A quarter million people petition for the Westboro Baptist Church to be reclassified as a hate group

[BoredAussieGamer]

My two cents on the touchy subject on the right of free speech and picketing funerals:

Here's a fundamental line that can apply to any situation regarding issues of freedom of speech. Your rights to freedom of speech cease to protect your ass when you infringe on other's rights, whether that be to mourn their dead or not be harassed during a sensitive time.

Ah, but America has no such right.
Yep, in America you have the right to be as offensive as you want to whom ever you want, but not the right to mourn the death of a loved one in peace, and many Americans are proud of that...

Man, Australia just keeps looking better and better. Say what you will about us, we banned these fucksticks from entering our country.

 

[MiskWisk]

I think this conversation has gone in the wrong direction. The petition is not calling to censor them, but to change their title from a church to a hateful organization. They would still be allowed to say what they wanted, but they would no longer get a tax credit for being a church.

They would still be allowed to do their pointless and offensive work, they would just have to pay more for the right to do it.

YOU! Get your logic out of this internet forum at once!

 

[kgpspyguy]

labeling them as a hate group sounds pointless but I agree that these people are not Christians, they go against nearly everything a Christian is supposed to be and as a man of Faith Ill just end by saying "going to church doesn't make you a Christian anymore then standing in a garage makes you a Car"

 

[lacktheknack]

if you want to ban them ban all churches, else where do we draw the line? how much hate is too much?

When people start to harass mourning friends and familymembers of the deceased, in some bizarre quest to announce that the wrath of their invisible skyfather is upon us all, I think it's pretty self-evident that they've blown a fuse and should be quarantined, isolated from society.

Make no mistake, I also think humanity would be better off without religion, and would applaud a global renounce of faith, to focus on progressing as a species, but to say you don't see the difference between the average Christian and these deranged sociopaths is just stupid.

By the way, I think this topic belongs in the religion and politics forum. Despite one could argue that this is not a religion we should take 'seriously', they themselves claim to have religious motivation, which goes to show how dangerous the cocktail of extreme bigotry, mental disorders and religion can be.

EDIT: My apologies for the double post :x

i hate WBC just like any other guy, but thats exactly the point. does our hate justify banning them? wouldn't then their hate justify banning us? of is this a "we have more people therefore we are correct" type of thing? and if "They are bad enough" and "average christian" is "not bad enough" who is to decide that? where do we draw the line? how do we know how much hate is ok and how much is too much?
im obviously playing devils advocate here, but when you can use our own argument against us doesn't that kinda make us hypocrites. i would like all religion to go away as well. but do i have the right to make it so? no. i would be no better than the people who claim that gays arent human.
this thread do belong in that section, but i have no moderating power to make it so.

They already HAVE "banned" us. We're all going to hell, remember?

If we label them a hate group, then it means little to them. It just means that they're a hate group and not recognized as a church.

And no, their hate doesn't justify banning us, seeing how they're less than a hundred people versus CONTINENTS of people who think they're a hate group. In this case, majority rules.

 

[TakerFoxx]

do tell of their actions crossing the line. have you read the WBC bible? it is different from the one you are used to. the beleive in their own version and they follow it. in a sense of defining a church, they are as much a church as your local chapel institution. actually, there are far worse institutions, like landover baptist church that hates the WBC because "They are too liberal" http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?p=823119823119

I should probably point out that the Landover Baptist Church is a humor/satire website intended to parody fundamentalist Christian organizations like the WBC. It's kind of like the Onion, only targeted towards Christianity instead of the news.

 

[Commissar Sae]

I think this conversation has gone in the wrong direction. The petition is not calling to censor them, but to change their title from a church to a hateful organization. They would still be allowed to say what they wanted, but they would no longer get a tax credit for being a church.

They would still be allowed to do their pointless and offensive work, they would just have to pay more for the right to do it.

YOU! Get your logic out of this internet forum at once!

But I like logic...

 

[Signa]

-snippu-

If you believe shielding society from harmful organizations led by delusional bigots counts as being hypocritical, I think you should look up the word hypocrisy, because I don't think you know what it means.

