PC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2238 posts, RR: 5 Posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1586 times:
a hate group.
Moderators - I'm not sure where this falls in the rules, so whatever is judged I will not dispute. However, I believe this is something that needs to be done. What this "organization" does is nothing short of despicable harassment. As pathetic as it sounds, I have more "respect" for the KKK than I ever would for the Westboro Baptists.
I do realize that this is a form of censorship. But this is one time that it needs to happen. For the love - they wanted to protest that killing 20 six to seven year olds was justified.
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12335 posts, RR: 12 Reply 1, posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1562 times:
The patriarch of this tiny and obnoxious group is a well established civil rights lawyer. It is sad he turned into the kind of person he once challenged but for the fact that as far as we know, the WBC doesn't kill or hang or beat up people and really his sick protests are fully protected by the 1st Amendment. IF the government were to find some way to go after them, to try to shut them up, that would be highly challenged and probably attract the ACLU (they defended neo-Nazi groups who were into protests), religious freedom groups and free speech absolutist. Perhaps the best way to go after them is to challange their non-for-profit tax status as a 'church' or get them to open up their financial books to see how they spend their money on the family.
flymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 6297 posts, RR: 6 Reply 2, posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1556 times:
Quoting PC12Fan (Thread starter): I do realize that this is a form of censorship. But this is one time that it needs to happen. For the love - they wanted to protest that killing 20 six to seven year olds was justified
Then where do we stop? Censor them then we should sensor everybody who hates gays or blacks or Hispanics etc.. Lets make sure no one can say something bad about anyone.
Please. There is a reason for the first amendment. They can say whatever they want. Do people agree with them? No. Can people protest against them? They sure can. But to say we should censor this one group because we don't believe in what they are protesting is just as bad as saying what the group says.
It just is not the way this country works.
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 1): Perhaps the best way to go after them is to challange their non-for-profit tax status as a 'church' or get them to open up their financial books to see how they spend their money on the family.
Exactly.
P.S. I find 99.9% of these white house petitions so dumb especially the ones that have come up on Anet.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
Dreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 7779 posts, RR: 22 Reply 3, posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1554 times:
Quoting PC12Fan (Thread starter): I do realize that this is a form of censorship. But this is one time that it needs to happen.
Why? As disgusting as I find them, their activities have been limited to protesting and saying moronic stuff. They have not threatened anyone's safety, have not physically assaulted anyone as far as I know. All they do is promise you damnation in the afterlife, and seriously, that is not a clear and present danger to most people.
The KKK on the other hand - at least some decades ago - went out and lynched people. Very, very different.
fr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 4259 posts, RR: 12 Reply 4, posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1542 times:
Quoting PC12Fan (Thread starter): I do realize that this is a form of censorship. But this is one time that it needs to happen.
Be very careful with that line of reasoning...when there is "one time" that something needs to happen, there will be another time.
I'm not a fan of hanging the "hate group" label on any organization, because, the term, like so many others (racist, homophobe, XXXX-o-phobe) has lost all meaning.
That having been said, I don't think that reviewing their status as a religious organization worthy of tax exempt status is censorship at all. In fact, I believe the federal (and various state governments) should do more reviews of organizations that claim to be exempt due to the organization being religious in nature.
seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9826 posts, RR: 17 Reply 6, posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1532 times:
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 1): IF the government were to find some way to go after them, to try to shut them up, that would be highly challenged and probably attract the ACLU
Tax them. They are using their tax exempt status as a "church" to fund these outrages. Once a religous organization crosses the line into politics, I say tax them.
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 3): As disgusting as I find them, their activities have been limited to protesting and saying moronic stuff
I want to be in line right behind Fred Phelps on judgement day just to see the look on his face when he is denied entry.
It reminds me of one cut-away from Family Guy with the two tele-vangelists being the only two people on Earth after the rapture. "Why weren't we raptured? We hated all the right things!"
fr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 4259 posts, RR: 12 Reply 7, posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1526 times:
Quoting AR385 (Reply 5): Can someone explain to me what does the White House has to do with this petition?
Oh, people have found a new bully-pulpit (well, not really that new) on The White House website:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petitions
And, we do have the right to petition our government:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Of course, I'm not quite sure this is what The Founders meant.
It's fascinating to see what folks are up in arms about. It's also informative (and a little disturbing) to see how many people really don't know what the power of the Executive are and even more disturbing, how many folks do believe in some level of censorship.
By the way, there are already several petitions running about the Westboro Baptist Church:
AR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 4846 posts, RR: 27 Reply 8, posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1521 times:
Thanks fr8mech. So if I understood correctly people can go to the White House website and initiate their own petitions, then. I thought that it was the White House, through its website that STARTED the petition. I thought that was weird.
