• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Anti-gay group plans to challenge new law against funeral protests

Cassapolis

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
85
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
ASSOCIATED PRESS
03/02/2006

ANDERSON, Mo. (AP) -- Members of a Kansas group known for their "God Hates Fags" placards say they'll picket the weekend funeral of a Missouri soldier, setting up the first direct challenge of a new state law.

Army Pfc. Christopher L. Marion, killed last week by a roadside bomb in Iraq, will be buried Saturday in Anderson, south of Joplin in the southwest corner of Missouri.

And the Topeka, Kan.-based Westboro Baptist Church will be there, said Shirley Roper-Phelps, the daughter of the Rev. Fred Phelps. He founded the nondenominational church that claims God is allowing soldiers, coal miners and others to be killed because the United States tolerates homosexuals.


http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...CB2C9380D2405F4C8625712500569747?OpenDocument
 
star2589 said:
why do people have to be so stupid... :doh
Click to expand...

Being religious never made anyone any smarter. Seems to have the exact opposite effect in many cases.
 
May as well put my two cents in. I'll get change, anyway. I am against homosexual marriage. Just state that. I am a person who tries to be a good christian, but usually fail. Got a lot of issues with language.
But this guy Phelps? Please don't think he represents the Christians. He is completely ignorant of what he says. The Bible is quite clear on the hate the sin, but not the sinner part.
And dishonoring the soldiers is an insult. I truly hope that the bikers show up. They ride and run interference against this moron and his ilk.
 
Cassapolis said:
Seems to have the exact opposite effect in many cases.
Click to expand...

I dont know about that. stupidity abounds everywhere. the religious ones certainly get on my nerves more often because they try to push their beliefs on me, but the stupid athiests would be just as annoying if they did the same thing. the only difference is that they have no need to sinse I'm already agnostic.
 
Cassapolis said:
ASSOCIATED PRESS
03/02/2006

ANDERSON, Mo. (AP) -- Members of a Kansas group known for their "God Hates Fags" placards say they'll picket the weekend funeral of a Missouri soldier, setting up the first direct challenge of a new state law.
Click to expand...


I wonder if these degenerates will get help from the ACLU.Degenerates for some reason enjoy helping other degenerates.
 

Man, no one who knows anything about christians believes this guy represents them. Dont sweat it and dont think you have to make excuses for him. He is going straight to hell when he dies and so are all the people who support him. I know its praying for evil, but the devil take him sooner than later.
 
I agree with what you've said except your first sentence...

Some members here are more than happy to report on the tactics of the religious fringe in an attempt to smear the whole religious community or Republican Party...

I'll use the biggie as an example...Pat Robertson...

Here's an old thread that was a combo of threads with the same premise...

"Hey everybody!...Look what Pat Robertson said today!!!!!"

If you check it out, you'll see the responses, especially from the Conservative contingency, were in agreement that good 'ol Robbie is a complete jackass and doesn't represent anyone with a clue...

But what do we have on this forum?...People who still want to portray him as some sort of leader for the intelligent masses...Take a look...

Robertson: Sharon Stroke is Rebuke From God

How About Calling for Assassination of Robertson?

Holy Land Theme Park? Tacky, Tacky, Mr. Robertson, and Quite Unchristian Too.

Venezuela Seeks Extradition of Pat Robertson for Terrorism

A three strike law for TV preachers?

Pat Robertson to Town: "God Hates You"

Pat Robertson Says people in Dover PA. Are doomed

I could go to posts, too, but as you can imagine, I'd be here all day...But here's something intersting to point out...

EVERYONE of these posts?..Not ONE started by someone who doesn't hate Bush...They want to equate Robertson with the party, which is something the Conservative members themselves don't even do...

Don't believe me?...Do a search...Find me a thread started by a REPUBLICAN saying anything Robertson has done or said is good...

You won't find one...

Because the Conservative contingency on this forum doesn't think that way...the same way the starters of these threads are trying to imply...

Go through those threads...You find overwhelming majority, if not unanimous thoughts on how everyone AGREES that Robertson is a turd...Doesn't that kinda make him an irrelevant debate topic?...You know...When everyone AGREES????...

But the thread starters don't WANT that...They are under the implication that they ATTACKED, so someone must come on and DEFEND...

Ain't gonna happen...

So...Let's throw out your statement again...

Man, no one who knows anything about christians believes this guy represents them

Let me ask a simple question...If the ones starting these threads don't believe this, then WHY are they starting these threads????...

To reaffirm what everyone already knows???...What's the point?...
 

Pat Robertson says controversial things, and people like to vent about it. What's wrong with that? It's nice when people from both parties can agree on a topic. I love to have whatever bugs me validated by others. I think it brings more camaraderie to this message board.

In my dictionary, the first meaning of debate is "to consider or deliberate." The second meaning is "to engage in argument by discussing opposing views." Even if I agree with someone, reading their take on an issue can provide me with more insight into the issue. I love connecting with people on a subject with which we agree. And it's particularly nice when I can do that with someone who is of the opposite political party.

Why do you need to make the condemning of Pat Robertson partisan? See bold and underline. I just don't get it.
 
Cassapolis said:
He founded the nondenominational church that claims God is allowing soldiers, coal miners and others to be killed because the United States tolerates homosexuals.
Click to expand...

Why is it that the gays always get blamed? It doesn't seem like a logical conclusion........


...people getting killed in iraq....why...it can't be because they are there for the wrong reason, no.......it can't be because the military is skimping on body armor,no no.........oh, of course...... it's the gays' fault....
 
cnredd said:
Some members here are more than happy to report on the tactics of the religious fringe in an attempt to smear the whole religious community or Republican Party...
Click to expand...

The door swings both ways. Take the above quote and make slight changes.

'Some members here are more than happy to report on the tactics of the liberal fringe (some don't even have to be an announced liberal or Democrat) in an attempt to smear the whole liberal community or Democrat Party...

Some people support the fringe of either side, but they most certainly are not representative of the whole of either side. :twocents:

Take it for what it's worth, if the shoe fits, etc., etc., etc.
 
It gets much worse then that…
I have posted about these sick mofo’s before.
Protesting a soldier’s funeral?
They may have the right to free speech
but I also have the right to work my way thru the crowd with a baseball bat.
Then serve whatever time I get in jail.

http://www.godhatesfags.com/fliers/mar2006/20060301_christopher-marion-funeral.pdf
http://www.godhatesfags.com/fliers/feb2006/20060228_jessie-davila-funeral.pdf
http://www.godhatesfags.com/main/index.html


But whats this I see?......

Patriot Guard Riders
http://www.patriotguard.org/Home/tabid/53/Default.aspx
SEMPER FI
 
This is a fringe nut group..............Why even give them any press.......
 


So did you actually have something to say about the topic at hand, or did you just want to get a dig in at some of the liberals on the forum?
 
I love it when Mods confront one another....
 
Navy Pride said:
This is a fringe nut group..............Why even give them any press.......
Click to expand...


Why you ask?...well that an easy one to answer.
How would you feel if the funeral was someone in your family and you saw these people?
Myself...I would goto jail that day but thats just me...
 

That's TWICE today somebody beat me to the punch and posted my opinion before I could...TWICE!! I am getting old and slow...

Anyways......I don't think they remembered that part. The door swings both ways. Not to see that is to be totally blind.
 
You're asking me why "I" am making this a partisan issue...I am not...If you read through these threads, you'll find that the condemnation of Pat Robertson is across the political spectrum...I am pointing out OTHERS that have made it a partisan issue...

I wrote this on that last post...

I could go to posts, too, but as you can imagine, I'd be here all day...

Since you're blaming ME for making this partisan, I guess I gotta show the evidence now that it's NOT me...These are just a few...






For the sake of time, this is just 5 of them from 5 different members...I'm pretty sure you know I could find many more...

Do you understand my point?...These are people that are PURPOSEFULLY equating Robertson with Republicans, Neocons, and whatever else they're against politically...THEY are bringing partisanship into their discussions about Robertson...not me...

Remember...I was just pointing out the disagreement from jallman's comment...Here it is again...

jallman said:
Man, no one who knows anything about christians believes this guy represents them.
Click to expand...
If this is true, then why are there so many posts and threads with Robertson even being mentioned?...If he is SOOOO "on the fringe"(which I believe), then why is he constantly being mentioned over and over and over again?...

Why?...because there are people here that DO believe that Robertson is "this guy" that "represents them"...

Let's be honest here...Whatever Pat Robertson says something out of whack, the response isn't "Pat Robertson said something out of whack"...

The response is "That Bush-loving, Republican, Neocon, Pat Robertson said something out of whack."...

