Jerry Falwell dead at 73

POSTED BY: Geezer
UPDATED: Sunday, May 20, 2007 16:55
VIEWED: 18307
PAGE 2 of 2

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2

CHRISISALL

Friday, May 18, 2007 2:11 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
No one hates Jerry Falwell. They’re just glad he’s dead so that they can be free of the burden of the possibility that he might occasionally make brief appearances in the news and say something they don’t agree with or find offensive.

Face it Finn; you dis Tinky Winky, and no one is your friend. Falwell roasts in Teletubby Hell.

Uh oh Chrisisall

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Friday, May 18, 2007 2:18 AM (P)

Damn gay Teletubbies and their rock music.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RUE

Friday, May 18, 2007 2:21 AM (P)

"They’re just glad he’s dead so that they can be free of the burden of the possibility that he might occasionally make brief appearances in the news and say something they don’t agree with or find offensive." Yes, you can be glad that someone died and is no longer spewing hate, and still not hate them.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Friday, May 18, 2007 2:26 AM (P)

What are talking about? Jerry Falwall never spewed any hate. He was just seeking relief from homosexuals.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RUE

Friday, May 18, 2007 2:30 AM (P)

Now I know you're kidding.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Friday, May 18, 2007 2:56 AM (P)

What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, I guess.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RUE

Friday, May 18, 2007 3:13 AM (P)

Nowhere did anyone have anything against Falwell except for what he did. And I supect if he stopped his hate-mongering people would have been OK with him.

But look for Falwell quotes (they're currently all over the internet) and you'll find him condemning people not for what they personally have done but because of what they are (or what he thinks they are).

See the difference? One - Falwell - condemns whole categories of people without any specific knowledge. The other - the posters here - have an issue with the specific actions of one person.

I suppose you won't see that though. You seem pretty stuck on Falwell. And you keep insisting he just had a different set of beliefs and never preached hate. As if he never called for the death of anyone (he did, at least twice).

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Friday, May 18, 2007 1:32 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I suppose you won't see that though. You seem pretty stuck on Falwell. And you keep insisting he just had a different set of beliefs and never preached hate. As if he never called for the death of anyone (he did, at least twice).

I see more then you think. I suppose the only way that some of you will ever believe that I don’t agree with Falwell will be for me to espouse a hatred of the man. And that’s more disturbing to me then one man spewing hate. But then again, Falwell never had much impact on my life. He was just some guy with an abrasive opinion, like Howard Stern or dozens of other such people I routinely ignore. What would lead me to have any kind of passionate condemnation of him anyway?

But yes, Falwell basically had a different set of beliefs. And as far as whether those beliefs were tantamount to preaching hate - I suppose we have to look at what that means. As I remember it, you have a certain set rather generalized opinions about Americans. Americans are “ugly and hateful.” Americans are the most defensive wall-off group of people in the world. And there’s probably stuff I missed. These are your thoughts about an entire group of people. Now I’m sure you won’t see this is as spewing hate, anymore the Falwell would have described his own words that way. I beleive Falwell once said that he hated the act of homosexuality, not the homosexual.

I think Falwell had a political view of the world that led him to be a little too overly critical of certain groups of people, but then in my opinion, you have a political view of the world that leads you to be a little too overly critical of certain groups of people. If I’m supposed to hate people with these kinds of opinions, I’m going to be hating a lot of people.

Now don’t get me wrong, I understand exactly where you’re coming from. I mean someone has got to point out how far America has drifted from the path of righteousness, right? You’re just saying what needs to be said. After all, Americans are running the streets of America in droves like they own the place. That’s just un-American.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RUE

Friday, May 18, 2007 4:10 PM (P)

When you call for someone or a group of someones to be killed it's hate speech. Not for god to take them home, or for them to leave this world, but for Bush specifically to 'blow them away in the name of the lord'. (just one example.) THAT'S what I have against Falwell, and which you consistently ignore. Or maybe you don't think that that's hate speech when Falwell says it, or says it in the name of religion.

