Is Westboro Baptist Church a hate group?

[eddie]

Some are beginning to think so, especially when Westboro wanted to protest at the funerals of the children killed in Newtown.

I think they can be classified as such.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/28/16210588-westboro-church-threat-to-picket-newtown-sparks-call-for-action?lite

[Cybermat47]

If it gets them banned, yes! They pervert the teachings of the Messiah, and just piss everyone else off.

[Takeda Shingen]

I think it's pretty clear that they are a hate group, given that their entire message is about hatred. In fact, hating seems to be just about the only thing they do.

[Herr-Berbunch]

Short answer - yes!

From what I've gleaned, and only from here, but they're nothing but a tight-knit family group with perverse ideology and are only a 'church' for tax benefits.

But I could be out of line here. :hmmm:

[Platapus]

Do we really want to start yanking IRS 501c status because a number of people disagree with what the organization does?

Keep in mind that any decision would have to be equally applied to other 501c organizations.....perhaps even ones many other people like.

That would be a slippery slope indeed. :nope:

[mookiemookie]

They're a gigantic money making scam that uses the word "church" as a way to shelter their scam from taxes. They're no more a "church" than I am.

[Takeda Shingen]

Well, here's the definition of hate group:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_group

A hate group is an organized group or movement that advocates and practices hatred, hostility, or violence towards members of a race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation or other designated sector of society.

I'd say that this pretty much covers Westboro Baptist. We're not talking about DOMA supporters or Chic-Fil-A here. This is a group that uses hate terminology and engages in disruptive behavior. Seems cut and dry to me.

[eddie]

Short answer - yes!

From what I've gleaned, and only from here, but they're nothing but a tight-knit family group with perverse ideology and are only a 'church' for tax benefits.

But I could be out of line here. :hmmm:

You're not out of line at all!:up:

[razark]

Without a doubt, they are a vile scum sucking hate group.

And as long as they don't break any laws, they have the First Amendment right to say what they want. :/\\!!

[Takeda Shingen]

Without a doubt, they are a vile scum sucking hate group.

And as long as they don't break any laws, they have the First Amendment right to say what they want. :/\\!!

Oh, they absolutely have the right to do what they are doing. But as a hate group they would no longer be considered a church and would lose their tax-exempt status.

[Armistead]

Short answer - yes!

From what I've gleaned, and only from here, but they're nothing but a tight-knit family group with perverse ideology and are only a 'church' for tax benefits.

But I could be out of line here. :hmmm:


Yea, it's sad you can start a church, declare yourself a Pastor and get so many tax deduction and benefits. Some past family state this family is just a group of old hippy atheist that have always played church....

[GoldenRivet]

As an East Texan who lives in a town where the only things to do is go to church, put money in the bank and eat dinner out I can pretty easily say that most baptist churches are hate groups.

[Platapus]

Well, here's the definition of hate group:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_group





One could make the same argument about the Catholic/baptist churchs

They are pretty hostile towards other religions and homosexuals.

That "definition" is fraught with loopholes. To me it should be restricted to acts of violence only.

A government can't really legislate hatred or hostility. Those are thoughts and intentions. It can, and should, only legislate actions.

The WBC is, in my opinion, scum. But until they break the law through action, they have a right to exist. No where does it say that a 501c organization needs to be nice.

[razark]

But as a hate group they would no longer be considered a church and would lose their tax-exempt status.
Who exactly decides on hate group status for tax purposes? I'm not aware of any government list of hate groups. And how does the government decide exactly what is or isn't a valid church for tax exemption? As far as I have seen, the WBC doesn't push a "political" agenda of the type that would get them in trouble.

[AVGWarhawk]

They're a gigantic money making scam that uses the word "church" as a way to shelter their scam from taxes. They're no more a "church" than I am.

I will go one further in that the WBC peddles their political view under the guise of being a church. It really is a political hate group.

[Cybermat47]

I can pretty easily say that most baptist churches are hate groups.

How come? :hmmm:

[Armistead]

As an East Texan who lives in a town where the only things to do is go to church, put money in the bank and eat dinner out I can pretty easily say that most baptist churches are hate groups.

I grew up in a Ind. Fund. Bapt. Ch. in the south, left when I was about 20. I bet it took 10 years to rid myself of indoctrinated racism, sexism, general hate, etc... Not to mention the fear of God striking me dead for each lil sexual thought I had due to puberty....:D

[Cybermat47]

Not to mention the fear of God striking me dead for each lil sexual thought I had due to puberty....:D

Don't worry, there's only one passage in the Bible that could be interpreted as referencing...that, and if you do interpret it as such, its pretty much saying "Play with yourself!"

[GoldenRivet]

How come? :hmmm:

It's just the way they look down their noses at you if you deviate from their opinions even slightly.

They throw their weight around in these parts. It's like a mafia

[Armistead]

Don't worry, there's only one passage in the Bible that could be interpreted as referencing...that, and if you do interpret it as such, its pretty much saying "Play with yourself!"

I haven't worried about that in 30 years.....