There are people here that MUST point this out, even though you can go to any thread here with Robertson in the discussion and see that the "Bush-loving, Republican, & Neocons" hate Robertson with equal vigor and find it insulting that he is being placed in the same group...

If that was not true, you'd be able to find overwhelming evidence here that there are many people who say that Robertson IS a good example of someone representing their views...

Do you think you could do that?...I think not...
 
I would agree with you IF you would supply an example or two...

Can you name someone from the "Liberal community or Democratic Party" that is condemned by the vast majority of Liberal members on this website?

Name somebody on the Liberal side of the aisle and then show me five different Liberal members that condemn them with the same vigor I could show Conservatives condemning Pat Robertson...

I'd LIKE to agree...But I don't see it...Point it out to me...
 
I have to agree with cnredd on this one. I feel the pain. I squirm each time a right hardliner equates Moore or Chomsky or Dean as lilly livered liberals in one breath....and in the next breath call me that same liberal.

It's a guilt by association albeit totally wrong.

It is a well know technique by blowhards and hate-baiters, from either side of the aisle, to bypass forum rules by calling some public figure a worthless S.O.B. liberal/conservative <fill in the blank> and then turn around and label you the same.

For example.

I might say that liberals are all baby raping, homo-lovin', pinko commies. Then I call you a liberal. An insult twice removed. I cannot call you a baby raper without facing the mods. But I can call you a liberal. And since I have already defined liberals as baby-rapers......well, you get the point....

I see it from all sides. And it is wrong just the same.
 
Kelzie said:
So did you actually have something to say about the topic at hand, or did you just want to get a dig in at some of the liberals on the forum?
Click to expand...
As stated in my post to aps, my comments were dircted to jallman's comment...

Man, no one who knows anything about christians believes this guy represents them.

If this were a true statement, then his name wouldn't be mentioned so much...Why even bring him up?...

I would LOVE to believe that we can all agree that Robertson is someone who should be discounted in everything he says or does, but, as we can see by his name repeatedly being popped up, there are some here that don't believe that...

Conservatives - "Pat Robertson is a nutcase."

Liberals - "Pat Robertson is a nutcase...Now it's my turn to remind you that he is a nutcase on YOUR side of the aisle and not MINE, so therefore I place you in the same boat as him."

Gee....thanks...
 

While I do appreciate your hard work, and you are very tedious, to say the least, I think Jallman's statement stands, "anyone who knows anything about Christians " these folks obviously don't know anything about your average Christian, they don't want to know, or they just rely on what they have heard! Anyone who can have the blind faith in something they have never had proven to them, those folks can't be that awful, can they? Anyone who believes what Christ has taught us, can these people possibly so intolerant, or hateful as some have suggested, it just makes no sense to me. The Christians I know, they will give you the shirt off their backs, no questions asked. That said, I share your frustrations, and your obvious attempts to educate others to the wonderful world of Christianity, and the beautiful people who follow this great religion.

May God be with all of you, this is spoken from the heart, and not in any way a means of converting you, just a way to share what comforts me so greatly.

Oh, good news, Robertson is out on his a$$, he no longer speaks for anyone!:2wave:
 
I say we pack up Robertson, Churchill, O'Reilly, Coulter, Moore, Dean, Hannity, and send them all off on a long voyage in a slow boat.

And instead of wishing them Bon Voyage at the pier, we all gather, conservatives, liberals, republicans and democrats alike, and as we wave bye-bye, we ALL shout to the top of our lungs.....

"You idiots DO NOT speak for us!!"
 

I agree, all but O'Reilly, I think he is more moderate then folks give him credit for. Sure, he can be an asshole, but he really tries hard to look out for the folks, as he so often claims. His attempt to get important issues front and center, is certainly commendable, I like the guy.
 

When you posted the links to the threads, I read the first post only. You were pointing out how all these threads were started by Bush-haters, and I inferred from your post that you were saying that the only reason these threads were started was to associate Pat with the conservatives. I never saw someone equating Robertson to conservatives in that first post. All I saw were people who were making fun of or insulting him and him alone. This is what caused me to deduce you were making this a partisan issue.

Regardless, cnredd, jallman's comment was clearly nonpartisan; however, you then made it a partisan issue. Obviously my thoughts were not totally off the mark since Kelzie saw it too. It's not a big deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…