I don't often concern myself with Rosie O'Donnell. She's an "actress" who I never found entertaining and who was given a platform on which to offer fairly simplistic political analysis - until she fucked it all up by melting down in a way that almost suggests mental illness. She "resigned" from the spotlight and hopefully will be one of those folks we rarely think of in the years to come.
One thing Rosie said though, which I think people shrugged off as crazy liberalism a little too quickly was (and I paraphrase) that "fundamentalist Christians are just as much a threat as fundamentalist Muslims." I don't know how Rosie meant for this comment to be taken, as I never watched her show. Christians who either watched The View or heard about her comments from their favorite right wing news source (the more likely choice) were outrageously offended. After all, Christians weren't killing American soldiers and broadcasting their deaths on YouTube. Christians weren't crashing planes into skyscrapers. Christians weren't killing apostates left and right. There is no way, according to these people, that these two types of fundamentalists are the same. Rosie is crazy.
Well, I don't want to disagree with the fact that Rosie is crazy - and if she was referring to the threat of terror with her statement, she's obviously way off base. But I think the concept that Christian fundamentalists and Muslim fundamentalists both pose a threat to our country (at least to the country I want to live in) has some merit.
What's needed, before I begin, are some definitions.
First of all, "fundamentalist." For the sake of this argument, a "fundamentalist" is anyone who believes that their holy book is the inerrant word of God. They believe that their book was literally penned or dictated by God on high and any deviation from the guidance of that book is "evil." In Christians, this means they hold such ludicrous beliefs as new Earth creationism and other ideas that require one to suspend all rational thought about science and logic. In Muslims, the beliefs would include the idea that martyrdom guarantees you 72 virgins in the afterlife. Fundamentalism in any religion means that regardless of a preponderance of evidence to prove that something may have happened according to a specific process, you deny the validity of that process if it doesn't correspond to the "word of God" as you understand it.
So, if you are a Muslim who recognizes that it might be wrong to stone a rape victim for having sex outside of marriage - you're probably not the fundamentalist I'm writing about. If you're a Christian who believes that evolution may explain how man came to be, but it doesn't explain who started the process - you're probably not the fundamentalist I'm writing about. Hopefully, you are one of the many moderates who belong to the religion who may reign in your crazy brethren. Please...hurry...
Another definition that needs to be made for the sake of this conversation, is what constitutes a "threat." What do we mean when we say that someone is a "threat" to us? For the sake of this conversation, the "threat" is going to be the potential for a group or individual to negatively affect our country (or again...the version of our country I want to live in). There are obviously various degrees of danger and magnitude to any threat.
Okay, back to my statement. Are "fundamentalist Christians are just as much a threat as fundamentalist Muslims?" I'd say yes they are. They're just a different kind of threat.
Fundamentalist Muslims (these are the ones referred to by increasingly popular but wildly inaccurate term "Islamofacist") are probably a much greater threat to my physical safety and the safety of my property than their Christian counterparts. Statistically speaking, if someone gets onto a plane with me and has somehow slipped through the highly competent TSA staff members with a vest made out of C-4 - that person is much more likely to be praying to Allah than he is to be reciting the Pater Noster. To deny this or temper this fact is to close your eyes and play peak-a-boo with reality. Fundamentalist Islam (again - not Islam as interpreted by its more rational followers) is the belief system that allows angry men to stone women, behead people, wage war against civilians, and hold entire societies hostage to their religious laws. So, if you're only concern is planes crashing into buildings, babies wired with explosives, or occasionally being taken hostage and subsequently beheaded - then there's no way in Hell fundamentalist Christians are a much a threat to our country as fundamentalist Muslims.
However, what are the odds of these people getting in a position to do this damage to me? There's been one MAJOR terrorist attack from a foreign source on U.S. soil in my entire lifetime (I guess we could debate what is "major," a "terrorist attack," or "U.S. soil"). So I don't really dedicate much of my time worrying about some terrorist walking in and blowing up the restaurant while I'm eating my lunchtime sushi. That's not to say that it wouldn't happen and that we shouldn't take precautions to stop it from happening. But, I generally feel that people who prattle on about a Post 9/11 mentality should really seek some counselling, or at least not mention that bullshit to me (Editor's Note. I do believe that people should prepare for the worst. You should have a normal, healthy state of awareness that should be driven by your desire to stay alive - not some some government instilled sense of paranoia that's constantly stroked by media sensationalists, political opportunists, and agenda driven assholes selling their talk shows). The fact is, the life of your average American is more affected by fat content of his or her breakfast than it is by Islamo-terrorism (unless you or your family member is off serving time in the desert...in which case you justifiably have no bigger concern right now).