Anyway, that wasn't what I was talking about, in our church then just thinking about a girl was adultery, but of course that led to the other....Course as a normal young man I did both, just with a lot of guilt.
Why I would never allow my son to go to any fundy church as I raised him.

[Cybermat47]

^^^^^

Baptist Churches just sound...nasty!

[TarJak]

Most religious fundamentalists are nasty. WBC is a hate group but they also prey (and pray) on being in the media to further their crappy messages and to help bring in funds from like minded twats. The best way of dealing with them is ignoring them. They may not go away but they will be starved of funds if the media didn't follow their every move.

[u crank]

^^^^^

Baptist Churches just sound...nasty!

Careful what you say. Making broad and unfounded statements about any one group of people is the first step toward the same mistake these people make.

These people were all Baptists.

Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Abraham Lincoln, Harry Truman, and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to name a few.

[mookiemookie]

I'd be surprised if WBC actually and personally believe 1/10th of what their signs say. They're trolls who say things to get people riled up, that's all.

[u crank]

Is Westboro Baptist Church a hate group?

If you give the Wiki article on them a quick read, it appears that they hate almost everything and everybody. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck......

I'd be surprised if WBC actually and personally believe 1/10th of what their signs say. They're trolls who say things to get people riled up, that's all.

Agreed. Just another way to be famous. And make money.

[Karle94]

The WBC is so extreme in their ways that even Ku Klux Klan doesn`t want anyhing to do with these guys.

[Onkel Neal]

Careful what you say. Making broad and unfounded statements about any one group of people is the first step toward the same mistake these people make.

These people were all Baptists.

Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Abraham Lincoln, Harry Truman, and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to name a few.


I agree. Most religious people I know, Baptists included, are not all that different than non-religious people in their manner of expressing their opinions and beliefs. I know that probably disappoints any Baptist, they want to be different (in a good way). I would not say they are bad, they have their opinions like everyone else. And yeah, like you said, bashing Baptists or Christians is probably not a tolerant POV.

For me, when Pat Robertson makes some hateful remark, and it gets picked up by the news cycle, it's not in the same league as when the WBC makes an disruptive, innappropriate appearance in force at a funeral.

[u crank]

For me, when Pat Robertson makes some hateful remark, and it gets picked up by the news cycle, it's not in the same league as when the WBC makes an disruptive, innappropriate appearance in force at a funeral.

I always try to separate uneducated ignorance from intentional malice. They're both bad, but one can be excused, the other can't be. One can also be corrected if people are willing to listen. I don't see much hope for the other.

[Jimbuna]

For me, when Pat Robertson makes some hateful remark, and it gets picked up by the news cycle, it's not in the same league as when the WBC makes an disruptive, innappropriate appearance in force at a funeral.

And that for me is one of the defining reasons I consider them (WBC) to be a hate group :yep:

[Buddahaid]

I think it's high time the tax exempt status is removed for all churches etc.

[Platapus]

I think it's high time the tax exempt status is removed for all churches etc.

That is a concept well worth discussing.

Personally, I feel churches should be taxed, but the church's not-for-profit activities should be exempt from taxation. In other words, the same rules for corporations should apply to religious corporations (churches).

Churches like corporations have their for profit activities and their not-for-profit activities. The same rules should apply to both.

Unless property is being used for recognized not-for-profit purposes, I do not understand how a church can receive income from owing property and not pay taxes.

[CaptainHaplo]

Well, here's the definition of hate group:

"A hate group is an organized group or movement that advocates and practices hatred, hostility, or violence towards members of a race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation or other designated sector of society"

I'd say that this pretty much covers Westboro Baptist. We're not talking about DOMA supporters or Chic-Fil-A here. This is a group that uses hate terminology and engages in disruptive behavior. Seems cut and dry to me.

Sadly, this is why they are NOT a hate group. The do not advocate that others hate homosexuals - they simply state that (they think) "God hates homosexuals". They do not advocate violence unlawful in any form against any group - including homosexuals.

Do not misunderstand - I find their tactics terrible, their lack of scholarship atrocious, and their intent despicable. That does not make them a hate group.

The first time there comes to light a "sermon" or "teaching" from Ole Fred, the patriarch, that says to go round up the gays and light em on fire or drag em through the streets - in other words - encouraging such action to take place outside the law - then they will be shut down immediately. These people are fools - but not so foolish as to step outside the boundaries of what this nation - that they so despise - affords them.

[Penguin]

No question they fall under the definition of a hate group.
I would also say that the right to have an undisturbed funeral trumps their right to spill their agenda. From a moral point of view go as far and say their right not to be physical harmed is less worth than the right to bury a person in peace.

People who attend a funeral are there involuntarely, they would rather listen to 600 hours of Justin Bieber than being forced to bury a loved one.
It is a different case when the "church" protests a homosexual parade. These folks attend a rally by their own will, so protesting there is legitimate, the question if the protests are idiotic or not, is of no concern when it comes to the quesion about legality.

[Tribesman]

For me, when Pat Robertson makes some hateful remark, and it gets picked up by the news cycle, it's not in the same league as when the WBC makes an disruptive, innappropriate appearance in force at a funeral.
For me I think Pat Robertson is actually worse.
Unlike Phelps he has a wide reaching comprehensive media network which some people actually think is credible, unlike Phelps he has access to politicians and partakes in national events as an insider not as a nutter screaming from the sidewalk down the block, unlike Phelps I think the hate filled bigot actually really believes what he says.
Any one of those alone makes him worse than Phelps, a combination of them makes him a lot worse than the WBC

[Armistead]

Binny Hinn... Dark Sith Lord ....Got to be one of the funniest videos on utube.

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Benny+Hinn+YouTube&view=detail&mid=4A789133E126DD84DBF64A789133E126DD84DBF6&first=21

[Penguin]

Sadly, this is why they are NOT a hate group. The do not advocate that others hate homosexuals - they simply state that (they think) "God hates homosexuals". They do not advocate violence unlawful in any form against any group - including homosexuals.

They do advocate hatred. According to them, their interpretation of Christianity is the only true one. They worship their version of god, who hates about 99.9% of the world. As the "true believers" that they are they spread "god's will" by advocating hate. Their message is "You want to be saved? OK, follow the right way and hate (insert group)." As they are convinced of their version of truth, they want others to believe the same, to walk the way that is right according to them.
You can call it hate-by-proxy if you want, if people say "my leader hates fags" instead of "I hate them". Nonetheless they believe this and leave no chance out to spread their message.

[soopaman2]

The minute you hear them scream their "god hates fags" and *soldiers name* is a "sh.. doo doo Uhh eater" (please let that slide :))...at a soldiers funeral, who's only crime was dying in a war.

I am utterly disgusted by any group who capitalizes on soldiers deaths to get attention.

Especially when they are tax exempt, and their roll call sheet looks like the scene from Blazing Saddles, when the entire town council had the same last name (Johnson) implying incest.

How could I start my own tax exempt church... I want it stopped or Iwant in.

I will worship my pinky toe, and his name is Bubby. Bubby bless Bubby upon you all, now where is my tax exemption?

Bubby believes in masturbation and playing ping pong.

My new name is Grandmaster Shalabalabad of Eastus, and I am an apostle, and messenger of Bubby.
Call me silly.
So about that tax exempt thing... Not like I hate anyone without a Phelps or Roper last name like these fruits do.

You can allllllllll join my flock, I ask nothing, Just love of Bubby.

[Armistead]

The minute you hear them scream their "god hates fags" and *soldiers name* is a "sh.. doo doo Uhh eater" (please let that slide :))...at a soldiers funeral, who's only crime was dying in a war.

I am utterly disgusted by any group who capitalizes on soldiers deaths to get attention.

Especially when they are tax exempt, and their roll call sheet looks like the scene from Blazing Saddles, when the entire town council had the same last name (Johnson) implying incest.

How could I start my own tax exempt church... I want it stopped or Iwant in.

I will worship my pinky toe, and his name is Bubby. Bubby bless Bubby upon you all, now where is my tax exemption?

Bubby believes in masturbation and playing ping pong.

My new name is Grandmaster Shalabalabad of Eastus, and I am an apostle, and messenger of Bubby.
Call me silly.
So about that tax exempt thing... Not like I hate anyone without a Phelps or Roper last name like these fruits do.

You can allllllllll join my flock, I ask nothing, Just love of Bubby.

Actually many have started their own home church so they can get all the tax deductions. Just declare yourself a Pastor, have church at your house and let the tax deductions roll.....

[Jimbuna]

Actually many have started their own home church so they can get all the tax deductions. Just declare yourself a Pastor, have church at your house and let the tax deductions roll.....
If that is in fact the case where do I sign up :)

[eddie]

If that is in fact the case where do I sign up :)

Right here!:D

http://www.amfellow.org/

[Jimbuna]

Right here!:D

http://www.amfellow.org/

No problem...you make the donation and I'll be well pleased :O:

[Cybermat47]

I think it's high time the tax exempt status is removed for all churches etc.

Really? Some might view that as a breach of the 1st Amendment,a clause of which gaurantees Freedom of Religion.

[eddie]

No problem...you make the donation and I'll be well pleased :O:

I'll have to borrow the money though! Any suggestions as to whom might give us some financial help, so you can become a Clergyman?

[Jimbuna]

I'll have to borrow the money though! Any suggestions as to whom might give us some financial help, so you can become a Clergyman?

Cybermat47 :har:

[Cybermat47]

Cybermat47 :har:

Nah, borrow it from Richard Dawkins, he'll be so willing to help a fledgling Church.

[Jimbuna]

I chose you because rumours have it you receive a handsome pocket money allowance :D

[razark]

Really? Some might view that as a breach of the 1st Amendment,a clause of which gaurantees Freedom of Religion.
If you tax all churches equally, it's not an infringement. If you tax the Catholics at 1%, and the Baptists at 10%, and the Muslims at 50%, and the Wiccans at 90%, then you're crossing a line.

I have no problem taxing churches, however I don't expect that to happen any time soon. I do think that any church that wishes to maintain a tax-free status should be required to allow the public to examine their books.

[Skybird]

Really? Some might view that as a breach of the 1st Amendment,a clause of which gaurantees Freedom of Religion.And freedom from religion. That's what the religious crowd comfortably forgets to mention time and again. It also is about the obligation of the state to stay out of the business of propagating interests of religious groups and content of religious dogma.

Tax privileges for religious groups, parallel justice systems that replace the law code of the country, and state-collected religion taxes (as in Germany in case of Protestant and Catholic church), also have to go. Everywhere. Members and priests of religions are responsible before the law in the same way anyone else is. Religious groups have to pay the same taxes like anybody else, by the same rules. No public funding for religious institutions, may it be temples, may it be attached social services. Groups and churches have to finance themselves by donations of its members or what the members agree to pay in mandatory membership fees.

No tax evasion for the rich. No special status for the religious. Both are as equal before the law as any ordinary citizen not being rich and not having a club card. No public funding.

And in case I have not said it before: no public funding. :D Neither directly nor indirectly.

[Cybermat47]

^^^^^^^

No, it's Freedom of Religion, which means that the Government will not excessively involve itself in Religion. Removing the tax-exempt status could be seen as a breach of that.

[Cybermat47]

Also, the 14th Amendment ensures that people will not be prosecuted for their Religion (or lack of). Removing the tax exempt status could be seen by some as a break of that.

[Cybermat47]

parallel justice systems that replace the law code of the country, and state-collected religion taxes (as in Germany in case of Protestant and Catholic church), also have to go. Everywhere. Members and priests of religions are responsible before the law in the same way anyone else is..

Don't worry, the parallel justice system disappeared ages ago! What sort of country would have a government stupid enough to let that sort of thong happen, yet smart enough to convince everyone to vote for them?

[Platapus]

By granting churches a tax expenditure (which what an exemption is), would that not be a case of the government getting involved in religion?

No one is saying that the government should have oversight over what churches do. That would be a violation of the first amendment.

But making the tax expenditures the same as for other non-religious entities (corporations for example), would be more in line with first amendment position that the government should stay out of religious issues.

I don't see how making things the same (people being treated equally) could be considered infringement. :nope:

A most interesting issue. :yep:

[Platapus]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...

I don't see anything in there about guaranteeing a church tax free status. :nope:

[Takeda Shingen]

And freedom from religion. That's what the religious crowd comfortably forgets to mention time and again. It also is about the obligation of the state to stay out of the business of propagating interests of religious groups and content of religious dogma.

Your understanding of the US Constitution is remarkably shallow.

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.

That's all it says, Skybird. Free exercise of religion, no state church. Period. Every other argument made about the interpretation is subjective.

[Skybird]

^^^^^^^

No, it's Freedom of Religion,
Which necessarily includes the right to stay free from any religion, not just some, but all. You cannot have a freedom of religious practice without the freedom to no need to care for religion, no matter which one, at all. That's why the state shall not support any bills and law-making on behalf of interest-lobbying for any religions there are.

which means that the Government will not excessively involve itself in Religion.
No, it is not that the state should not engage in exessive involvement of religion, but should not engage in any engagement on behalf of religion at all.

It seems to me you have not thought your line of thought to the logical end, or do not want to do so. What you imply, in the end leads to nothing else but discrimination and two-class-system founded on a dominant religions' claims.

I refuse to accept such special status being given to religions, no matter their name. Your freedom ends where you start to limit mine and claim your freedom justifies that. But it does not justify it.

Keep thy relgion to thyself. Don'T bother others with it. Do not expect others paying special attention to it or willing it to be given special rights, priviliges, and special freedoms.

Regarding parallel justice systems, you obviously do not know about the Catholic church is running a parallel justice system of church law that in parts overrules the law of the country, that Islam practices - also in Western countries - a system of parallel justice that boycotts the legal system of the state and establishes one based on Shariah, and that Jews also know the idea of such a parallel justice systems. You also ignore that on certain issues like circumcision these religions demand immunity from certain laws that would punish everybody doing the same acts, but not claiming protection of religious special status for it.

Nice double standards.

No special rights, no priviliges, no special status for religions. Religions behave the worse the more these things are given to it. According chapters of history since millenia time and again turn out to be extremely brutal, barbaric, brain-killing and intolerant. Religions are to be tolerated only in situations of tight control and superivision, being practiced only in small doses, so that they cannot brake out and turn the world into a hellhouse once again.

[Sailor Steve]

Really? Some might view that as a breach of the 1st Amendment,a clause of which gaurantees Freedom of Religion.
Some might. Others might ask what special priviledges such as tax-exempt status have to do with freedom of anything.

[Sailor Steve]

And freedom from religion. That's what the religious crowd comfortably forgets to mention time and again.
Actually some religious types not only don't forget that, they mention it loudly, insisting that it does not guarantee freedom from religion.

On the other hand, they don't mean the same thing by that phrase that you do. You mean freedom from being bombarded by religious proseletizing, whereas they mean freedom from the existence of religion.

Or maybe you mean that too?

[Sailor Steve]

^^^^^^^

No, it's Freedom of Religion, which means that the Government will not excessively involve itself in Religion. Removing the tax-exempt status could be seen as a breach of that.

Also, the 14th Amendment ensures that people will not be prosecuted for their Religion (or lack of). Removing the tax exempt status could be seen by some as a break of that.
Now you're bordering on the ridiculous. Some people might try to claim that, but they would be wrong. Tax-exempt status is a special allotment, not an equal right, or a freedom. Removing it does not involve persecution or prosecution.

[Sailor Steve]

Keep thy relgion to thyself. Don'T bother others with it.
I tend to agree about tax-exemptions for belief, but here you are insisting on limiting freedom of speech. You can turn anyone away from your own door, and you can tell anyone who approaches you in public to leave you alone. You cannot make a law preventing them from trying to talk to you.

[Cybermat47]

Now you're bordering on the ridiculous. Removing it does not involve persecution or prosecution.

Yeah, you're right.

[soopaman2]

Let me put this in a simple way most any of us can understand.

Their tagline is "god hates Fags"

They go anywhere, where they and their inbred family can get attention.

Kinda reminds me of a deliverance kinda family, or a Texas Chainsaw Massacre kinda fellowship. Either way, I hope I am not pulled over in that part of town.

(I would rather deal with our gun happy police)

[Jimbuna]

No comment :doh:

[Skybird]

Actually some religious types not only don't forget that, they mention it loudly, insisting that it does not guarantee freedom from religion.

On the other hand, they don't mean the same thing by that phrase that you do. You mean freedom from being bombarded by religious proseletizing, whereas they mean freedom from the existence of religion.

Or maybe you mean that too?

I mean not needing to constantly defend my freedom against claims for more freedom and rights and more influence by religions, based on religious dogma.

I mean it in the way I get angry if companies would call me for advertizing at home and if I tell them I don't want that, they stop for a while, and then they start again or somebody else. Because it is annoying to be expected to take of the telephone three times per day - even if the other side falls silent once you told them they are not welcomed. I insist on my right and freedom to not need to be triggered like this time and again.

I mean that the public space, society, state-run institutions, education, law, and in general: places payed for and maintained by my taxes, should not be tailored and base on demands of religion, but should remain to be free of religious demands. Club rules are for clubhouses and the fenced property around it. Outside the clubhouse, they shall not apply. Nevertheless, they have to - always, in every case - be in conformity with the law of the land.

I play my radio in my rooms that way that my neighbours must not take not of it. If I want to listen to louder music, I take headphones. If I do not wish to use headphones, then I would need to find myself a place that I can afford and where I live all alone so that nobody gets effected if I pump up the volume. If I cannot afford that - then I either skip playing music, or must go back to headphones, or must get used to playing it more silent.

Keep thy music to thy ears. Don't attack others by pushing it down their ears, too, no matter whether they want or not. They may have their own tune.

Some extreme music lovers nevertheless can'T even get it when using headphones. They play it so loud that you can listen to their tune in all the bus or train waggon you sit in. That was when somebody experienced me tapping on his shoulders and giving him a grim look. So far, they got the message then, and turned more silent.

And then it was okay.

Still any doubts on your side regarding what I mean? It is very simple to live in peaceful neighbourhood with me, because I live by a simple physical law: force results in counterforce. Push me, and I push back. Push me more, and I push even stronger.

Don't push me, and don't get pushed by me. Tolerance, and freedom and all that is all nice and well: but I insist on equal terms for all, and reciprocity, and the obligatory nature of some basic rules that even religions should not be allowed to avoid.

Because religious people in no way are the more precious and valuable people. Have you read this year the sociological study where they examined the degree of helpfulness and willingness to help in religious people, and non-believers? The study found religious people to be more limited and rigid, and non-believers to be more willing to help and being more altruistic. The authors assume that it is because a non-believer does not enjoy the luxury of just following a dogmatic set of rules (and how often do these rules show anything by a helpful, friendly tolerant, altruistic mindset when considering how much bad "fate" is considered to be well-earned and God-wanted?) , but a non-believer must form and reflect over moral standards on a far more profound, basic level, since he has no "compass" provided by scriptures to follow, but must plot his own course. Believers often claim, unproven and unfounded, that without religion there would be no moral behaviour. Quite the opposite is the truth. Religions have condensated in the institutionalised format of the big world religions of today despite humans having formed moral standards. And all to often we see in side relgions these moral standards collapsing and being replaced by blind fanatism, hate and intolerance and all the resulting barbary and cold-heartedness towards humans believing in the "wrong colours". Every religion seems to have an exoteric, institutional, dogmatic, profane (= directed at the world, power, control) face, which I always see as negative, and an inner, esoteric level, that can be called mystic, enlightenment, Zen, whatever. As I understand it, free masonry is about that, and is about safeguarding against the dark side of exoteric religion. People of the latter type you can get along with very well, as long as they do not turn into simple-minded new-age dilletants. But the exoterically religious by definition are fundamentalists and fanatics of varying degrees of severity. And these must be confronted and stopped, no matter how, no matter the cost - else they destroy everything else in the name of their "religion". Some are active aggressors, other give passive support by not opposing them and thus giving them the opportunity to unfold. Both are as guilty, however.

[Tribesman]

So Skybirds self contradictory nature comes into play again.
Don't push me and I won't push you but if you don't push them then I will push you too:doh:

[Skybird]

I tend to agree about tax-exemptions for belief, but here you are insisting on limiting freedom of speech. You can turn anyone away from your own door, and you can tell anyone who approaches you in public to leave you alone. You cannot make a law preventing them from trying to talk to you.
Being called at home for advertising something once or twice a year, is nothing I keep my mind busy with.

Being called several times per week, seeing campaigns by the according companies to change laws on behalf of their interests and people not buying them getting discriminated and demanded to be stripped of freedoms and rights that others take for granted for themselves - that is something different.

Yes, I demand not to be approached constantly as long as I have not asked and have not invited them. I understand missionising to be an act of aggression. Even more so since it is one of its principles not to encourage questions and critical reflection, but to paralyse both and instead push a pre-fabricated message along the neurons's axons.

[Cybermat47]

instead push a pre-fabricated message along the neurons's axons.

A pre-fabricated message...telling you to love everybody, which is what most people already do, is something that you're sick and tired of? :doh:

[soopaman2]

Where does it end?

Where is our right to strike back?

Their "god hates fags" crap echoed over so many funerals of American war dead, Where is my justice? Where is my fair play?

These people blame all the ills of American society on Homosexuals, seriously???

When I blame all our ills on religious Christian extremists.


So it does not end, they blame me, I blame them, though in this particular case, the idiocy is clearly on their side. (for once)

Jesus taught above all, forgiveness.

The one thing religious extremists like this lack, and the eventual downfall of America, mark my words.


Edit: for the record, pork and shellfish is off limits too, but the queer haters never bring that up when they quote Leviticus and Deutoronomy, as well as sleeping with an unclean woman, (on the rag) something we all did.

I have a feeling someone will be along to clean this up and chastize my bluntness, since I am no friend of mods around here. (Yeah you,)

[Skybird]

A pre-fabricated message...telling you to love everybody, which is what most people already do, is something that you're sick and tired of? :doh:
Oh the irony in this question. :haha:

The answer cannot be any different than "Yes"...!

Serious now. I refuse to love everybody for sure. It's a violation of my sense of reason to love jst everybody, and it also is beyond my capacity and strength to love 7 billion people, counting. Let's be honest, all the world is a little too much for our human shoulders, let's chose some more realistic proportions then. I like some people - and others I don't. I tolerate some people - and some I don't. And I believe in the good of a some people - but not in something good in all people. Some are to be handled with care - some are just scum.

And many religious sectarians tell you that you will be loved only if you believe the right things - theirs. Many institutions do that, too, and threaten you with hellfire and eternal doom if you don't.

And be honest - does it really need a religion to tell you to treat the other friendly if he treats you friendly, too? Haven't you already come to that idea all by yourself, long before the first religion knocked on your door? ;)

Religious dogma of this or that sect, school, dogma - it all is prefabricated stuff for sure, tailored to support the club'S claim for power, control over people and their minds, and special status given to them and demands announced that all other should believe what they believe, else...! Superstitious retaliation in the next life at best, oppression and discrimination and progroms in already this profane present reality at worst. Save me!

[soopaman2]

No comment :doh:

No offense Mr. Buna.
I understand you were an LEO, and a damned good one, but America is kinda infected.

Protect-my-pension-itus

British gentlemen are excused from my above comments.:timeout:

[Cybermat47]

Skybird, you know that if all religous institutions lose their tax exempt status in your country, they're just going to come knocking on your door even more asking for donations :haha:

[Sailor Steve]

A pre-fabricated message...telling you to love everybody, which is what most people already do, is something that you're sick and tired of? :doh:
That is not what religious proselytizers say...none of them. They try to convince you that their way of belief is the only way, and that you need to join them. The message of love is almost never mentioned. Perhaps at your young age you've never been aggressively approached by dozens of different persuasions of believers over a period of several years, but once you're an adult you will find all types of people trying to convince you that your way is wrong and their way is right.

To be honest, I sympathize with them up to a point, since if you truly believe that not believing as you do results in a quick trip to hell then you want to save as many people from that fate as you can, but it does get old after awhile.

[Sailor Steve]

I mean not needing to constantly defend my freedom against claims for more freedom and rights and more influence by religions, based on religious dogma.

Being called at home for advertising something once or twice a year, is nothing I keep my mind busy with.

Being called several times per week, seeing campaigns by the according companies to change laws on behalf of their interests and people not buying them getting discriminated and demanded to be stripped of freedoms and rights that others take for granted for themselves - that is something different.
I knew exactly what you meant, and to a point I agree with you. I was just point out that there are religious types who believe that "freedom from religion" means taking away their right to worship what they want.

Other than that, we are in accordance. I think we just disagree about where to draw that line.

[Sailor Steve]

So Skybirds self contradictory nature comes into play again.
Don't push me and I won't push you but if you don't push them then I will push you too:doh:
Actually that wasn't what he said, and you're showing your own bias again.

[Sailor Steve]

Skybird, you know that if all religous institutions lose their tax exempt status in your country, they're just going to come knocking on your door even more asking for donations :haha:
Yep, and he can close the door in their face for no extra cost.