These people are nothing but an ulcerous cancer, that we need to take a stand against. You ask how much hate is okay, don't you see how silly that question is? NO amount of hate is ever okay. I fully realize that we are human, and such irrational emotions are kind of our handicap, but to base a religion on it and shoving it down people's throats is just WRONG. It doesn't need defending, nothing good can come from that. "we have more people therefore we are correct"? Try "we have common sense and are therefor correct"

Yes, I know you're not a mod, I was just putting it out there.

i believe shielding in its roots are bad. but censorship, which is what this is, is not the same as shielding. you are nto trying to make somone be deaf, your making the guy be mute.
if no amount of hate is eve ok, then 99,99% of people should off themselves for not being ok. in fact, game is natural emotion just like love. everyone hates something and everyone loves something. and trying to quantify hate of "this is too much" and "That is ok" simply does not allow for rational comparison. emotions in general are human hnadicaps, but thats who we are, and forcing people to be robots simply doesnt work.
common sense is not so common. if you were to go around and talk to people you would soon find out that its a rarity. if "Average person" is where you look for "common" sense we would still be in the dark ages. while WBC does go a bit too far with forcing other people to believe thier stuff and thats not ok, they did no crime in voicing their side of argument, as stupid as that voice is. unless you found a 100% fail-proof way to mute ONLY the stupid any action attempted to take there are not going to be successful.
im sure youll come swinging with KKK and nazi groups now, but ill stop you there. i dont support them, but i could defend their right to voice thier viewpoint if it came to that. shutting people off jsut because you and many other people dont like what they got to say is not a "smarter" viewpoint.

I think you just fell short of stating what's really important here. The KKK and Nazis were known not just as hate groups, but as groups who harmed innocent people through that hate. I too, believe that the WBC needs their right to free speech (and much more importantly, freedom from the thought police[footnote]I can't think of a worse thing for our society than not being allowed to feel a way about something that isn't the popular opinion, and then turning people who feel that way into second class citizens. That is FAR worse than the antics of this religious/hate group[/footnote]) just as the rest of us, but they are toeing the line constantly on what it means to hurt innocents with their hate. What needs to be determined is if their harassment is harmful, or if it's something that can be ignored and laughed off. I'm feeling pretty certain it's the former of the two, and thus would support this reclassification. As someone said on the first page, this is a surgical strike on a cancer in our society. This isn't supporting legislation that says all religious groups that picket are now hate groups.

 

[barbzilla]

do tell of their actions crossing the line. have you read the WBC bible? it is different from the one you are used to. the beleive in their own version and they follow it. in a sense of defining a church, they are as much a church as your local chapel institution. actually, there are far worse institutions, like landover baptist church that hates the WBC because "They are too liberal" http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?p=823119823119

I should probably point out that the Landover Baptist Church is a humor/satire website intended to parody fundamentalist Christian organizations like the WBC. It's kind of like the Onion, only targeted towards Christianity instead of the news.

... someone took landover seriously? Do you get your important news from the Onion (or Fox)? (sorry, I am not trying to call anyone out on it, I genuinely found it funny)

OT: I don't think we have any specific legal designations for Hate Group (other than the terminology to acknowledge one). I am not going to go so far as to say that WBC should exist, I just don't think this is the way to go about it. I do think that the earlier poster who said we should picket them was an interesting idea, as was getting them re-designated as a political group (though revoking a churches license is a notoriously hard thing to do). Perhaps we should start setting up events that they would want to picket across the country from where they are located and get them to fly/drive out there only to abandon the event as soon as they show up. Just keep doing this until they are drained of funds.

 

[Maze1125]

I can't think of a worse thing for our society than not being allowed to feel a way about something that isn't the popular opinion, and then turning people who feel that way into second class citizens. That is FAR worse than the antics of this religious/hate group.

Absolutely, I agree 100%, people should have the right to hold any opinion and to be allowed to voice any opinion in such a way as that they can get their "message" to whomever they want.

But that is not the same as them being allowed to do it where-ever they want when-ever they want.

Banning people from protesting outside funerals does not infringe on their ability to speak in general and so isn't a problem. There's no slippery slope, just the protection of people's right to mourn.

