Homestar Runner Wiki Forum
http://forum.hrwiki.org/

Argh! More hate!
http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=8794		 Page 2 of 3
Author:  PianoManGidley [ Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am ]
Post subject: 
Magna Carta wrote:
StrongRad wrote:
Sorry bout that dids.

I find this idea horrible. I mean he could kill you, then he could go to jail a hero of anti-gay people everywhere.


Very true. If he goes to prison anywhoo, he'll still be remembered as a "martyr" (even though he didn't get killed) for the cause of publicising the Westboro Baptist Church. His church will then strengthen.


I see it as the other way...if he did kill me, then I figure other members of the church would at least have enough of a mind and/or heart to see that flat-out murder is wrong and leave the church. And it would be especially true that many anti-gay people around the globe would never go so far as to advocate actually MURDERING gay people, no matter how much they disagree with homosexuality. In that case, the church would weaken instead of strengthen. I mean, what about the two guys who killed Matthew Shepard? Are they seen as "heroes" by the anti-gay community? There are even members of the Westboro church that I've heard direct quotes from saying that they admonish the acts of murder that the two gentlemen committed, yet still "praise" Matthew Shepard's death and "burning in hell."
Author:  StrongRad [ Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:17 am ]
Post subject: 
The thing is, Gidley, if they truly advocate the death of Gay people, then they will embrace this man as a victim of the "vast homosexual conspiracy against the straight people of this world". If they don't advocate murder of homosexuals, then they are just talking big, and big talk is nothing to worry about.
Author:  PianoManGidley [ Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:21 am ]
Post subject: 
StrongRad wrote:
The thing is, Gidley, if they truly advocate the death of Gay people, then they will embrace this man as a victim of the "vast homosexual conspiracy against the straight people of this world". If they don't advocate murder of homosexuals, then they are just talking big, and big talk is nothing to worry about.


Exactly my point. If the person did NOT fire the gun, then members of the church would see that they are just full of hot air, and begin to question whether they REALLY believe what they say. If given the opportunity to do something more "useful" for their cause than just picketing and protesting, and they refuse, then they are seen as cowardly and uncommitted in their claims. Other members of their church would see that and possibly abandon the organization for following a "weak leader," thereby weakening the church even more.

I believe that in either outcome, you would have certain members leaving the church, and in either outcome, the general public would see what these people really stand for and how far they are really willing to go.
Author:  VectorCell [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 12:43 am ]
Post subject: 
What I find interesting about this Wesboro Baptist Church is that they feel that they have been appointed by God to destroy the homosexuals, when, in history, God has taken it upon himself, if he really feels that there are homosexuals to be destroyed, as he did in Sodom and Gomorrah. I can understand if they think that homosexuality is a sin, and if not recognizing Jesus as the Messiah is a sin, as they are entitled to join any religion they want and call whatever they want a sin, but for them to enforce it themselves seems against the very fundamental doctrine of Christianity. The doctrine they are practicing is more (not anywhere close, I'm not saying that Jews are violent, uncivilized people) in line with Judaism, with the "eye for an eye" instead of a "turn the other cheek" philosophy, when in fact they hate the Jews. I think that as long as we don't teach our children (as a society as well as individual parents) to hate based on differences of background, religion, or lifestyle, then we really have nothing to worry about from these people.
Author:  Didymus [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 2:19 am ]
Post subject: 
Keeping in mind that homosexuality, as it was practiced in Sodom and Gomorrah, was essentially a form of rape, and that their crimes included hatred of God.
Author:  VectorCell [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:03 am ]
Post subject: 
Didymus wrote:
Keeping in mind that homosexuality, as it was practiced in Sodom and Gomorrah, was essentially a form of rape, and that their crimes included hatred of God.