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 5309 posts, RR: 47 Reply 9, posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1517 times:
Just ignore them. I don't think they are trolls, but they often act like trolls.
And to be fair, as much as I hate them, they don't lynch people or bomb anything. Don't give them any attention and they'll either stop or people won't be mad because no one will be paying attention.
Even if they are characterized as a "hate group" what are they doing that goes against the Constitution? Nothing, I would reckon.
ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12335 posts, RR: 12 Reply 10, posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1514 times:
Quoting AR385 (Reply 5): Can someone explain to me what does the White House has to do with this petition?
Apparently the website of the White House (ie: the President/executive branch of the US Government) has put up the opportunity to create petitions on the site for the public to have a way to directly affect public policy. In recent months, the petitions have included silly ones like to build a Star Wars like 'death star' to some states terminating their statehood and separating as part of the USA and to call for the deportation of CNN Personalty and UK National Piers Morgan for his anti-gun comments in an interview with a guns right group. To be subject to Executive Department review, a minimum number of 'names' on these 'petitions' must be entered.
fr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 4259 posts, RR: 12 Reply 11, posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1514 times:
Quoting AR385 (Reply 8): So if I understood correctly people can go to the White House website and initiate their own petitions
Yup, go ahead and read through them. A while ago there was a petition to build a Death Star. I believe it got the requisite number of signatures to require a response from The White House. I need to look that up.
Airstud From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1856 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1508 times:
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 10): to call for the deportation of CNN Personalty and UK National Piers Morgan for his anti-gun comments
Yeah that one was a gem. I am very, very pro-Second Amendment, but these people who think a person should be deported for stating a perfectly civil, peaceable opinion - well I'm sorry, we first learned about the Constitution in seventh grade and these petitioners apparently never made it to eighth.
mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 22719 posts, RR: 88 Reply 14, posted (4 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1471 times:
Quoting seb146 (Reply 6): Tax them. They are using their tax exempt status as a "church" to fund these outrages. Once a religous organization crosses the line into politics, I say tax them.
I've never really understood why any church has tax exempt status. Anything spent on charity should, of course, be a deduction, but when I look at the staggering wealth of some churches, I start to wonder about the taxes I have to pay.
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 9): And to be fair, as much as I hate them, they don't lynch people or bomb anything. Don't give them any attention and they'll either stop or people won't be mad because no one will be paying attention.
I agree. Phelps and Co offend me mightily, but I think the young people at Matthew Sheppard's funeral had the right idea - dressing as angels with enormous wings to shield the grieving family from the Phelps mob.
vikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 8219 posts, RR: 28 Reply 15, posted (4 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1459 times:
seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9826 posts, RR: 17 Reply 16, posted (4 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1443 times:
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 9): Even if they are characterized as a "hate group" what are they doing that goes against the Constitution? Nothing, I would reckon.
One thing I have never understood is: why are they allowed to protest at funerals because "God hates..." (even though no where in any holy book does it say that any diety hates) but public nudity is banned? I am not talking about the obvious disgusting behavior but if someone wants to simply lay out in a park on a warm, sunny day that is horriffic and think of the children? Or a plant is illegal to posess?
Superfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 38502 posts, RR: 80 Reply 17, posted (4 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1438 times:
As much as I hate the Westboro Baptists, I support their 1st. Amendment right to free speech. In fact, I hope they're still around when I die and hope they protest at my funeral. That would be an accomplishment for me.
Quoting fr8mech (Reply 4): Be very careful with that line of reasoning...when there is "one time" that something needs to happen, there will be another time.
Quoting PC12Fan (Thread starter): I have more "respect" for the KKK than I ever would for the Westboro Baptists.
You can't possibly be serious with that statement.
I know you're angry at the Westboro Baptists as many people are but you can't possibly say they're better than a terrorist organization that has killed thousands of people.
How many has the Westboro Baptists killed?
AR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 4846 posts, RR: 27 Reply 18, posted (4 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1431 times:
Well, if anybody read or listened to the Pope´s Christmas message, it was so ridiculous it was funny. He mentioned how people were shunning the church and God and how people are becoming more materialistic, and then he goes and says that gay marriage, abortion and the usual threaten world peace. If it wasn´t so moronic...
So, really, with certain difference in degree, Ratzinger is not much different than Phelps, and I used to be Catholic...
fr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 4259 posts, RR: 12 Reply 19, posted (4 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1392 times:
Quoting mariner (Reply 14): I've never really understood why any church has tax exempt status. Anything spent on charity should, of course, be a deduction, but when I look at the staggering wealth of some churches, I start to wonder about the taxes I have to pay.
In a nutshell:
The power to tax is the power to control and ultimately destroy.
fr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 4259 posts, RR: 12 Reply 21, posted (4 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1337 times:
Quoting mariner (Reply 20): It isn't the taxes I object to, it is that churches are exempt from them.
Churches are exempt from taxes in order to give them additional protections from government interference.
scbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 11362 posts, RR: 50 Reply 22, posted (4 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1313 times:
Quoting Airstud (Reply 12): I am very, very pro-Second Amendment, but these people who think a person should be deported for stating a perfectly civil, peaceable opinion - well I'm sorry, we first learned about the Constitution in seventh grade and these petitioners apparently never made it to eighth.
Maybe you need to go back to school for a quick refresher session on the various amendments?
ImperialEagle From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1230 posts, RR: 14 Reply 23, posted (4 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1293 times:
For years the Phelps' have singled out the families of fallen soldiers to protest. They show-up at their funerals and harrass the families with ridiculous signs and banners suggesting that the Lord has punished the fallen soldiers for the sins of homosexuals.
As a funeral service professional I am very protective of the families I serve. I want their right to privacy respected while they work through the grieving process. I certainly don't want them confronted with the abject cruelty of some freaky radical religious group. If I thought there were even the chance of those P'sOS showing up I would file a restraining order or peace warrant against them to keep them away for a funeral. I don't think I would have a problem out of any of the judges I know.
There is a time and place for everything. Funerals should NEVER be a venue to protest anything other than the loss of a loved one. IMO ij just shows how demented the Phelps' are. Their moral compass has no pointer.
Again, I am reminded of the old quote:
"I like Christ, I just don't like some of his Christians. They are so UNlike their Christ."
"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
27 zckls04: Censoring them is a terrible idea. By doing that you grant them legitimacy, whereas currently they have none. They are figures of fun for most people.
28 rfields5421: First I agree that these nut cases are the worst kind of extremist who deserve nothing but our scorn. Won't happen. The 'right' of these people to mak
29 RussianJet: In the strict sense of the word, yes - but as you suggest, there is more than one way to skin a cat.....
30 fr8mech: Exactly my point. If a church, any church, were routinely threatened with taxation, it could easily change the way they do business. In other words,
31 srbmod: Last year, members of WBC were going to protest a military funeral at Arlington National Cemetery. Of course a number of counter-protesters showed up
32 Superfly: Oh the irony. No human being has moral authority on anything.
33 PC12Fan: Everyone, Can't argue all the points you've made. I guess I was getting passionate about this particular subject, especially with the recent tragedy.
34 Superfly: I figured that was the case. That was a bit out of character for you and totally understand your frustration with this group. It's time to stop relyi
35 DocLightning: I have to agree with you. Mark it down on the calendar. That said, it is not censorship to decide that their activities do not constitute a church an
36 mariner: But not my point. I know the historical causes of it, I understand the dance of power that existed between church and state. I accept your possible e
37 Dreadnought: Then you come to the idea of government defining what is and what is not a religion. Potentially a slippery slope, but I'm sure it is something reaso
38 jetblueguy22: I think this petition is a terrible idea. As much as I hate everything they stand for they are not doing anything constitutionally illegal. All this i
39 DeltaMD90: They are terrible. I don't want to open the gun debate in this thread, but I think we can agree from both sides that the almost glorification the sho
40 fr8mech: Of course they have accountability...us. So long as we continue to tune in and respond to their sensationalistic drivel, they will continue to spoon
41 zckls04: My biggest problem is churches using their position to influence government. I think if any church is found to donate money to a political campaign (
42 DocLightning: They already do. And they do a rotten job of it. There's a group of drag queens who do charitable work for the gay community and they are classified
43 zckls04: Most churches do some sort of charitable work, which means they'd be tax exempt anyway I would think.
44 DocLightning: Great. Let them. And for the churches that solely exist to funnel millions of dollars into the corrupt pastor's private coffers, tax them. Same with
45 Maverick623: They're no different than the old petitions.com or whatever website. I give a small pass to some of the "older" generations who may not fully know ho
46 Mike89406: You can support the WBC as they are in tge recycling business nowadays. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022050828
47 falstaff: The only protesters you will get will be greenies objecting to the giant Cadillac hearse hauling your body and the big Lincoln limos hauling the thro
48 DocLightning: Yes, and yet the Constitution grants that power. In fact there is no country of which I am aware in which there are no taxes at all except maybe the
49 fr8mech: I never said I was against taxation. I never said I was against taxing religious institutions. In fact, in this very thread I have advocated periodic
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2238 posts, 
From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 4846 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 22719 posts, 
From Thailand, joined May 2000, 38502 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 11362 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