So they're a threat, but they're not exactly a priority when it comes to stuff I worry about. But what about a threat not against my life itself, but instead to the quality of my life? Who's the bigger threat there? Well, fundie Muslims only affect my life by encouraging our power hungry politicians and their sheepish supporters to pass laws that curb my civil liberties. That effect is only caused tangentially though - as the overreacting idiocracy is the actual perpetrator of this activity and not the terrorist.
Right now, in America, the group of people who actively push their agenda into the political and social arena in such a way as to make me conform to their moral code are fundamentalist Christians. They're making sure that future scientists are taught to represent the magic of intelligent decent and to give credibility to the theory that the Earth is only about 6,000 years old. Their politicians are passing legislation to block research in certain scientific areas because nearly microscopic embryos (embryos that will otherwise be frozen indefinitely) may have been ensouled. They have an agenda to bring this country, my country, back to an era where it will be viewed as a Christian nation. Unable to do this from the pulpit alone, they'll use the Congress, the Presidency, and the Supreme Court to accomplish these goals.
Now, the 54% of our population (as reported in a 2004 Newsweek Poll) who believe that the Bible is the LITERAL WORD OF GOD (TM) are shaking their heads. They're saying "Tough shit, ZK. We've been living like this for years. We've had to deal with Roe v. Wade. We've had to deal with Hollywood's pornification of our entertainment industries. We've been driven out of schools. There's a freaking war against Christmas! We just want a fair shake." I would almost be tempted to agree with them.
It's hard to keep a good Christian way of life these days. It seems like society is intent on saying every immoral act you detest is okay. That's probably a slap in the face. But, with all of those evil secular influences creating the potential for exposure - fundamentalist Christians never actually had the state influence their lives the way they want it to influence my life. If the state allows some practice that is against the Christian religion, Christians are still free to not to engage in that practice.
For instance, Roe v. Wade made sure women had access to abortion. Abortion is a divisive topic. Under Roe v. Wade, those who oppose abortion can choose not to have one. They can try and tell people their opinions on the subject. They could help promote the alternatives. Hell, they apparently have the right to be complete tools and picket in front of clinics with pictures of fetuses and intimidate anyone coming or going from an abortion clinic. However, those who don't share these people's opinion and see the choice to reproduce as a right that woman can exercise still have access to the procedure. Neither party has had their rights curtailed.
Fundamentalist Christians, on the other hand, long for the day when no one CAN have an abortion, thus imposing their will on the half of the country that doesn't agree with them. And abortion is just one of the issues they feel this way on. These people lobby daily for laws to be passed, politicians to be elected, and appointments to be made that will make sure that their moral code is the only that can be followed. Where as Christians can lead a perfectly Christian life under a legal code constructed by secularists, secularists can not do the same under a fundamentalist regime.
This threat actually affects the life of the average American much more that the threat of terrorism. It affects sex education programs meant to lower teen pregnancy and prevent STDs. It affects vaccination programs that could practically eradicate one of the most common forms of cancer in women. It affects research in to treatments for injuries and diseases that could give victims back fairly normal lives. Under the rule of a fundie legal code, these programs - and others - are eliminated or at least denied funding. And this is a threat that's present almost constantly from school board elections up to presidential elections.
So yes, I do think that fundamentalist Christianity may deserve watching just as much fundamentalist Islam. Both are dangerous. One wants to control when you die. The other wants to control how you live. And I type this on a day when the supposed "moderate" republican candidate has been endorsed by one of the most repugnant religious leaders of modern times - and that endorsement is one of his crowning achievements.
Suck It Rudy.
Edited to add: Just to clarify...If you are a person of faith, I don't care. Believe what you want. It's your right. I know religious people who are incredibly wonderful people. Some of them even practice their religions in ways that truly are beneficial to the world. The above rant is not about you or them.
Unless you're Pat Robertson. If you're Pat Robertson...then go fuck yourself. Unless you're some OTHER Pat Robertson who just has a very unfortunate name. In which case you're probably cool. Unless you actually believe that the Earth is only 6,000 years old. If that's the case then, well, I don't know what to say man. I mean...sure all of the scientists in the world could be wrong - except for the nutritionists who signed off on your manifesto. But I'm gonna need more proof.