...Showing that essentially God doesn't detest the current form of homosexuality to the point of it needing to be destroyed. This religion is extremely hypocritical, so I seriously doubt that it would obtain enough followers to become a significant threat, as the Nazis were to Germany. Essentially they are a fly on the tail of society, not posing as any real threat. All that should (and can) be done about them is to watch them closely to make sure they don't commit any real crimes.
Author:  Eldiran [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:19 am ]
Post subject: 
I dunno about this whole thing. I mean, can this honestly be real? I am very, very pessimistic about humans and their moral and mental capabilities, but I can't even imagine people who could be this, well... there's not a strong enough word for it.

Could anyone actually believe in this:
Wikipedia wrote:
11. It is a sin not to rejoice when other people are victims of tragedy, violence or suffering.


It makes me doubt that these people could be for real. Are they just trying to make their names known or something? Did someone put these sites all up ons the net as a joke? This kind of ignorance goes beyond the bounds of my imagination.
Author:  Didymus [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:35 am ]
Post subject: 
I think Eldiran was expressing shock rather than actual skepticism.
Author:  Eldiran [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:03 pm ]
Post subject: 
I actually was a bit skeptical, but more that they could actually believe in what they preach. Could this just be an effective attempt to make their name known? Though I hardly see how it could benefit them at all.

That and serious, serious mental disabilities are the only things I can think of to explain this. My mind is thoroughly boggled.
Author:  Didymus [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:08 pm ]
Post subject: 
Some people have suggested that to be the case with That One Really Mean German Guy.
Author:  PianoManGidley [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:43 pm ]
Post subject: 
Didymus wrote:
Some people have suggested that to be the case with That One Really Mean German Guy.


You talking about the Anti-Porn Guy? Oh, wait...he lives in Florida... Perhaps he should move to Kansas to join the Westboro church.
Author:  IantheGecko [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:37 pm ]
Post subject: 
No, the guy they made a musical about in "The Producers".
Author:  VectorCell [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:42 pm ]
Post subject: 
PianoManGidley wrote:
Didymus wrote:
Some people have suggested that to be the case with That One Really Mean German Guy.


You talking about the Anti-Porn Guy? Oh, wait...he lives in Florida... Perhaps he should move to Kansas to join the Westboro church.


Actually, he was talking about Billy Crystal. He's a fairly mean german guy. Or something like that...

The case with Hitler was kinda different, as he just advocated the deporting of them at first. The majority of the killing was done without the knowledge of the general german population. I really don't think these guys have a chance in heck of getting any significant group of people to follow them. Kinda reminds me of the Scientologists marching down the street yelling, "Psychiatry Kills!". I'm sorry, Scientologists, I'll respect your religion and all, but that's just ridiculous.

Image
Author:  Didymus [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 7:02 pm ]
Post subject: 
YOU SAID HIS NAME!! Thread = Very Over!! You = Very Lose'd!!

