Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dressing up hate (Hewitt on Andrew Sullivan and the term "Christianist")
World Magazine ^ | May 20, 2006 | Hugh Hewitt

Posted on 05/12/2006 9:47:02 PM PDT by Unam Sanctam

What does the term "Christianist" mean and why is Time peddling it?

Time columnist Andrew Sullivan uses the term to describe evangelicals with whom he disagrees. He says his goal is to "take back the word Christian while giving the religious right a new adjective: Christianist. Christianity, in this view, is simply a faith. Christianism is an ideology, politics, an ism. The distinction between Christian and Christianist echoes the distinction we make between Muslim and Islamist."

He explains further, "Muslims are those who follow Islam. Islamists are those who want to wield Islam as a political force and conflate state and mosque. Not all Islamists are violent. Only a tiny few are terrorists. And I should underline that the term Christianist is in no way designed to label people on the religious right as favoring any violence at all. I mean merely by the term Christianist the view that religious faith is so important that it must also have a precise political agenda. It is the belief that religion dictates politics and that politics should dictate the laws for everyone, Christian and non-Christian alike."

Most pundits have rejected "Christianist" because it obviously tries to link Islamists and those evangelicals Mr. Sullivan loathes. He is attempting to dress up hate speech as simple precision, but given the vast spectrum of political opinions among believers on the center-right, "Christianist" is a howler. Still, no one should be laughing when a once-respected newsweekly defines a huge portion of the American mainstream as the equivalent of the Islamists who attacked the country on 9/11. Be prepared as others pick up Time's term.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: andrewsullivan; antichristianbigotry; christianist; christians; christophobia; evangelicals; hewitt; hughhewitt; language; sullivan; timemag
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

1 posted on 05/12/2006 9:47:05 PM PDT by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

"He says his goal is to "take back the word Christian"

Andrew Sullivan can't take back what he never possessed in the first place.


2 posted on 05/12/2006 9:51:50 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
Most pundits have rejected "Christianist" because it obviously tries to link Islamists and those evangelicals Mr. Sullivan loathes.

The "All fundamentalisms are the same" meme, again. The absurdity of this belief would be obvious to a five year old--Christians don't behead people, last time I looked--but not to vile Christian-baiters like our bug-chasin', bareback-lovin' Andrew.

3 posted on 05/12/2006 9:51:58 PM PDT by denydenydeny ("Osama... made the mistake of confusing media conventional wisdom with reality" (Mark Steyn))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

I've been fighting the use of the word "fundamentalist" to describe Islamists for some time. When applied to Christians it describes a very specific group with very specific beliefs.


4 posted on 05/12/2006 9:58:39 PM PDT by Uriah_lost (http://www.wingercomics.com/d/20051205.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

"He says his goal is to "take back the word Christian while giving the religious right a new adjective: Christianist."

The freaks of this world are not surprising. Jesus never called his followers "christians". the followers later identified with this roman tag due to their default reluctance to deny their faith. The 'christian' label is irrelevant. Following Jesus in your heart is a passion for eternal glory. boy, am i getting sappy in my older years.


5 posted on 05/12/2006 9:59:20 PM PDT by Tulsa Ramjet ("If not now, when?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
"boy, am i getting sappy in my older years."

Good sappy, though... :)

6 posted on 05/12/2006 10:01:34 PM PDT by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
Expect nothing less from a homosexual.
7 posted on 05/12/2006 10:06:42 PM PDT by Echo Talon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

***What does the term "Christianist" mean and why is Time peddling it? ***

Much like a local lib letter writer who constantly uses the term "Christian Taliban" in his datribes.


8 posted on 05/12/2006 10:06:58 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (ISLAM is STILL the religion of the criminally insane!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

It's an attempt to further secularize our society and demonize any hint of "religion" or "faith" that dares to oppose or question the intelligentsia of the left-wing MSM and elitist left-wingers who are busily designing their version of utopian social "policy".

Hmm, was that a bit of a run-on sentence?:)


9 posted on 05/12/2006 10:12:09 PM PDT by khnyny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: denydenydeny

He'd be on much more familiar ground, attempting to popularize use of the term "penist" to describe himself and others like him.


