Lileks condenses all of the foolishness of the multi-culti left on our war of cultures into one neat column:

See, the real problem is the West and its bluenose brigade, its Wal-Marts and Hummers and Big Gulp lifestyles. The Christianists, as some clever equivocators call them, are an impediment to Utopia as great as the terrorists. No less a philosopher than Rosie O'Donnell said so on "The View" recently, proclaiming Christian fundamentalists and Islamicists equal threats to America. They're both judgmental — boo, hiss! — and that makes them equal.

O'Donnell had a point, one supposes. Using the legislative process to pass faith-based initiatives, driving jets into skyscrapers: madness, everywhere.

At the risk of making a generalization: The secular right seems more tolerant of Christianity, and skeptical toward large swaths of Islam. The secular left often seems annoyed and contemptuous towards American religion — unless the pastor on the dais insists Jesus would have been a board member of Planned Parenthood — and oddly protective of Islam. Not because they believe in it; heavens, no. Some progressives are simply besotted by any civilization not their own.

Others have no vocabulary to oppose its more radical manifestations, because, well, we cannot judge other cultures. (Unless they're in the American South.) Others are less concerned by Islamicists because they have greater dislike for the people who oppose radical Islam, who are probably bigots. (Boo, hiss!) When those theo-neos get tough on radical Islam, it's just a convenient mask for their dislike of the Scary Non-Christian Dusky Hordes. Besides, what about the Crusades and the Inquisition? Huh? OK, then.

A lot of Christians are judgemental and scared of other religions and the liberal world. I am a Christian, and I see being a Christian as something that instead of turning people away should be loving. Most of us aren't loving and we are seen the way you describe. I think many of the very conservative Christians who are terrified of the new world should read this article. If Christians are truly Christians they should be reaching out to others, not condemning them.

everythingyellow, I think you completely missed the point of this exercise. Sure, there are plenty of intolerant Christians. The point, as Lileks is trying to pound into your head, is the difference between someone giving you a disapproving look, and someone slicing your melon off at the adam's apple, for the same offense of not believing as they do. There is a difference.

You know, the mis-quoting of Rosie O'Donnell and the outrage the mis-quotes generates is finally getting to me. She did NOT say Christian Fundamentalists. It's on tape, it's on YouTube, it's everywhere people. She said Christian EXTREMISTS. You know, the ones who bomb abortion clinincs, murder doctors, paint swastikas, THOSE people. She's not talking about Christians, she's talking about EXTREMISTs. Do you hear that people? Or are the people getting outraged extremists after all? Burned any crosses lately?

I'd be willing to bet that when she says "extremists" she means "fundamentalists." I'll also bet that she has a lot more in mind than abortion clinic bombings. Did she actually use any specific examples of what she meant (not that even those cases are in any way comparable to Islamofascists, which are a significant number of Muslims)?

Want to take the bet?

No bet here, the example she used was civilian deaths in Iraq. And where I said extremists, read radicals.....it's been one of those days, sorry.

According to the National Abortion Federation, there have been 7 murders, 17 attempted murders, and 41 bombings committed against abortion providers since 1971. Since 1999, there have been zero murders, 1 attempted murder and two bombings.

What a freaking epidemic of violence. Those damn extremist Christers are Out of Control. I understand now why I should fear the Christianist (tm) just as much as the Islamist!

No problem, Brad. I take as much umbrage as anyone when I think that someone is misquoted or misinterpreted for political purposes, but I think that in this case, Lileks was spot on. Please keep commenting.