[Armistead]

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh316/Sixft12/netvibes/eatingpopcorn.gif

[Cybermat47]

Yep, and he can close the door in their face for no extra cost.

If we all lived in an MMO, he'd probably have to pay $50 :har:

[Sailor Steve]

If we all lived in an MMO, he'd probably have to pay $50 :har:
Which means what exactly?

[Cybermat47]

Which means what exactly?

That I don't like MMOs.

[Sailor Steve]

That I don't like MMOs.
Which has what to do with the discussion at hand?

[Cybermat47]

Which has what to do with the discussion at hand?

Nothing. Enough Theological debates. Goodbye and have a nice day, sir :arrgh!:

[Sailor Steve]

Nothing.
My point exactly.

[Tribesman]

Actually that wasn't what he said, and you're showing your own bias again.
Really Steve?


Don't push me, and don't get pushed by me.

That is a simple line, one that is justifiable and understandable

Some are active aggressors, other give passive support by not opposing them and thus giving them the opportunity to unfold. Both are as guilty, however.
No matter what the cost he must confront them and push to stop these people?

So that is don't push me and I won't push you but make sure you push those people I want to push or I will push you too as not supporting my view makes you guilty.:yep:
That is the line of the fundamentalist zealot which is not justifiable.

So Steve try and repeat your claim again with a straight face.

[HundertzehnGustav]

Yep, and he can close the door in their face for no extra cost.

Or he can keep them tied up for 15 minutes, and do as i do.
Or Draw his gun on them, see how they react.

keep them standing outside. "hold on, M'aam, let me grab my Mug" and then have a Cup of Tea and a Sandwich in their Face.:D

Keeping Religious Types at my door is what i do in my Pasttime. I have kept 2 chicks standing at attention for one hour thirty four minutes once, replying to their claims with abolutely bonkers theories. It was awesome entertainment, and didn't cost me a dime.

However, what i see from this socalled W.B.Church makes me want to put them into a Gulag Stalag or worse.

hate group?
They hate everybody but themselves it seems.

Which is a thing one can often find between religions... hate, just because of difference.

Religion, if i can not make fun of it, gets on my nerves and serves me nothing, zilch nada... but these Types take the Cookie for sure.

[Buddahaid]

Or he can keep them tied up for 15 minutes, and do as i do.
Or Draw his gun on them, see how they react.

keep them standing outside. "hold on, M'aam, let me grab my Mug" and then have a Cup of Tea and a Sandwich in their Face.:D

Keeping Religious Types at my door is what i do in my Pasttime. I have kept 2 chicks standing at attention for one hour thirty four minutes once, replying to their claims with abolutely bonkers theories. It was awesome entertainment, and didn't cost me a dime.

However, what i see from this socalled W.B.Church makes me want to put them into a Gulag Stalag or worse.

hate group?
They hate everybody but themselves it seems.

Which is a thing one can often find between religions... hate, just because of difference.

Religion, if i can not make fun of it, gets on my nerves and serves me nothing, zilch nada... but these Types take the Cookie for sure.

I have some friends that let them in and then steer the conversation to Buddhism at every turn, offer more coffee, and watch them squirm to get away. That usually cures the visitors for a good while.:yeah:

I admit I have a problem with many Churches and see them as mostly social clubs with very little Christian thought to back them up. And I find those Churches to usually be Baptist but that is just my experience and opinion.

Churches should be about the people and are the people. Why waste the collection money on building ridiculous Cathedrals? Are we still in the Dark Ages when people thought they could buy their way to heaven by giving land and money to the Church?

I agree that the charitable work should be tax exempt, but I also think as a tax exempt Church, the amount of charity should be at a higher rate to encourage the roll of providing safe haven to the destitute, not turning them away from the gilt doors of the beautiful building where they make unsavory viewing to the Church members dressed in their finest for the social gathering. Those people are also souls to be saved if you really are a Christian and that is where the true colors are shown.

[Sailor Steve]

Really Steve?


Don't push me, and don't get pushed by me.

That is a simple line, one that is justifiable and understandable
Yep, and you took it to mean what you wanted it to mean, adding extra meanings because it's what you think Skybird always means. You put words in his mouth that he didn't say. You may or may not be right, but you still added extra meanings on top of what he actually said.

It was indeed simple, but you felt the need to complicate it.

[Skybird]

As I see Tribesman does what he has done best already three years ago or so : trolling, misquoting, turning words in people's mouth and ignoring contexts of quotes to give them the twist he wants for continuing his trolling rampage. I do not even wish to learn what else he is throwing at me when I do not look - which is always, btw. - and people are kind enough to not quote him so that he remains invisible for me.

Thanks for your support, Steve, but I have told you before: you are wasting your time with guys like this. It's a troll you are dealing with, simply that: a troll.

I recommend to follow my example and just setting him to ignore status. Saves you time and nerves. That's what I did a long time ago. He's not about serious or honest communication, he's about trolling, wanting to see who falls for him today and for how long.

Have a happy new year, Steve.

