Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Gingrich: Challenge 'Radical Secularism' (AP)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Eugene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-07 11:56 AM
Original message
Gingrich: Challenge 'Radical Secularism' (AP)
Source: Associated Press

Gingrich: Challenge 'Radical Secularism'
Gingrich Lauds Falwell At Liberty Commencement, Urges
Grads To Fight 'Radical Secularism'


LYNCHBURG, Va., May. 19, 2007

(AP) Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told Liberty University's
graduating class Saturday to honor the spirit of school founder
Jerry Falwell by confronting "the growing culture of radical
secularism" with Christian ideals.

Gingrich, who is considering a 2008 presidential run, quoted Bible
passages to a crowd of about 17,000 packed into the university's
football stadium four days after Falwell's death.

Despite the somber tone of the day, graduates who covered the
football field chanted "Jerry! Jerry!" in tribute to Falwell.

"A growing culture of radical secularism declares that the nation
cannot profess the truths on which it was founded," Gingrich said.
"We are told that our public schools can no longer invoke the
creator, nor proclaim the natural law nor profess the God-given
quality of human rights.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/19/ap/politics/main2828120.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-07 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
1. LOL at "radical secularism"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-07 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Radical non-promotion of religious agenda. Absurd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
electron_blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-07 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
3. LOL, he really means "radical rationalism"
People who can THINK and insist on doing so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-07 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. i'm against "Radical adultery" for pious politicians.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OHdem10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-07 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
5. Good Juicy Red Meat to the Fundamentalists.
I insist on saying Fundamentalists because there is
quite a difference between Fundamentalists and Evangelicals.

The Fundamentalists never accepted the Englightenment.
Theirs is a profound struggle against Secularism.

Roberts and Falwell would often wax loudly and strongly
against Secularism They see this as what is wrong
with America.

Since Newt is going to run for President and a Master
Wordsmith--Putting Radical in front of Secularism
makes it sound like something the Middle Class would
shrink from in horror. Watch Newt and his use of
Words as Weapons. He plays to the audience in front
of him but sends a message to the wider audience
who might be viewing on TV.

Always examine Newt's words carefully.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
More Than A Feeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-07 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
6. The most revealing part is that he doesn't really care that students are free to pray on their own.
For him, Christianity has to have officially recognized authority and status, or else its a major loss that contributes to social ills. My guess is he thinks that said social ills are caused by diversity, and if everyone would just shut up and obey the "one true faith", there would be no arguments, and no problems.

It's a bad idea to put someone who thinks that the problem with society is that everyone is not a white, Christian male in charge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flaminbats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-07 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
7. why put a blindfold on lady justice?
at least she could see what color the accused is, what economic class each side is from, and require them to announce at the beginning of the trial what domination or religion they participate in.

THEN WE COULD REALLY DECIDE WHO WAS GUILTY AND INNOCENT, but without the blindfold at least we would have more evidence and less radical secularism!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knight_of_the_star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-19-07 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
8. He's going to run
He just hasn't declared yet, he wants to be crowned as the nominee by the wingnuts before he jumps in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC