Gingrich fears 'atheist country ... dominated by radical Islamists'

[editec]

Gingrich fears 'atheist country ... dominated by radical Islamists'

Newt is freaking nuts if he truly "fears" that.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Gingrich fears 'atheist country ... dominated by radical Islamists'

Newt is freaking nuts if he truly "fears" that.

Yeah Im not sure how you fit that together.

 

[Toro]

lol

This is why I'm happy Newt is running. I almost sent him money, just for the amusement factor.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

I just wish Jeb would throw his hat into the ring so the Republicans would have a chance to make 2012 at least exciting.

The Bush name is poison. Never again .
Maybe if they changed there name to Buttafuoco or Hitler or something.
Bush No chance ever.

 

[pinqy]

Heres the point. A secular country will not take religious fanatics serious. They'll think "No one would die or murder in the name or religion, I mean, come on, fairy tale religion?" And they'll underestimate Islamic radicals.

Right, because that's exactly what happened in China and the USSR.

 

[Article 15]

Isn't Newt a hoot?

I like this one from the other day ...

Gingrich argued that public education curriculum in the United States ought to include teaching that the nation's foundation is based in Christian faith.

"I don't care what the ACLU says; they should teach it accurately, that we hold these truths to be self evident that we are endowed by our creator," Gingrich said, stressing the word "creator."

"If you don't start with values, the rest of it doesn't matter," he said.

Conservatives show different sides during Iowa gathering - USATODAY.com

 

[Late2TheParty]

But is it more ridiculous to vote for Newt while he says that stuff?

Or to vote for an unknown candidate who simply spews "Hope! Change! Bush is bad!"

There are more than 2 people in the USA to vote for. We don't need to scrounge at the bottom of the idiot bin.

 

[8537]

Heres the point. A secular country will not take religious fanatics serious. They'll think "No one would die or murder in the name or religion, I mean, come on, fairy tale religion?" And they'll underestimate Islamic radicals.

Ah yes, and good radical Christians know damn well that folks will die or murder in the name of religion!

 

[NYcarbineer]

No, he is making a valid point that libtards dont fathom, because their brains are eaten up with liberalism.

Heres the point. A secular country will not take religious fanatics serious. They'll think "No one would die or murder in the name or religion, I mean, come on, fairy tale religion?" And they'll underestimate Islamic radicals.

They'll say we must "tolerate" the radicals. Why? Because the atheists will view the religious fanatics as inferior. As if they haven't evolved enough yet, and feel sorry for them, hence the need to be sympathetic and tolerant of them.

I heard it put will by a friend. Liberals look at bears as the type you see in a Disney movie, or a Nissan Leaf commercial. Harmless, fun, cuddly, fun animals. So when a small black bear mauls a child, they're shocked. "Oh my God!! I can't believe the bear did that!!!" Well, yeah, he's a BEAR FOR GODS SAKE!!!


Same concept. A secular America will tolerate and underestimate radical Islamists. And before long, the cancer will grow to the point that it's too late.

Makes perfect sense to those of us who:

A) Know bears will klll you.
B) Know radical Muslims will too.

You made me laugh out loud.

He was doing an impression of Newt Gingrich trying to explain something Newt Gingrich said.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So he fears that our country will be a country with no god that is dominated by people who worship a god.

Huh?

A radical Secular Humanist Islamic Theocracy.

Comon! What's not to understand?

 

[G.T.]

I think fear is the key word in drawing my conclusion: pussy.

 

[edthecynic]

No, he is making a valid point that libtards dont fathom, because their brains are eaten up with liberalism.

Heres the point. A secular country will not take religious fanatics serious. They'll think "No one would die or murder in the name or religion, I mean, come on, fairy tale religion?" And they'll underestimate Islamic radicals.

They'll say we must "tolerate" the radicals. Why? Because the atheists will view the religious fanatics as inferior. As if they haven't evolved enough yet, and feel sorry for them, hence the need to be sympathetic and tolerant of them.

I heard it put will by a friend. Liberals look at bears as the type you see in a Disney movie, or a Nissan Leaf commercial. Harmless, fun, cuddly, fun animals. So when a small black bear mauls a child, they're shocked. "Oh my God!! I can't believe the bear did that!!!" Well, yeah, he's a BEAR FOR GODS SAKE!!!


Same concept. A secular America will tolerate and underestimate radical Islamists. And before long, the cancer will grow to the point that it's too late.

Makes perfect sense to those of us who:

A) Know bears will klll you.
B) Know radical Muslims will too.

So you are saying that America should be a radical religious society like Hagee preaches rather than secular to protect itself from radical religions.

 

[rightwinger]

How can it be an atheist country dominated my radical Islamists?

Don't radical Islamists kill atheists?

 

[Dr.Drock]

I've yet to hear a christian tell me why they're so utterly scared to death of atheists.

Is there any group in America less violent than atheists and agnostics?

 

[rightwinger]

I've yet to hear a christian tell me why they're so utterly scared to death of atheists.

Is there any group in America less violent than atheists and agnostics?

I was going to say nuns....but then I remembered Catholic School

 

[Dr.Drock]

I've yet to hear a christian tell me why they're so utterly scared to death of atheists.

Is there any group in America less violent than atheists and agnostics?

I was going to say nuns....but then I remembered Catholic School

God imagine if nuns were strong, there'd be muggings going on all over america.

My parents never hit me, other teachers never did, but when I went to a catholic school from k-2nd grade I got paddled all the time. This was in the 90's!!!

I'm starting to think hating atheists is a more socially accepted (and often celebrated) from of bigotry than islamophobia. It's certainly passed homophobia.

 

[Sallow]

No, he is making a valid point that libtards dont fathom, because their brains are eaten up with liberalism.

Heres the point. A secular country will not take religious fanatics serious. They'll think "No one would die or murder in the name or religion, I mean, come on, fairy tale religion?" And they'll underestimate Islamic radicals.

They'll say we must "tolerate" the radicals. Why? Because the atheists will view the religious fanatics as inferior. As if they haven't evolved enough yet, and feel sorry for them, hence the need to be sympathetic and tolerant of them.

I heard it put will by a friend. Liberals look at bears as the type you see in a Disney movie, or a Nissan Leaf commercial. Harmless, fun, cuddly, fun animals. So when a small black bear mauls a child, they're shocked. "Oh my God!! I can't believe the bear did that!!!" Well, yeah, he's a BEAR FOR GODS SAKE!!!


Same concept. A secular America will tolerate and underestimate radical Islamists. And before long, the cancer will grow to the point that it's too late.

Makes perfect sense to those of us who:

A) Know bears will klll you.
B) Know radical Muslims will too.

You really hate America and the United States Constitution, don't you?

I mean I get it..it's a Liberal Country and a Liberal Document..but heck..we liberals are letting you stay after the Whiskey Rebellion..and the Civil War.

Couldn't you at least try to be nice?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Well, this thread certainly brings the lolz........

BTW, radical Islam isnt the only radical religion known to terrorize and provoke violence.

 

[RDD_1210]

A nation of Atheists. Ahhh, dare to dream.

 

[whitehall]

I fear it too, don't you? Gingrich is mainstream for sure.