The ‘other’ throughout American history is generally easy to spot. Look for a catastrophic event or significant movement that propels them into the national spotlight. Look for media coverage that is biased, deceiving, even inciting violence. Look for Americans reacting to the press with a call to arms.

Nearly every era of American history is defined by negative attention leveled against a particular group of people. For the Native Americans, it came as they were being forcibly evicted from their homeland and herded onto reservations. For Japanese Americans, it came in the form of internment camps launched just three months after the attacks of Pearl Harbor. For Muslim Americans, hateful discrimination erupted within days of the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

These groups, just three of many examples of the darker corners of American history, all have one thing in common - they represent the unknown. They are outside of the norm. And, at least at the time, they are perceived as a threat.

But rarely, if ever, has the target of these prejudicial practices been a blond-haired, blue-eyed Christian male.

On July 22, 2011, the people of Norway experienced unimaginable terror when Anders Behring Breivik, a self-identified Christian aligning with the far-right, killed a total of 69 people, mostly teenagers, in coordinated attacks on government buildings and a camp for young people.

And on July 26, 2011, conservative Fox News pundit Bill O’Reilly took to the airwaves to blast other media groups correctly identifying Breivik as a “Christian terrorist,” claiming they were attempting to place a negative spin on the religion.

Actually, Bill, I think it’s the other way around.

You see, it’s alright for O’Reilly and other conservative hosts to base their perception of an entire people group on one singular event. A group of terrorists following an extreme form of Islam immediately means all Muslims are bent on jihad and planting their religion throughout the world.

“The primary threat to this world comes from Islamic terrorism,” O’Reilly railed in the same broadcast. “And Muslim suicide bombers blow innocent people up almost every day.”

See the connection between the religion of Islam and the act of terrorism that O’Reilly not only makes, but repeats within two sentences? But heaven forbid a Christian be targeted for involvement in a comparable act. The standard, the norm, what is expected in his mind - that simply cannot be attacked.

If O’Reilly insists on generalizing a people group based on the actions of an individual, so be it. The same prejudicial standards he applies to Muslim Americans can’t be negated because an individual falls within his understanding of the status quo.

But it’s high time for a person to be judged for their actions, not their creed; for their personal beliefs, not their public professions. Christians should no more be judged for Breivik’s actions than Muslims should be for the small group of extremists who carry out acts of terrorism. No more than a Japanese American should be interned just for the actions of the government of their home country.