Poll: Controversial Protests

Recommended Videos

asinann

New member
Apr 28, 2008
1,602
0
0
The Westborough Church isn't that hard to chase away, just organize enough of a counter protest and they won't even bother to show up. They were going to protest the showing of some play at the local community college (the one about the dragging death of that kid, I don't remember the name,) warned everyone a month ahead of time, saw the reaction of the local populace including a newspaper article detailing what happened to the last hate group that showed up in town (the police failed to protect them from the beatings that were administered) and then decided to stay home that day.
 

Jerious1154

New member
Aug 18, 2008
547
0
0
They protested at a high-school near where I live because it's named after Walt Whitman, who was gay. It was pretty hilarious. Seven people showed up for the protest, then as soon as school ended the entire student body came out chanting and holding signs as a counter-protest.
 

DarkRyter

New member
Dec 15, 2008
3,077
0
0
I support free speech as much as I can, so it would be hypocritical for me to tell them to shut up.

Hopefully, someone will pull some kind of awesome prank on them. And put it on youtube.

"If you can't shut someone up, scream louder to hurt their ears."

Walt Whitman. I'm pretty sure he said that.
 

Chipperz

New member
Apr 27, 2009
2,593
0
0
Yes, No. Gay guys should be allowed to marry. Seriously, I can't believe they can't in ANY part of the world.

Also, the "Freedom of Speech" crap that people like this hide behind should be completely reworded. Nothing should be banned, but some things shouldn't be protected - if you insult a complete stranger, it should be their human right (yeah, human rights trump constitutional rights) to kick you in the bollocks until you bleed out your ears.
 

TheRealCJ

New member
Mar 28, 2009
1,831
0
0
Yes, but not at the school.

After all, Freedom of speech doesn't just apply to things that YOU want to protest about. The choice of where and when is unfortunately off, but I fully support their right to protest in favour of their own opinions, even if I absolutely don't agree with them.

Any other stance would make me a hipocrite.
 

Cliff_m85

New member
Feb 6, 2009
2,581
0
0
TheRealCJ said:
Yes, but not at the school.

After all, Freedom of speech doesn't just apply to things that YOU want to protest about. The choice of where and when is unfortunately off, but I fully support their right to protest in favour of their own opinions, even if I absolutely don't agree with them.

Any other stance would make me a hipocrite.
No, the choice of where and when is fundamental.
 

TheRealCJ

New member
Mar 28, 2009
1,831
0
0
JanatUrlich said:
I don't really wanna get married until marriage is legal for everyone in all of the states across the USA

And yeah, everyone should have the right to say what they want to, even right wing, racist, homophobic dickheads

Two of my male friends made out with each other behind a guy who was protesting against gays. The guy couldn't work out why a huge crowd had suddenly formed and started laughing XD
Your parents are going to be incredibly dissapointed. I don't think that any country in the WORLD is EVER going to legalise all forms of marriage. It sucks, but what can you do?

However, I'm not particularly worried about 'marriage' as such, because 'De-facto' relationships are more-and-more becoming the norm. After all, marriage has always been a traditionally religious thing, rather than a legal one, but the courts just went with it because it was a) during a time when church and state weren't so different, and b) It was the path of least resistance.

Personally, I couldn't care less about wether gays/lesbians/zoophiles/buildings can be married, as long as they recieve the same rights that Straight married/defacto couples recieve in regards to healthcare, money, etc. currently.
 

TheRealCJ

New member
Mar 28, 2009
1,831
0
0
Cliff_m85 said:
TheRealCJ said:
Yes, but not at the school.

After all, Freedom of speech doesn't just apply to things that YOU want to protest about. The choice of where and when is unfortunately off, but I fully support their right to protest in favour of their own opinions, even if I absolutely don't agree with them.

Any other stance would make me a hipocrite.

No, the choice of where and when is fundamental.
Oh, when I say 'Off' I mean 'not on', as in 'really not right'. Sorry, Australian vernacular.
 