 

[Signa]

I can't think of a worse thing for our society than not being allowed to feel a way about something that isn't the popular opinion, and then turning people who feel that way into second class citizens. That is FAR worse than the antics of this religious/hate group.

Absolutely, I agree 100%, people should have the right to hold any opinion and to be allowed to voice any opinion in such a way as that they can get their "message" to whomever they want.

But that is not the same as them being allowed to do it where-ever they want when-ever they want.

Banning people from protesting outside funerals does not infringe on their ability to speak in general and so isn't a problem. There's no slippery slope, just the protection of people's right to mourn.

Well, I could argue that there is a slippery slope, if people are careless in the lawmaking. Making certain speech not OK in certain areas could be a step to saying dissatisfaction with the government isn't allowed to be expressed outside a courthouse or any government building. Laws aside, making people OK with such restrictions I think is harmful in of itself. But that's neither here nor there. Slippery slopes depend a lot on the imagination of the people discussing it, and the more wild the imagination, the dumber the discussion gets. My point is that the WBC exudes hate wherever it goes, and unless we can convince EVERYONE to stop listening to them, they need to be silenced in some way that only legally applies to them.

 

[Connor Voskamp]

The members of the WBC aren't even Christians, they are a bunch of super angry atheists who are out to make religious people look like horrible people.

 

[Adam Galli]

It deserves to be a hate group and that dickhead pastor deserves to be in prison.

 

[MrMan999]

This is a very slippery slope. They have the right to free speech. And if we pass laws restricting the WBC, that sets a precident(sp), whats to stop the government from passing laws from restricting the Occupy Protests? Or gun control advocates, or LGBT rights advocated.

 

[Lunar Templar]

I'd have gone with 'Terrorist Group' myself.

not that it would get any results with a different label, as i doubt this petition will go anywhere, just really don't like them

 

[Vegosiux]

not that it would get any results with a different label

Well, yes, it would, with a different label they could no longer claim the church tax exemption privilege, and that's basically what the petition is about the way I see it.

 

[Warachia]

ACTIONS are important, that is where WBC crossed the line several times, their actions are what defines them as a hate group regardless of what they claim, when you do nothing but hate people, and try to spread that hate, you are a hate group, I don't see why any sort of line needs to be drawn, or why you'd factor churches into this at all, since they clearly go against the religion they claim to follow, they could have been any sort of group, but if they still did what they do now, they'd be reclassified as a hate group.

do tell of their actions crossing the line. have you read the WBC bible? it is different from the one you are used to. the beleive in their own version and they follow it. in a sense of defining a church, they are as much a church as your local chapel institution. actually, there are far worse institutions, like landover baptist church that hates the WBC because "They are too liberal" http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?p=823119823119

Unfortunately the link you posted doesn't work, but that's something interesting, I did not know that they had a different bible (if that's true), but my other point still stands, it doesn't matter what your beliefs are, so long as you intentionally spread hate (or act hatefully against others as the WBC has admitted to doing) you will be seen as a hate group inside of that country, it's perspective, and it's pretty simple to classify, do they target specific groups? Yes, do they target individuals and families within those groups? Yes, do they go out of their way to attack the people in those groups? Yes they do, they go out of their way to have protests and incite the families, therefore verbally attacking them, so what does this spread if not hate? Of course I'm betting this isn't all that they do, but from what I've found spreading hate is a large part of it, you do not need to spend all of your time spreading hate (and sometimes even just a small amount of your time) to get you classified as a hate group. Now let's look at my local church, the answer to ALL of the above is no, so therefore they are not a hate group.

Frankly, it doesn't matter who you are and why you are doing what you do, a large sewing club could get together an intentionally target a minority and they would be seen as a hate group, should we then classify all sewing clubs as hate groups? Of course not, the main point I was trying to make was your actions speak louder than your words or beliefs.

 

[Lunar Templar]

not that it would get any results with a different label

Well, yes, it would, with a different label they could no longer claim the church tax exemption privilege, and that's basically what the petition is about the way I see it.

was talking about calling them a terrorist group over a hate group

i'm fully aware that having their 'church' status revoked would yank tax exemption from them.

 

[Souplex]

There's only 294,000-ish signatures? I expected far more.