Fundamentalism or Orthodoxy??

So when did any form of Christianity that asserts the particularity of Christ among other religions become labeled "hardcore fundamentalism"?

I stumbled on this article on Yahoo! (coincidentally after having talked about Kirk Cameron at breakfast this morning) this evening. Found here, the article details the conversion and new ministry that Kirk Cameron has undertaken. I actually had an opportunity to hear Kirk speak at my school a couple of years ago, so I was familiar with his testimony as well as his ministry strategy. More thoughts on that later, but what really caught my attention was this statement:

"They have harnessed Comfort's writing and Cameron's celebrity to create a small multimedia empire that is in service of a hardcore fundamentalist message: Accept Jesus Christ as your personal lord and savior or you will not get to heaven."

Again, I ask, when did this basic Orthodox, protestant, evangelical tenet get subverted under the banner of hardcore fundamentalism? I object to this for a number of reasons. First, I hold to this message and don't consider myself a fundamentalist (let alone a hardcore one, unless you consider me a grammar fundamentalist, as you will see). Second, much like CS Lewis protesting the way the word 'gentleman' was being used to describe something other than what a true gentleman is, I protest this use of the word fundamentalist. A fundamentalist is a subsect of Christian practice, not Christianity itself. The use of the word fundamentalist in this context is a redundant use of sorts, and actually distorts understanding, making either the word Christianity or fundamentalism a useless word (I have a sense which word people would love to make worthless). Thirdly, the word hardcore (let alone fundamentalist) is wrought with connotation, most of which is not favorable. Lumping a basic Christian message under the title of hardcore fundamentalism is far from neutrality in journalism. Lastly, taking a message that is a basic tenet of Christianity and labeling it "fundamentalist" ties all adherents to fundamentalism. And since the banner of fundamentalism has gone from meaning "a subsect of Christianity" to being more synonymous with "religious fanatic", on the plane of backward, polygamist Mormons and Islamic terrorists (a plane on which, although I have my disagreements with them, I would not begin to place fundamentalist Christians), the adherents of basic Christianity get lumped into a group of polygamist, jihadists. I'm sure there are those who would be eager to label me that as well....but, well... I can't even get one wife, let alone three, and I mulling over pacifism.

Now, it might be more appropriate to label Cameron's methods of sharing the gospel as "hardcore," but still not necessarily fundamentalist. I will diverge from his methods, but not his basic message. I'm not a big fan of confrontational evangelism (any single method of evangelism which claims to be the only means, gets labeled suspect in my book), and I think there are more effective ways of presenting the love and grace which are central to the Christian message.

Well, having made my grammatically fundamentalist complaint for the day, I'm going to go grab some Taco Bell (talk about hardcore) and head to bed.