And I don't have much respect for scientology. I'm sorry, but basing your religion on the writings of a science fiction author? Come on! That's right up there with Roddenberrianism.
Author:  StrongRad [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 10:18 pm ]
Post subject: 
VectorCell wrote:
Kinda reminds me of the Scientologists marching down the street yelling, "Psychiatry Kills!". I'm sorry, Scientologists, I'll respect your religion and all, but that's just ridiculous.
Well, in their defense, I have had 2 friends who were on psychiatric mdeications that killed themselves. In a small way, I'll agree with them (a VERY SMALL WAY)
Author:  DarkSideOfTheSchwartz [ Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:06 pm ]
Post subject: 
It's not just that church that is intolerant in Kansas, at my school , if you are thought to be gay, noone will hang around you, and if you know someone that is gay, it automaticly makes you gay.
Author:  Didymus [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 12:51 am ]
Post subject: 
See, now that's ridiculous. Not only is it cruel and intolerant, it's also just plain ignorant and stupid.
Author:  sb_enail.com [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:12 am ]
Post subject: 
Christians aren't taught to hate. If they're preaching hate, they aren't following the teachings of Jesus. Jesus preached to tax-collectors, prostitutes, the homeless, the diseased, basically all the social pariahs of his time. He would definitely preach to homosexuals, murderers, rapists, and the like if he were around today, but since he's not, Christians must. It's our duty to spread the word of salvation to all who will hear. Like in Walk the Line, when Johnny Cash is talking to the record studio guys about cutting an album at Fulsom(sp?) Prison, and one guy says "Your fans are Church-going Christians, they don't want you singing in a prison", and he responds "Well then they're not Christians".
Author:  Capt. Ido Nos [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:53 am ]
Post subject: 
sb_enail.com wrote:
Christians aren't taught to hate. If they're preaching hate, they aren't following the teachings of Jesus. Jesus preached to tax-collectors, prostitutes, the homeless, the diseased, basically all the social pariahs of his time. He would definitely preach to homosexuals, murderers, rapists, and the like if he were around today, but since he's not, Christians must. It's our duty to spread the word of salvation to all who will hear. Like in Walk the Line, when Johnny Cash is talking to the record studio guys about cutting an album at Fulsom(sp?) Prison, and one guy says "Your fans are Church-going Christians, they don't want you singing in a prison", and he responds "Well then they're not Christians".


Exactly. If anything, Christians are taught to love. In fact, Jesus said the world should know us by our love for each other, and for all around us. it's one of the Fruits of the Spirit, which a lack thereof becomes a good indicator of not really having the Holy Spirit dwell inside you. What these people should be doing is not violently condeming those who are doing wrong, but gently getting them to realize the error of their ways. If a good friend or family member of yours was partaking in a destructive habit, you wouldn't bash them upside the head, would you? No, you'd do it with understanding, and you'd do it because you love them and care enough about them as to worry about their well being. That's just what we are called to do with the world, not just our immediate family and friends.
Author:  DeathlyPallor [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 5:30 am ]
Post subject: 
Sadly, I have seen more self-proclaimed Christians who don't act upon their book's teachings. Being a pagan, I have received a lot of grief from these people. I don't believe they necessarily represent Christianity, which in itself I have disagreements with. I may have disagree with some of the tenets they teach, but at its root, I know for a fact that they are not meant to judge others because they are not worth of it. I have used the bible as a weapon against them for years (a technique on loan from Sun Tzu's Art of War - "Keep your friend's close, and your enemies closer.) There is a church in the area I live that holds a massive amount of sway here. They are a very selective group and actively condemn people who don't go to their church. I don't believe that is very cooperative with Matthew 7:1. By using that line alone, I've infuriated them. No matter, I had fun with them when they tried to give me any grief. Anyone that tries to proselytize in such a manner deserves the grief that is wrought to them.
Author:  Didymus [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 5:37 am ]
Post subject: 
How about Matthew 7:5?
Author:  DeathlyPallor [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 5:47 am ]
Post subject: 
I almost forgot about that one. I suppose I'll add that one to my arsenal.

Lock and load *ka-click*.
Author:  Didymus [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 5:52 am ]
Post subject: 
Oh, and Matthew 18:15-20. Let's not forget that one, too.
Author:  DeathlyPallor [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:05 am ]
Post subject: 
That can be taken so many different ways. And I don't feel my ways are wrong. Nor do I think yours are.

"All truths are parallel, all truths are untrue." -Rozz Williams

Meaning, what is true to you and what is true to me are held in the same standing. They are true to those who hold them. But your truth to me is not, and vice versa. I believe people need to find their own truths in life.
Author:  Didymus [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:17 am ]
Post subject: 
Jesus Christ once said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life." I do not concur with your assessment that all ideas and opinions have equal validity. But my challenge to you, DP, is that if you are going to try to use the Word to challenge someone's faith, you might best know that Word thoroughly.

And Rozz Williams' statement is in fact a logical contradiction.

Honestly, I really don't know much about these people you are referring to. But as a Lutheran in the middle of Baptist country, I sometimes experience the same issue, people who think that if you don't belong to the largest church in town then there's something wrong with you.
Author:  DeathlyPallor [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:24 am ]
Post subject: 
Didymus wrote:
Jesus Christ once said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life." I do not concur with your assessment that all ideas and opinions have equal validity.


I didn't mean ultimate validity. If it is valid to the person, then it's their truth, and not mine. Thusly, the bible is your truth, not mine. But it does not mean that I will condemn you for it.

Yet another place where we differ. I don't think that saying that someone's opinion or religion is invalid because it doesn't concur with our own is a foolish notion. Sure, I may not vest much confidence in some people's ideas, but I believe that if they vest their confidence into it, I'd best respect it.

Quote:
But my challenge to you, DP, is that if you are going to try to use the Word to challenge someone's faith, you might best know that Word thoroughly.


It's been years since I've read it. I still don't follow the tenets of it, but it doesn't make me any less a person, or a bad person for that. If you condemn me because of it, then I have every right to condemn you. But I haven't condemned you, because it is not my place. You should see the episode of Penn and Tellers Bulls--- (yes, the show is called that) where they dissect the bible. I think it would be interesting for you to see. Not to agitate you, but for you to critique it as someone who is ordained.
Author:  Didymus [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:35 am ]
Post subject: 
I was referring to the idea that, if you are going to use a weapon, you should be intimately familiar with it. I never implied that you were less of a person because you do not know the Bible.
Author:  DeathlyPallor [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:37 am ]
Post subject: 
I wasn't going off of that statement. I was talking about the validity of the truths.
Author:  Didymus [ Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:55 am ]
Post subject: 
But to steer us back on topic, our buddy Phelps is one good example of why not all ideas can be considered valid. Here is a fringe group that has departed from the teachings of Scripture by latching on to one isolated idea and completely ignoring the rest.

In the example I gave earlier, of contrasting Matthew 18 (in which Christ encourages us to confront sin) with Matthew 7 (in which Christ cautions us against judging). So how are we to understand these passages?

Phelps answer: not only would he go to Matthew 18, but he would jump over the initial steps and jump to the end - in confronting sin, he preaches hatred, not reconciliation.

On the other hand, whatever else we are to make of Matthew 7, it cannot mean that we never confront sin.

So what is the answer?

Simple: Start with Matthew 7:5 - we confront sin in ourselves first. For example, before I can confront, say, sexual sins, in someone else, I must first confront sexual sin within myself, seeking forgiveness and cleansing first for myself. Only then can I gain a proper perspective to help someone else. This, btw, is why Step 12 in AA is to help others with their addictions; it's only when you've gained the new perspective that comes from freedom that you can help others in their path to recovery.

Next, looking back at the Matthew 18 again, it starts out by giving us the goal of confronting sin: to win your brother. Our attitude should never be to attack, hurt, and alienate, but rather to seek reconciliation. This means, when we confront, we do so in a gentle, loving manner. But there is a risk - even the most compassionate and gentle attempt to confront wrong can be ill-received. And there are some battles that just are not worth fighting.

So my answer? Phelps and his group have some serious sin problems that need to be confronted within their own organization and within themselves.

Has anyone read Philip Yancy's What's So Amazing About Grace? In it he tells two stories: one was about his relationship with a gay friend of his. The second, of a man he respected in his childhood who was as bitter as Phelps, and how his bitterness ultimately was a front for a deep struggle with his own sin.
Author:  TheDensel [ Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:16 am ]
Post subject: 
Im agnostic myself and Im not big on the theology of organized religion, but I am big on the philosophy of it. That being said, Jesus, wether he be the son of God or not, had some pretty good Ideas. Didymus that Matthew anaysis you just pulled out makes perfect sense.

I Dont know why i just wrote that whole thing but i just thought u ought to be congragulated
Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/