10 posted on 05/12/2006 10:12:46 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Echo Talon

"Expect nothing less from a homosexual."

Is that right? Gee, I guess I was dead-on about that "further secularization/left-wing version of social utopian policy" thing, lol.


11 posted on 05/12/2006 10:17:29 PM PDT by khnyny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: khnyny

he probably made up the new word in a bath house. :\


12 posted on 05/12/2006 10:21:12 PM PDT by Echo Talon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam
Hewitt buys fully in to the liberal paradigm of hate speech and poltical correct speech.

PBS hack.

13 posted on 05/12/2006 10:23:32 PM PDT by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

Sullivan thought long and hard about how to coin a catchy slur. That's all the term "Christianist" is about, nothing more.


14 posted on 05/12/2006 10:40:29 PM PDT by beckett (Amor Fati)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

So are the people who agree with Sullivan, "homosexualists"?


15 posted on 05/12/2006 10:50:26 PM PDT by Dreagon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
We have for too long, been way too polite with homosickuals.

And yes it should be homosickuals not homosexuals, and that is my point.

For too long we have allowed the homosickuals to shape the discussion on their sick and shameful behavior as "homosexual". Sex is the act of a man and woman procreating.

What a sick man and a sick man are doing, is nothing but physical abuse originated from mental disorder. Quite simply the rectum was designed for excrement to leave the body. The act of homosickuality is abusive and harmful to the rectum and causes all kinds of physical breakdown and ailments in that area. This is being coverd-up and ignored by the medical community because they have an ax to grind in making huge profits with abortion so they don't want to display the truth about homosickuals, because they have a vendetta against Christians.

But the main point is for too long we have been too polite with allowing homosickuals shape the discussion and terminology such as "homosexual" and "gay". And allowing them to distract from the real issue of the filth they are shamefully engaged in, with their discussions about "genes" and "natural born behavior".

Just look at how Christians get treated by those people and their supporters on the Godless Left. They constantly make the absolute worst hysterical accusations against Christians, and are now even trying to identify us as "Christianists" as a comparison with terroristic Islamists.

It's long past due that we start reshaping the discussion about THEM and start focusing on the real simple truth of the matter no matter who uncomfortable and unpleasant the subject because quite frankly they seriously do not want to have open dicsions about what "gay" really is...a man abusing another man in the rectum which was solely designed by God for excrement to exit the body.

Even the language I have used in this post is too soft and timid.

Let's Simply Be Honest!

That's the last thing they want!
16 posted on 05/12/2006 11:04:52 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper (ETERNAL SHAME on the Treasonous and Immoral Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

The word "Christian" is thrown about in ignorance as though anyone has even bothered to note what Christian scripture defines the concept to mean. A follower of Christ is well defined in the New Testament. But, there are plenty of 'houses of philosophy' as opposed to 'houses of worship' that have created their own religion as a spinoff from Christianity and seek to pretend they're the same thing. The Christian Scripture itself denounces this approach noting that one cannot follow two masters - Christ and a philosopher in this case. Wherever that happenstance stands, it is not Christianity that one is looking at, it is a philosophy begging a label inspite of itself. Some of them may be friendly to Christianity; but, that doesn't make them Christian.. any more than a Krishan becomes Budhist by clothing himself in Shaolin robes and meditating over thoughts of Krishna. Sheepdipping one's self in something in pretense is nothing more than fraud.

This said, the guy's approach is more than a little misguided. Knowing what one wants to say is no substitute for being right when saying it.


17 posted on 05/12/2006 11:17:05 PM PDT by Havoc (Evolutionists and Democrats: "We aren't getting our message out" (coincidence?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

sullivan needs to be tagged as a sodomist.


18 posted on 05/12/2006 11:19:39 PM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Idiotist


19 posted on 05/12/2006 11:47:34 PM PDT by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr; All
Sullivan is a Brokeback Columnist.

No Cheers, unfortunately.

20 posted on 05/13/2006 12:37:22 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson