Can a President call himself pro-religious liberty if he's anti-Muslim?

I have no doubt that Newt Gingrich would be a strong advocate for defending the religious liberties of Catholic groups currently threatened by Obama administration policies.  When it comes to the religious liberties of Muslims, though, Gingrich takes a sharp turn toward intolerance. 

[A]sked if he would ever endorse a Muslim running for president[,] "It would depend entirely on whether they would commit in public to give up Shariah," Gingrich said.

Let's get this straight: you're welcome to participate in our public life if you "give up Shariah."  Sounds like the sort of treatment given to Rocco Buttiglione by the EU (and rightly criticized by many conservatives).  Or consider this piece of red meat he happily threw out to voters:

Gingrich also called the Ground Zero mosque "a deliberate and willful insult to the people of the United States who suffered an attack by people who are motivated by the same thing."

What exactly is the "same thing" that motivated the 9/11 hijackers and Muslims who want to have a mosque near their homes and places of work?  Is it the "same thing" that motivates Catholics and abortion clinic bombers?  We must resist efforts to paint religious believers with a single broad brush.  When it comes to Muslims, Gingrich appears ready to do just that.

Is Gingrich anti-Muslim?  Well, he does generously concede that "A truly modern person who happened to worship Allah would not be a threat." It is "a person who belonged to any kind of belief in Shariah, any effort to impose it on the rest of us, [who] would be a mortal threat."  So are religious believers welcome to participate in public life in Newt Gingrich's America?  Yes, as long as you're "a truly modern person" who just happens "to worship Allah."  Not reassuring.