• Historical Religion, an oxymoron you’d only hear from a moron like Newt Gingrich

Anyone else follow the whole Bill-O v. Hertzberg affair I posted video of a while back? Well, now that I’m back to actually *gasp* blogging, I’d like to point out something that former speaker of the house Gingrich had to say in the original segment, and the itals are mine and not theirs:

GINGRICH: Look, I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants impose its will on the rest of us. It is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government, if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion. And I think if you believe in historic Christianity, you have to confront the fact, and frankly for that matter if you believe in the historic version of Islam or the historic version of Judaism, you have to confront the reality that the secular extremists are determined to impose on you acceptance of a series of values that are antithetical, they’re the opposite of what you’re taught in Sunday school.

quoting this from Hertzberg’s insanely detailed telling of his and David Remnick’s part in all this.

What I take offense to here is the thought that a religion’s stories can be taken as, or even referred to as, history. It’s religion. It’s a series of stories. It’s one peoples view of what has happened in the past, not a consensus of what actually happened, which is what you read in most history books. I’m not saying I believe all religion to be bullshit and facetious, I just think that putting the word historic next to the word Christianity, which is obviously Newt’s true intent, is a scarily ominous precipice. A precipice that Newt, once off air, probably belly-flops off of onto a magical bed, cushioning his fall with layer upon layer of bullshit, calming the bastard down when he worries that homosexuals may one day be granted the rights to marry.