Borrowed Time

New member
Jun 29, 2009
469
0
0
Mimsofthedawg said:
Cliff_m85 said:
Mimsofthedawg said:
xmetatr0nx said:
Oh these people again. What can i say that hasnt already been said about them, yes theyre off their fucking rocker. This thread is all over the place though, on one hand you have the crazies and on the other you have a serious social political issue. Very poorly done OP. Weve done the gay marriage thing to death already here, theres not much left to say that hasnt been said already.
Yea, I just got finished with a flame war a that lasted a full three days! Heavy casualities were mounting.

At any rate, the Westboro baptist church doesn't understand Christianity. God loves the sinner, hates the sin. They don't represent mainstream theology or mainstream anti-gay-marriage people. They're crazy even for people against gay marriage. These people would just as soon bring genocide against homosexuals, where as most people who are anti-gay simply don't want marriage stuff to pertain to them.
I disagree. They obviously do understand Christianity, especially after watching interviews with the haggard looking female bridge-troll who actually knows her stuff. They don't represent mainstream theology, they represent true theology....the people who don't ignore the "for their blood be upon them" or the Deuteronomy 22: 22-29's of the Bible nor do they put a fluffy whip of apologetics over them. God does hate homosexuals enough to call for their death at one point, a death by believers and not by him. Ofcourse the Westboro would love genocide against homosexuals.......because they know their Bible.
No, they abuse Torah. In the terms of Yeshua, "the Law was made for man, man was not made for the law,"

Within Torah, there are 613 laws. They all are very comprehensive and Jesus rose the bar on almost all of them. But what he came to preach is a message of repentance and grace. What you so arrogantly ignore is the fact that in Deuteronomy, it talks about if people repent from their ways and offer sacrifices for their sins, they will be forgiven. God takes this message of grace a step further by consistently offering people who are not anywhere near worthy of love an opportunity of grace. He showed grace with David, Samson, etc. You talk about the law as though it was set in stone, but you don't understand God. God is not under the law. We are not under it either, but rather are completed by it. Samson, for example, was a great judge in Israel, but he was plagued by sexual promiscuity; he broke laws that are punishable by stoning. Yet God was slow to anger and didn't concede to punishment until he slept with a certain Philistine woman. David had 900 wives and another 900 concubines, but didn't get punished till he committed adultery with one. God is very slow to anger.

The message of Torah is right - they do deserve to die. But so do all of us. Adultery is punishable by death. Yet Jesus said that anyone who looks upon a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in her heart. I don't see God smiting people left and right. We can never complete the law. The Law completes us. It completes us by showing us the message of grace and Love God has for his people. When you add up the law* and the prophets, that's what you get - love. These aren't apologetic, it's the basic Christian doctrine established by Yeshua himself. These people do NOT understand Christianity, they abuse the Law. But if they really understood the law, they would feed the hungry, take care of the poor, watch after the wretched, take in the widows - they'd stop being so obsessed with self-righteousness and judging and begin doing what the Law actually commands; care for those around you. Again, this isn't apologetics, but is a consistent theme throughout the Bible, particularly in the Old Testament.

Yeshua also says to condemn someone in their sin condemns yourself - being the condemner is far worse than being the condemned. According to his teachings, these people should be struck by God's wrath. But he hasn't done that yet. Why? Because he's gracious, because just as homosexuals are found in sin, so are they, and God wants them to be found in his love, not his hate.
\

Exactly on every level. God does not hate homosexuals as He does not hate the person. He hates the sin committed by the person and He calls us to do the same. I'm sure that many here have heard the term, "Hate the sin, love the sinner." They are by no means a representation of true Christianity. They dwell upon the Law that was put in place to show us that we are in desperate need of a savior, that is Christ Jesus. Christ did away with the Law ruling us because he was the perfect sacrifice for all of our sin, from the beginning of time to the very end.

Does that mean that we are free to act however we choose with out consequence? Of course not, we live our lives in a pleasing way to Him because it's what He asks of us. It's the same as a child who wants to please their father by doing what the father asks. My kids do their chores because they want to do what I've asked of them. My wife cooks me dinner (no I don't demand that she does or even ask her to and quite often I cook as well to give her a break) because she wants to please me because she knows how much I love food. (mmmmmm) I take my wife to Broadway plays, cook her her favorite dinner and constantly remind her in as many ways as I can how precious she is to me and how much I love her because I desire to see that smile on her face.

We are called to love and to serve as christians. We are not called to condemn and sow discord. They pervert the Law and twist it's context to fit their own agenda, using it to make excuses for their actions. I disagree with homosexuality, true, but I'm not for outlawing same-sex civil unions. I believe it should be up to the states to decide. Yes, I said civil unions, as the act of Christian marriage should be, as many other things, a seperation of church and state. At the same time, I have to say that these people should be allowed to protest their ignorance and perversion of the Word. They have the right to speak out against those that they disagree with, and I will be first in line to fight for their right to do so. I'd also be first in line to fight for anyone here's right to disagree publicly with them.
 

teisjm

New member
Mar 3, 2009
3,561
0
0
I think homosexuals should have teh right to marry.
And for the protesters... they should have the right to make themselves look like retarded idiots (which they do IMO)
 

ShadowKatt

New member
Mar 19, 2009
1,410
0
0
I know the gay marrige thing has been done to death, but I haven't gotten to comment yet, so here goes, because I am gay, and I've been against gay marrige since the whole concept came to the public media. Because the truth is God does hate fags. The religon hates homosexuals and thinks they should be stoned, drawn, and quartered. And the people that follow that religon(Hereafter referred to as zealots, you know who they are) take the religon into their own hands on a modern day crusade in their lords name to cleanse the earth of sin and abomination. And since marrige is a religous term, no, I don't think gays should get it. Let the zealots have their religon, and let them keep their religon until it'snot enough that they have it and they need to force it on others. Then shoot them in the head. But while they keep it to themselves, do not give gays marrige. Give them all the LEGAL and FEDERAL rights that marrige enjoys, and then tell the gays that if that's not good enough, stuff it.
 

QuirkyTambourine

New member
Jul 26, 2009
1,193
0
0
Can anyone give me proof that they're not trolling? I've lurked around on that awful website a bit tonight and it's a bit like Maddox got a Bible out and went full bore on the crazy rants. I really hope they're just trolls, it'd be worth the trip out to Kansas just to sit in on a sermon if they aren't.
 

Cliff_m85

New member
Feb 6, 2009
2,581
0
0
Chipperz said:
Yes, No. Gay guys should be allowed to marry. Seriously, I can't believe they can't in ANY part of the world.

Also, the "Freedom of Speech" crap that people like this hide behind should be completely reworded. Nothing should be banned, but some things shouldn't be protected - if you insult a complete stranger, it should be their human right (yeah, human rights trump constitutional rights) to kick you in the bollocks until you bleed out your ears.
If you insult someone?


I dislike how you cooked this burger. Would that be enough?
I don't believe in your god. Would that be enough?
You smell a bit funny. How about that?


I completely disagree with you, in other words.
 

Burck

New member
Aug 9, 2009
308
0
0
"On the one hand, I would love a bunch of counterprotests," Evans said, "but that's exactly what they hope for. What do you do, just pretend they're not there?"

Call it crazy, stupid, or just plain cheesy, but I say based on this, why not get a group of counter-protesters to sing some Christian song about love or something. Use their own words against them, and also transcend their attempt to incite anger by counter-protesters.
Berethond said:
Stop.

Everyone here needs to realize this first!
There are only ten members in the Westboro Baptist Church.
Almost all of them are the family of Mr. Phelps.

Okay?

They're just dicks.

Oh, and for example of good Christians, remember when that milk-man shot and killed five little girls and then killed himself at an Amish school?

The families of the girls went to milk-man's funeral, offering their condolences, holding no grudges, and forgiving absolutely.

That's what Christianity is about.
^And thank you

I may have given up on living as a Christian and perhaps so have some of you out there, but you really shouldn't hold such any strong prejudice against that whole third of the world.
 

Cliff_m85

New member
Feb 6, 2009
2,581
0
0
Borrowed Time said:
Mimsofthedawg said:
Cliff_m85 said:
Mimsofthedawg said:
xmetatr0nx said:
Oh these people again. What can i say that hasnt already been said about them, yes theyre off their fucking rocker. This thread is all over the place though, on one hand you have the crazies and on the other you have a serious social political issue. Very poorly done OP. Weve done the gay marriage thing to death already here, theres not much left to say that hasnt been said already.
Yea, I just got finished with a flame war a that lasted a full three days! Heavy casualities were mounting.

At any rate, the Westboro baptist church doesn't understand Christianity. God loves the sinner, hates the sin. They don't represent mainstream theology or mainstream anti-gay-marriage people. They're crazy even for people against gay marriage. These people would just as soon bring genocide against homosexuals, where as most people who are anti-gay simply don't want marriage stuff to pertain to them.
I disagree. They obviously do understand Christianity, especially after watching interviews with the haggard looking female bridge-troll who actually knows her stuff. They don't represent mainstream theology, they represent true theology....the people who don't ignore the "for their blood be upon them" or the Deuteronomy 22: 22-29's of the Bible nor do they put a fluffy whip of apologetics over them. God does hate homosexuals enough to call for their death at one point, a death by believers and not by him. Ofcourse the Westboro would love genocide against homosexuals.......because they know their Bible.
No, they abuse Torah. In the terms of Yeshua, "the Law was made for man, man was not made for the law,"

Within Torah, there are 613 laws. They all are very comprehensive and Jesus rose the bar on almost all of them. But what he came to preach is a message of repentance and grace. What you so arrogantly ignore is the fact that in Deuteronomy, it talks about if people repent from their ways and offer sacrifices for their sins, they will be forgiven. God takes this message of grace a step further by consistently offering people who are not anywhere near worthy of love an opportunity of grace. He showed grace with David, Samson, etc. You talk about the law as though it was set in stone, but you don't understand God. God is not under the law. We are not under it either, but rather are completed by it. Samson, for example, was a great judge in Israel, but he was plagued by sexual promiscuity; he broke laws that are punishable by stoning. Yet God was slow to anger and didn't concede to punishment until he slept with a certain Philistine woman. David had 900 wives and another 900 concubines, but didn't get punished till he committed adultery with one. God is very slow to anger.

The message of Torah is right - they do deserve to die. But so do all of us. Adultery is punishable by death. Yet Jesus said that anyone who looks upon a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in her heart. I don't see God smiting people left and right. We can never complete the law. The Law completes us. It completes us by showing us the message of grace and Love God has for his people. When you add up the law* and the prophets, that's what you get - love. These aren't apologetic, it's the basic Christian doctrine established by Yeshua himself. These people do NOT understand Christianity, they abuse the Law. But if they really understood the law, they would feed the hungry, take care of the poor, watch after the wretched, take in the widows - they'd stop being so obsessed with self-righteousness and judging and begin doing what the Law actually commands; care for those around you. Again, this isn't apologetics, but is a consistent theme throughout the Bible, particularly in the Old Testament.

Yeshua also says to condemn someone in their sin condemns yourself - being the condemner is far worse than being the condemned. According to his teachings, these people should be struck by God's wrath. But he hasn't done that yet. Why? Because he's gracious, because just as homosexuals are found in sin, so are they, and God wants them to be found in his love, not his hate.
\

Exactly on every level. God does not hate homosexuals as He does not hate the person. He hates the sin committed by the person and He calls us to do the same. I'm sure that many here have heard the term, "Hate the sin, love the sinner." They are by no means a representation of true Christianity. They dwell upon the Law that was put in place to show us that we are in desperate need of a savior, that is Christ Jesus. Christ did away with the Law ruling us because he was the perfect sacrifice for all of our sin, from the beginning of time to the very end.

Does that mean that we are free to act however we choose with out consequence? Of course not, we live our lives in a pleasing way to Him because it's what He asks of us. It's the same as a child who wants to please their father by doing what the father asks. My kids do their chores because they want to do what I've asked of them. My wife cooks me dinner (no I don't demand that she does or even ask her to and quite often I cook as well to give her a break) because she wants to please me because she knows how much I love food. (mmmmmm) I take my wife to Broadway plays, cook her her favorite dinner and constantly remind her in as many ways as I can how precious she is to me and how much I love her because I desire to see that smile on her face.