[Tribesman]

Yep, and you took it to mean what you wanted it to mean, adding extra meanings because it's what you think Skybird always means. You put words in his mouth that he didn't say. You may or may not be right, but you still added extra meanings on top of what he actually said.

It was indeed simple, but you felt the need to complicate it.
No, the words say what they say.
Is there any particular reason you are cutting the quote?
Are you unable to make that claim with a straight face when you use his second line?
Perhaps you have a fanciful line you could dream up which would mean his words do not say what they say.


As I see Tribesman does what he has done best already three years ago or so : trolling, misquoting, turning words in people's mouth and ignoring contexts of quotes to give them the twist he wants for continuing his trolling rampage.
I call Skybird a liar because he lies, a bigot because of his rampant blind hatred, and a zealot because of his religious fanatacism.
Simple isn't it.

[Hottentot]

Oh dear...

[Jimbuna]

As I see Tribesman does what he has done best already three years ago or so : trolling, misquoting, turning words in people's mouth and ignoring contexts of quotes to give them the twist he wants for continuing his trolling rampage. I do not even wish to learn what else he is throwing at me when I do not look - which is always, btw. - and people are kind enough to not quote him so that he remains invisible for me.

Thanks for your support, Steve, but I have told you before: you are wasting your time with guys like this. It's a troll you are dealing with, simply that: a troll.

I recommend to follow my example and just setting him to ignore status. Saves you time and nerves. That's what I did a long time ago. He's not about serious or honest communication, he's about trolling, wanting to see who falls for him today and for how long.

Have a happy new year, Steve.

No, the words say what they say.
Is there any particular reason you are cutting the quote?
Are you unable to make that claim with a straight face when you use his second line?
Perhaps you have a fanciful line you could dream up which would mean his words do not say what they say.



I call Skybird a liar because he lies, a bigot because of his rampant blind hatred, and a zealot because of his religious fanatacism.
Simple isn't it.

http://imgcash3.imageshack.us/img233/1673/adminwatch2af0.gif

As low key as I can manage so can we all settle down before further action is required......please?

[Armistead]

No, the words say what they say.
Is there any particular reason you are cutting the quote?
Are you unable to make that claim with a straight face when you use his second line?
Perhaps you have a fanciful line you could dream up which would mean his words do not say what they say.



I call Skybird a liar because he lies, a bigot because of his rampant blind hatred, and a zealot because of his religious fanatacism.
Simple isn't it.

Please stop talking about Skybird and calling him names, he may be stupid, but he's not a liar.

Anyway, I'll go back to my chair.

http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k110/tonyeyles/smilies/1947_eating_popcorn_and_drinking_be.gif

[Skybird]

Please stop talking about Skybird and calling him names, he may be stupid, but he's not a liar.


http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/7280/asterixschlag.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/4/asterixschlag.png/)

[Jimbuna]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v337/JFliegel/picard-facepalm.jpg

:)

[Takeda Shingen]

Please stop talking about Skybird and calling him names, he may be stupid, but he's not a liar.

Anyway, I'll go back to my chair.

http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k110/tonyeyles/smilies/1947_eating_popcorn_and_drinking_be.gif

Thank you Armistead. That was very helpful in calming things down.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v337/JFliegel/picard-facepalm.jpg


I'll see your facepalm and raise you a headdesk.

http://thatschurch.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/headdesk.jpg

Do you every find yourself wondering about some of the members here? Sometimes I just read these posts and can't help myself from saying 'what in the name of high school football' out loud.

[Betonov]

Sooooo, anyone recommends any good kebab joints in London ??

[Platapus]

So the Washington Redskins and Dallas Cowboys are playing in about 3 hours. The problem is that I want both teams to lose.

Can that happen in NFL?:D

[u crank]

So the Washington Redskins and Dallas Cowboys are playing in about 3 hours. The problem is that I want both teams to lose.

Can that happen in NFL?:D

Only with his help.

http://www.dallasnews.com/incoming/20121213-enter_movie-hobbit_2_mct_28538807.jpg.ece/BINARY/w620x413/ENTER_MOVIE-HOBBIT_2_MCT_28538807.JPG

[Armistead]

Thank you Armistead. That was very helpful in calming things down.




Glad to be of help.....

Course the bird knows I was pulling his feathers....:O:

[Takeda Shingen]

Glad to be of help.....

Next time leave it to us, thanks. Less misunderstandings that way.

[Armistead]

I'm sorry Skybird........

[Cybermat47]

http://thatschurch.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/headdesk.jpg
.

That's pretty much my reaction to all these Theological arguments.

[Tribesman]

Please stop talking about Skybird and calling him names, he may be stupid, but he's not a liar.

I am afraid you are very wrong Armistead.

That is the beauty of lies, they are relatively easy to prove as such and the "three years ago or so" episode he mentions does provide a very good example of it.

If only the truth were so easy to establish.

[Skybird]

Course the bird knows I was pulling his feathers....
(...)
I'm sorry Skybird........

http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/3924/idefixko.gif (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/820/idefixko.gif/)

[Armistead]

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4689087191122994&pid=1.7

[Cybermat47]

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4689087191122994&pid=1.7

:yeah: :up: :yep: