Newt Gingrich's Anti-Islam Jihad

If nothing else, Newt Gingrich can always be relied upon to be a supreme hypocrite. The man seems utterly shameless and will grasp upon whatever insanity of the day seems to rally his - often dim witted - supporters. Whining about protecting the "sanctity of marriage" from a thrice married serial adulterer is but one example of Gingrich's shameless hypocrisy. He apparently believes that we're all idiots and should blindly believe his latest batshitery. Among the Christianist/Tea Party base of the GOP, his ploys may seem to work, but there's still the issue of convincing rational citizens and the issue of the impression made on the rest of the world.

Another one of the other Christianist bandwagons Gingrich has jumped upon is deep anti-Muslim bigotry and the myth that domestic Sharia law is a threat to America. Never mind that Gingrich and his far right supporters wants to impose the Christianist equivalent on every single American. A column in the Washington Post looks at the danger Gingrich is stirring up for the country with this anti-Islam ploy. Here are some highlights:

The epochs of Newt Gingrich’s public life are defined by the books that have revolutionized him — generally of the type that sell well at airports. . . . These idea crushes are mostly harmless. Sometimes they are not. Gingrich has recently been captured by the theory, developed in books such as Andrew C. McCarthy’s “The Grand Jihad,” that sharia law is a mortal threat to the survival of freedom in the United States and the world as we know it.

The Republican front-runner set out his argument about Islamic law in a speech last year to the American Enterprise Institute. The United States’ problem, Gingrich argued, is not primarily terrorism; it is sharia — “the heart of the enemy movement from which the terrorists spring forth.” Sharia law, in his view, is inherently brutal — defined by oppression, stonings and beheadings. Its triumph is pursued not only by violent jihadists but by stealthy ones attending the mosque down the street.

It was not a casual theme. Gingrich Productions has generated a movie on the topic called “America at Risk: The War With No Name.” Gingrich has called for a “federal law that says sharia law cannot be recognized by any court in the United States” — leaving the impression of a threat as real in Topeka as it is in Riyadh.

With due respect to the speaker and his recent reading, what qualification does he have to identify sharia’s “natural form”? In the United States, public officials respect the conscience of citizens while protecting them from violence. The proper role of government is to aggressively fight terrorism, not to engage in theological judgments.

The governing implications of Gingrich’s views are uncharted. Would President Gingrich reaffirm his belief that the most radical form of Islamic law is the most authentic? Would he tell American Muslims that, to be good citizens, they should renounce sharia?

And how would President Gingrich deal with predominantly Muslim nations if the war against terrorism were transformed into a struggle against sharia? Wouldn’t every Muslim friend and ally be discredited and undermined by having a relationship with the anti-sharia superpower? Wouldn’t Islamic radicals welcome the civilizational struggle that Gingrich offers? No strategy would be more likely to undermine the cause of the United States and the safety of its people.

[Gingrich's] views demonstrate a disturbing tendency: the passionate embrace of shallow ideas.

I have no more love for atrocities done by Islamic extremists that the next person. But branding an entire religion as dangerous is in itself dangerous. Especially when one considers the horrors that Christianity has wrought on the world and non-Christians over the centuries.