God's Warriors...?

Powerline comments on an upcoming CNN series (starting tonight, I believe) called "God's Warriors". The series is intended to examine religious fundamentalism, specifically Jewish, Muslim, and Christian "warriors", and is hosted by far lefty Christiane Amanpour.

Though the series supposedly paints all three as being equal, Powerline points out some key differences. For example, "the Christian 'warriors' are home-schooling their children, while the Muslim 'warriors' are blowing people up."

When discussing martyrdom, Amanpour explains it this way:

"To the West, martyrdom has a really bad connotation because of suicide bombers who call themselves martyrs. Really, martyrdom is actually something that historically was quite noble, because it was about standing up and rejecting tyranny, rejecting injustice and rejecting oppression and, if necessary, dying for that."

Powerline rightly corrects her:

"[T]he problem with today's Islamic 'martyrs' is not that its adherents are 'willing to give their lives,' it is that they want to kill non-Muslims. It isn't really a mystery why martyrdom was once considered noble; Christian martyrs like Saints Stephen and Sebastian didn't kill anyone. Whereas today, 'martyrdom' in much of the Islamic world is a euphemism for mass murder. Hence the 'really bad connotation.'"

They continue:

"It's hardly worth the trouble to point out the stupidity of confounding Christian 'fundamentalism' -- the most commonly accepted definition of which is a belief in the literal truth of the Bible -- with Islamic 'fundamentalism,' whose distinguishing characteristic is a desire to impose Sharia on the world, and kill everyone who resists."

Powerline explains Amanpour's analysis by saying essentially that all fundamentalist views are opposed to her liberal viewpoint. But, the chances of her being attacked (i.e. killed) by an Islamic 'fundamentalist' is far less than being attacked (i.e. via voting and supporting candidates with whom Amanpour disagrees) by Christian 'fundamentalists', so she is more concerned about the impending threat of Christian 'fundamentalism'.

The overall summary: "This ... is the perspective of a political partisan, not the perspective of a journalist."

If you're like me, you've often wondered why liberals support (or at least overlook) Islamic/Muslim atrocities while raging against Christian freedoms. This is your answer. This is why liberalism cannot be allowed to run our country.

There's my two cents.