Search the Community

Firstly, on a personal note, it took great self-restraint when writing this topic. Every time I try to write about them, it turns into a very vitriolic rant... This topic is to explain who they are based on what I know / have read about them. What is Westboro Baptist Church? Thus, please remember that this is a topic where you share your knowledge about them, this is not a topic for ranting. If you wish to rant about this group, do open a topic in the vent section so that I too may join in Westboro's leader - Fred Phelps In 1954, A church in Topeka, Kansas called East Side Baptish Church hired Fred Phelps, he was the associate pastor. In 1955 , the East Side Baptist Church decided to expand by introducing a new branch called Westboro Baptist Church. They wanted Fred Phelps to be the pastor of the newly created branch, once Phelps was appointed to pastor, he broke all connections with the East Side Baptist and took complete charge over the Westboro Baptist Church. Before he was permanently disbarred from practicing law in 1989 , Phelps along with leading the church started his own law firm called "Phelps Chartered Law Firm". His initial career as a lawyer involved suing people to earn through settlement fees (settlement is when the two parties "settle" on an agreed sum of money in order to keep the case from going to court). Later on, his law firm focused on representing the non-white population in cases of racial discrimination now focusing on "civil rights". Many argue especially his estranged son Nathan Phelps, that this was another method for the firm & church to earn money. In 1989 , Fred Phelps agreed to permanently stop practicing law on the condition that his family is allowed to practice. Since then, his daughter Shirley has taken primary responsibility of the law firm, she would later on be the church's main spokesperson and representative. His first attempt at politics (running for governor of Kansas - 1991) is an utter failure, what stands out the most is that his campaign solely focused on spreading negatory remarks about competitors and other politicians through flyers. Westboro's Humble Beginnings - 1991 Now, you can see that since its first meeting in 1955 upto 1991 , Fred Phelps & The Westboro Baptist Church were not widely known for having anti-gay feelings. But suddenly, in 1991 , Westboro Baptist Church members started what they called "Great Gage Decency Drive" where they'd go down to Gage Park in Topeka to convince people about how wrong & dangerous being homosexual is (Hell, AIDS & all that jazz). Westboro's descent into inhumanity After having introduced themselves and their intentions to the world, The Westboro Baptist Church now began their onslaught with a single belief "God hates f*gs and that they all deserve to die" . They had proudly started picketing funerals with rude signs. The world knew where the church stood after they infamously picketed the funeral of Matthew Shephard, a 21 year old homosexual college student who had been tortured and murdered. Westboro's fight : The Evolution of their beliefs By this point, only the Westboro Baptist Church knew what they believed in because the world sure did not understand. They had started picketing funerals of anyone they deemed were "sinners" & "f*gs" . The list included fallen soldiers, jews, non-whites, mormons, victims of violence and so on. Their explanation to each picket was "No glory given to God , they enable f*gs, and are sinners" Funerals they have picketed include Steve Jobs, Matthew Shephard, and Twitter HQ are just a few examples not to mention the several funerals of fallen soldiers, including Sterling Wyatt, Donna Johnson, and Nicholas O'Brien. They take especial pride in the death of soldiers and victims of violence (Sandy Hook , Aurora shooting, and Boston bombing) because they feel the deceased "deserve" this punishment and in a way God removed the enablers. Westboro's supposed beliefs Fred Phelps has said himself that they are "Old School Baptist Church" where basically, if the bible says no, it means no. If you say otherwise, you deserve to die and are prone to go to hell. They are also supposedly followers of Calvinism which states 5 core points :- Total Depravity Unconditional Election Limited Atonement Irresistible Grace Perseverance of the Saints It is argued that these 5 points do not exist in the Bible. The 5 points explain that man has sin present in every part of his body, sin that has been inherited directly from Adam (Total Depravity) . It then goes onto say that Jesus Christ did not die for every believer but died for only a select few, bearing the sin only for the elect (Unconditional Election) , Next comes Irresistible Grace wherein the elect achieve salvation whether they wish to or not, basically when God comes down to save you, you cannot resist being saved (Irresistible Grace). Finally. Once you are saved by Jesus Christ, you can never be lost. The Westboro Baptist Church basically interpret these 5 as "We are the chosen ones, we are exempt from hell since we follow Jesus Christ and are the true believers unlike the other fake sinners. " In simple terms, anyone who is not a member of Westboro Baptist Church is a sinner doomed to hell since they are :- Not Christian. Not Christian enough (Indulge in premarital sex, divorce, homosexuality, transgender qualities, bisexuality, adultery, anal sex , children out of wedlock and so on). Not a part of Westboro Baptist Church. Westboro v/s the Public In the initial years, the public reacted (justifiably) angrily towards the picketing done by the church. It is common for Church members to yell at people walking by, in hopes of provoking them. They were often successful resulting in verbal altercations. In one incident however, Benjamin, the Phelps grandson spat at a passerby. Using these altercations to their benefit, The Phelps family would sue anyone who objected to their picketing. If you fought / assaulted a WBC member for ruining a loved one's funeral, they would sue you. They attempted to sue the city of Topeka for $1 million because they were not kept safe during pickets. After years of trying to fight fire with fire, the public has come to realize that it was pointless fighting against the Westboro Baptist Church and started using their appearances for much better causes. Jason Connell raised a lot of money for organizations that Westboro Baptist Church objects to (LGBT , AIDS & so on) Comedian Lisa Lampanelli donated $50,000 to a Gay Charity in the name of the church (She had earlier revealed that she would be donating $1000 for every member of WBC that showed up to protest her appearance) Petition signed by 357,950 people to legally recognize the church as a hate group. The creation of the "Patriot Guard Riders" , A motorcycle club whose members protect funerals from WBC. They stand forming a human chain often holding flags and sing patriotic songs if Church members try to shout / chant any obscenities. Efforts by online communities result in people getting together to form Human chains wherever the church decides to picket, this has resulted in the Westboro Baptist Church avoiding picketing (Roger Ebert's Funeral, Funeral of Aaron Swartz, Newton, Aurora , & Boston) Hacktivist group Anonymous waged war in January 2013 after the WBC brazenly announced via Twitter that they would picket Sandy Hook Elementary School. Angered by this announcement, Anonymous hacked into their website, published online, member personal information including name, address, phone numbers and social security number. Other acts included hacking into twitter accounts, revealing the hotels where members would be staying while in Connecticut, and hacking the Church's office Facebook Page. The facebook page is still being controlled by Anonymous who have been posting humorous images and posts that are completely opposite of what the Westboro Baptist Church preaches. Westboro's Current Status It has always been speculated that the church is comprised of mainly the Phelps family and their extended family, the size is not larger than 100 (some say 40).. Many of the main family members have realized the true nature of the group and have left it since. They have failed to appear at many locations despite announcing pickets via social networks. **Personal Comment :- If you want to have a good laugh at their unconventional ways, do watch the documentaries by Louis Theroux, you'll cringe in sheer embarrassment every time they open their mouth** http://youtu.be/rjmg69XmJp8 If you read this, you are a champ, If you open a rant in the vent with good fodder, I will buy you a beer.

In a previous thread I have argued that most Christians are immoral. I would like to develop this now and argue that the entire basis of the religion is itself immoral and wicked. Before I start it is important to realise that I am talking about Christianity as in 'following Jesus'. I take a Christian to be someone who tries to live their life according to the teachings of the character from the New Testament - Jesus of Nazareth. It is also important to realise that I am not 'having a dig' at individual Christians. Fortunately, I think, most self-professed Christians actually don't follow the teachings of the bible character. So, let me start by trying to establish what I believe jesus teaches. I am NOT going to include the usual versions of the universal ethic (do unto others.....love thy neighbour....etc) because that particular ethic far pre-dates Christianity and is common to most religions before and since. There is nothing specifically Christian about the notion of treating others as you would like to be treated. So what messages can we say are particularly Christian? I want to concentrate on four. 1. Jesus/God is the only one who can forgive sin. 2. A true follower should cast aside worldly considerations and follow Jesus. 3. Turn the other cheek to enemies/transgressors. 4. Thinking bad things is as bad as doing them (thought crime). The biblical support for these is beyond dispute, and I leave it as an exercise for the reader to find the particular references. So let's consider these individually. 1. I find the notion that anyone has the power to forgive a sin committed against me immoral. The notion that someone can injure me and then receive pardon, regardless of my wishes, is repugnant. To those who say that secular courts do the same thing, you are quite wrong. Secular courts act on behalf of society and do not forgive anything. A not guilty verdict is not forgiveness, and a person who serves a sentence in prison is not 'forgiven' for the original offence. 2. Jesus says repeatedly that a true believer should walk away from worldly responsibilities - such as family - and follow him. This is deeply immoral. All of us have people who are, to some greater or lesser extent, dependant on us. The idea that we should simply walk away and not worry about their well-being is obnoxious, yet this is the message that Jesus repeatedly preaches. 3. Forgiving enemies might seem like a noble and worthy goal but it is not. If someone strikes me, and I simply turn the other cheek, then how are they to learn that their behaviour is unacceptible? What is to stop them hitting someone else - especially since their experience teaches them that such behaviour carries no sanction? I am perfectly willing to forgive someone who has done me wrong, but I would first wish to see some evidence that they are genuinely sorry for the wrong. 4. The most repulsive part of the Christian doctrine is the notion of thought crime. God, we are told, is like the ultimate dictator. Not only does he see what you do, he sees what you think, and what you think will be counted as evidence on the day of judgement. Even the God of the Old testament, Yaweh - selfish, sadistic, genocidal maniac that he is - does not condemn people for their thoughts, only their actions. It is the supposedly new improved, user-friendly version - Jesus - that introduces this repellant notion. Thus we read in Matthew: You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment… You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. The notion that people's thoughts are equal to their actions is profoundly and deeply immoral. One of the things that separates us from other animals is our ability to NOT act on our instincts and impulses. Thus I may look at a pretty girl and think 'cor....I'd like to.....' (I leave the rest for the reader to imagine - and I promise that I won't convict you of sexual thought crime). To say that this is on a par with actually raping the woman is actually evil. It denies my humanity on a basic level. It also means that, having thought something bad, I may as well go right ahead and actually do it - since there is no difference as far as God sees it. So, in summary, I believe that Christianity, at the very core of the belief system, is immoral and wicked, and I am deeply thankful that most Christians are content to ignore much of the immoral twaddle that the character in the New testament insists upon.

Music from ancient times has been an essential part of human life. Music brings life into a tired soul. People from ancient times and even today have found music soothing. When you are travelling far music can be the best thing. Now a days every other person is seen listening to music. It's been such an attraction. We categorize music in various sections like Jazz, Blues, Vocal, Hip-Hop, Rap, Rock and Hard core Rock etc. But how important is it for us to choose what we are hearing. Is everything that we hear appropriate. Does the kind of music we hear make any difference in our thought pattern and our personality? And what kind of positive and negative impact can music leave on us? Kindly share your thoughts.

Most of us are simply trying to make sense of this life, into which we are thrust without invitation and which we have to try our best to deal with. Some believe that we can best proceed by learning lessons from others who have gone before. I count myself in that category. Some take it further and believe that we should model our lives on a particular role-model. Christians would, I believe it is fair to say, be in that category.Now, when I try to learn lessons from others, the first obvious thing to do is learn about them - what did they actually say and do. If I want to learn from Kant and the categorical imperative then I need to understand what he was actually saying - otherwise I am simply projecting my own views onto a label and calling it Kant, which is fundamentally dishonest in the same way that constructing a straw-man argument is dishonest.Now, let's apply that simple standard to Christians. Do they make it a priority to learn about Jesus before adopting him as a role model?Well, the only source of information we have is the New Testament. Anyone claiming to be a Christian must surely, therefore, be familiar with this set of documents as a minimum. But is this what we observe? I would say no. Most Christians I debate are woefully ignorant of scripture. Their notion of Jesus is almost entirely fantasy, or 'received wisdom'. You can test this assertion. Ask a Christian to repeat a few things which Jesus actually said. Most will struggle to misquote a few of the more well known phrases. Then ask them what the basic message of Jesus was. You will normally get trite answers like - love thy neighbour. Ask them where this is said and I can guarantee that most of them will have no clue - they know the phrase because they have seen it repeated on the media and in church. They are prepared to believe that Jesus said it, but they are too lazy to actually find out if he actually did, and in what context. The same applies to the list of platitudes that normally pour out of apologist mouths.In truth the average Christian hasn't got a clue about Jesus. They are intellectually lazy, ignorant bigots, who profess belief in something they don't understand and, worse, are not prepared to put the effort into understanding. I have nothing but contempt for this. They are quite happy to support the bigotry found in the bible without actually reading it. Thus Christians often say that homosexuality is a sin, but ask them which part of the bible this comes from and you will be met with either blank looks or, at best, they will name the book of the old Testament. Now ask them what else, from that book, is to be considered immoral. Be prepared for a long wait because they will not know - I absolutely guarantee it. Why am I sure? Because the list of things in Deuteronomy and Leviticus that are considered 'wrong' is massive and largely ridiculous, and nobody could possibly live according to the prescriptions of these books - and I must emphasise that I mean that quite literally, they would not be able to live.But I hear people saying - why single Christians out - surely most people just struggle through life without knowing what they believe chapter and verse. Ask a supporter of evolution what Darwin actually said and they will not know. This is true, but there is a difference. Firstly, evolution (to take a specific example) does not tell you how to behave. More importantly, it does not tell you to condemn others who do not behave the same. Secondly, evolution is testable - like any scientific theory it must be capable of being proved wrong. There are, in short, good reasons to believe it is true, without appealing to faith.So, it is my contention that most Christians - particularly the evangelical variety - are fundamentally immoral. They accept a dogma on faith, discard elements of that dogma they find inconvenient, adapt the actual dogma so that it is nothing more than a reflection of their own prejudices and desires, and then judge others on the basis of this un-testable self-serving bollox.They do not deserve respect - in fact they do not even deserve benign tolerance. They deserve contempt, or at best pity.PS - I have been pulled-up on my use of 'most'. Why, the questioner asked, do you say 'most' Christians? Surely ALL Christians are equally culpable? Well, yes, in actuality that is probably true. I left room, however, for the Christian who knows the bible and genuinely tries to live his life in the way that the biblical Jesus taught. Such a person would not be a hypocrite in my evaluation. They would, however, be a dangerous sociopath who, I sincerely hope, would already be in prison for the rest of their life.If you don't understand why I say this then you haven't read the bible properly.As it happens I also believe that Christianity - as laid-out by Jesus in the New Testament - is a fundamentally immoral philosophy, but that is a different debate.