot" = good and will instantly be motivated to vote Republican.

Expect increasing amounts of this sort of shit for the next 18 months.

[wautd]

“a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists,”

I'm impressed. It's hard to look dumber than Palin but it seems some politicians are trying hard to set the bar even lower.

[PeZook]

You know, I somehow find this dumber:

"I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they're my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American."

I have no understanding what it once meant to be a Pole. Does it mean I live in some horrible dystopia?

[Guardsman Bass]

This is typical for Gingrich, and you see it in his books as well (I read To Save America out of curiosity a few months ago). He'll string together all kinds of positions, some of them contradictory, because each of them independently hits some key political point for a potential audience.

[Crossroads Inc.]

If I may... If you look at this through the "logic" of the far right, it DOES Make sense...

If the country became dominated by evil Atheists, and the good moral christians where no more, then it would leave the door open for the country to be taken over by Radical Islamists!
It actually feeds back into the far rights belief that the ONLY thing keeping us from being overpowered by the evil Islam's, are good God fearing Christians! if the country was to become atheists, why, we would become a Caliphate in no time!

[lance]

You see athiests are spineless cowards who know their going to hell when they die for not believing in god. So the Muslims are going to run ramshod all over them.

[paladin]

“a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists,”

I'm impressed. It's hard to look dumber than Palin but it seems some politicians are trying hard to set the bar even lower.

Sounds like Newt has been talking to Glenn Beck about the "supposed" Caliphate threat.

With Michele Bachmann entering the race for the Republican presidential nomination, the bar will be set very low for looking dumb.

[Zed]

If I may... If you look at this through the "logic" of the far right, it DOES Make sense...

If the country became dominated by evil Atheists, and the good moral christians where no more, then it would leave the door open for the country to be taken over by Radical Islamists!
It actually feeds back into the far rights belief that the ONLY thing keeping us from being overpowered by the evil Islam's, are good God fearing Christians! if the country was to become atheists, why, we would become a Caliphate in no time!

No, it has to do with the same identity politics that you find in Europe at the moment. The idea is that the multicultural society has failed, and that secularism doesn't provide sufficient defenses against Islamist infringement on people's liberties. Examples often cited are how Muslim women are pressured into wearing the veil, the (violent) protests against the Danish cartoons that seek to limit freedom of speech, and the fact that secular groups tend to have lower birth rates than deeply religious groups, which demographically favours the latter. In order to limit these Islamist advances, it is supposedly necessary to return more strongly to one's cultural heritage, in the form of (depending on whom one is talking to) 'Judeo-Christian values' or 'the values of the Enlightenment', thus fostering a stronger sense of identity that can resist these Islamist pressures.

The argument is coherent to some extent, even if you don't agree with it (and I don't.)

[Crossroads Inc.]

Isn't that rather what I said, but rationalized out?

I mean, you kind of just said that a secular multicultural society will invariably lead to one dominated by radical Islamics.

[Zed]

Your depiction of the argument made the argument seem crazy and nonsensical. My depiction of the argument made it seem reasonable. I take it as a rule of thumb to assume that the opponents I debate are reasonable rather than crazy and nonsensical. People with crazy and nonsensical ideas can't be convinced anyhow, so it's better to assume that people have reasons for what they believe - otherwise debate is pointless.

Once you actually understand the position the reasonable people among your opponents hold, it's possible to start challenging them more effectively, without effectively diabolizing your opponents (which is never going to be any help in convincing anyone) or making their arguments into straw men (as your inclusion of words like 'invariably' do).