We are called to love and to serve as christians. We are not called to condemn and sow discord. They pervert the Law and twist it's context to fit their own agenda, using it to make excuses for their actions. I disagree with homosexuality, true, but I'm not for outlawing same-sex civil unions. I believe it should be up to the states to decide. Yes, I said civil unions, as the act of Christian marriage should be, as many other things, a seperation of church and state. At the same time, I have to say that these people should be allowed to protest their ignorance and perversion of the Word. They have the right to speak out against those that they disagree with, and I will be first in line to fight for their right to do so. I'd also be first in line to fight for anyone here's right to disagree publicly with them.
That's blather, pure and simple. What you do is a part of who you are. Homosexuality being the sin but the homosexual not being hated is just idiotic since the homosexual can only express physical love through homosexual contact. This contact is a part of who they are, thus the 'sin' is part of who the sinner is. Christ was a scapegoat in all technical words. He died for sins that we didn't commit (we all have sins from Adam, right?) that we didn't ask for. Not to mention the completely immoral claim that you can use someone else as your scapegoat. If I do something wrong, no one can take the punishment for me since it is my duty to make up for my errors. The Westboro Baptist Church are more wise in the Biblical study than your church, simply because they don't agree with apologetics as you obviously do. The Biblical account of history is wrong for the most part, the science is mainly wrong, and the morals are outdated by far. It hurts society, as seen by these discussions. Maybe one day our species will be more logical and dismiss the nonsense, but it's mired with superstition and fear so it'll take quite awhile.
 

Skeleon

New member
Nov 2, 2007
5,410
0
0
Cliff_m85 said:
Skeleon said:
Yes, No.
There's such a thing as freedom of speech/right to protest.
And there's slander, insult, persecution.
When the rights of one person infringe upon the rights of another person, they have to be limited.
You don't have the right not to be offended. Otherwise we wouldn't have political discourse.
Of course. But there's a point where it stops being offensive and becomes persecution. Where it stops being part of a democratic dispute and begins being anti-democratic propaganda.
This is why wearing the swastika in Germany is forbidden, for example. The rights of minorities must be protected.
And there's a difference between "gay marriage is bad"/"against god's will" and "fags burn in hell".
 

tsb247

New member
Mar 6, 2009
1,783
0
0
I am against gay marriage, but I also despise Fred Phelps and his flock. They are a stain on the face of this earth; shouting their hate from the rooftops like they do. The good news is that people hate them pretty much everywhere they go, and we've all stopped caring about them. The fastest way to make them go away is to simply stop giving them the attention and press they so desperately want.
 

Cliff_m85

New member
Feb 6, 2009
2,581
0
0
Skeleon said:
Cliff_m85 said:
Skeleon said:
Yes, No.
There's such a thing as freedom of speech/right to protest.
And there's slander, insult, persecution.
When the rights of one person infringe upon the rights of another person, they have to be limited.
You don't have the right not to be offended. Otherwise we wouldn't have political discourse.
Of course. But there's a point where it stops being offensive and becomes persecution. Where it stops being part of a democratic dispute and begins being anti-democratic propaganda.
This is why wearing the swastika in Germany is forbidden, for example. The rights of minorities must be protected.
And there's a difference between "gay marriage is bad"/"against god's will" and "fags burn in hell".
You don't have the right to not be vocally persecuted. The swastica does absolutely no harm to any minority or majority, but the people wearing or showing it do. You, sir, are blaming the ink rather than the author.

There's no difference because no man can send someone to hell (theists: because they aren't god. people like me: because there is no hell). If someone says "I'm going to kill you" then you have an argument. Without vocalizing our opinion, there is no way to debunk an opinion.

Skeleon, I want to play at a hypothetical. Let's say that I believe that homosexuals are evil and you do not. I am not allowed to voice my opinion though since it is hateful. For the rest of my life, I continue to believe this nonsense.....and even worse, I spread it to my children who must also keep quiet. All of this could've changed with you providing evidence proving me wrong.....but you never knew I believed as such. Vocalization is the one absolute way to end ignorance. Am I incorrect?