Goldberg v. Sullivan, Round 2

Jonah posts another response to Sullivan this morning. Makes me wish that he hadn't been in such a hurry. But anyway...

Sullivan responds to Goldberg's post from yesterday with: I wrote "Christian fundamentalism" not Christianity; and I wrote "open and proud homosexuality", not just homosexuality. I completely agree that the murderous threat of Islamist fundamentalism is far graver than the threat of Christian fundamentalism. (Although it's worth noting that America's recent domestic terrorism has come from the extreme right, and that Erik Rudolph, a Christian fundamentalist terrorist, specifically targeted gays for murder.) But I also believe that the war against Islamic fundamentalism is indeed linked to the struggle against similar extremists within Christianity. We are in a global war for secular society, in which the search for religious truth is and must be protected but religious truth is not and must not be the basis of a political order. The external enemies of such secularism are far worse than the internal ones. But their ultimate mindset remains the same. It has always struck me as odd that some of those most opposed to Islamist fundamentalism are completely untroubled by the Christian variety. Or maybe Hitch and I are the only ones to see a connection.

"The external enemies of such secularism are far worse than the internal ones." I'm with you so far.

"But their ultimate mindset remains the same." Huh? First off, what is the mindset that he refers to? Secondly, why no elaboration as to exactly how the mindset is similar to what fuels Islamic fundamentalism?

"It has always struck me as odd that some of those most opposed to Islamist fundamentalism are completely untroubled by the Christian variety." Why? As Sim so articulately states, the comparison between the two is nonsensical and should be obvious to anyone who spends more than a minute looking at the question.

Can Andrew point us to pastorates that celebrate and encourage the handi-work of such as Erik Rudolph? How many of the James Dobson's and Ralph Reed's stand in their leadership capacity and condone such acts? None. Zero. Nil.

While on the other-hand Wahabbist mosques proudly and loudly promote the kind of violent means-to-an-end that even Andrew decries. Yet Christian fundamentalists, at the end of the day, are just as dangerous?

"Or maybe Hitch and I are the only ones to see a connection." Apparently so.