I have my criticisms of the US and USers but please find me a quote where I say they, or anyone, should be killed.

FREMDFIRMA

Friday, May 18, 2007 5:44 PM (P)

Quote:
he wasn't just a religious fundamentalist, he was a DANGEROUS religious fundamentalist who had tangible effects on peoples' lives.

Bingo.

Make yourself a threat to me personally, and I think it's a given i ain't gonna like you and your ilk very much.

The other side of the coin ain't my problem, when a man lays threat against me because of my beliefs, and encourages others to act on it cause he's too much a pansy to do it himself, welll....

Again, good riddance.

Quote:
Would you want members of Falwell's family stumbling across the crass comments found in this thread?

Fine, let em, and let Hitlers descendants whine about me flaming him too, and Stalins, and Abe "the monster" Lincolns, for that matter, I don't really care what they think of me.

Everyone's got a right to an opinion even if others find it offensive, but it crosses the line when one encourages violence against those who DON'T hold that opinion, and Falwell is gonna take a posthumous roasting for it, same as him and his ilk take from me while still kicking - this means YOU, Dobson, you fucktard.

(not firefly Dobson, mind.)

And for the record, do I, did I, hate him ?

Damn right, and Dobson, and Esso, and Baker, and Swaggart, and all the rest of these goons who think me and anyone who believes as I do should be purged from the earth to make room for true believers in what they believe.

Does it mean I hate all of that belief ? hell no, but when someone makes a direct threat against me because of my own beliefs, encouraging force and violence, it's morally RIGHT to despise them.

Think you'd be fond of me if I, say... advocated bringing back the practice of feeding christians to the lions, for example ? and meant it 100% seriously ? and tried to get the govt to throw it's legal weight behind it ? and pounded the message on TV all damn day ?

Wouldn't like that much, would you ?

Good flaming riddance to him, and may the rest of those hate-spewing scum follow him soon.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

PIRATECAT

Friday, May 18, 2007 6:15 PM (P)

I thought old Jerry was alright. I never thought he was all that bad. Well maybe the teletubby thing was over board. The only knock I ever heard were from people who worked for him said he was tight on raises and alittle forgettable on owed services.

"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".

SIGNYM

Friday, May 18, 2007 6:41 PM (P)

Now if some bigwig ayatollah were to call for someone to blow away Bush in the same of Allah, I'll bet Finn would get a might tetchy. Prolly want to nuke 'em all to hell.

That's what comes of not having perspective. Or insight into one's definitions.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Friday, May 18, 2007 8:11 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
When you call for someone or a group of someones to be killed it's hate speech. Not for god to take them home, or for them to leave this world, but for Bush specifically to 'blow them away in the name of the lord'. (just one example.) THAT'S what I have against Falwell, and which you consistently ignore. Or maybe you don't think that that's hate speech when Falwell says it, or says it in the name of religion.

I have my criticisms of the US and USers but please find me a quote where I say they, or anyone, should be killed.

I don’t think its hate speech when anyone says it. The “group of someones” Falwell was talking about blowing away weren’t innocent dough-eyed little children and baby seals. Falwell was talking about terrorists who kill Americans. Strange that you left that little bit out. I’m not going to say that I thought his comments were intelligent, but they aren’t hate speech and it strikes me as dishonest to portray it that way.

Since these nine words taken out of context are what you claim to have against Falwell, it begs the rhetorical questions: how much of this hate that Falwell is accuseds of spewing is really his own words or just the spin put on them by his critics?

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

FREMDFIRMA

Friday, May 18, 2007 8:36 PM (P)

Saffr.. err.. Finn,... please, now you're just embarrassing yourself.

-F

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Friday, May 18, 2007 9:13 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Now if some bigwig ayatollah were to call for someone to blow away Bush in the same of Allah, I'll bet Finn would get a might tetchy. Prolly want to nuke 'em all to hell.

That's what comes of not having perspective. Or insight into one's definitions.

http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=21366

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
There ARE some people I fantasize about being slowly eaten by ants... eyes first...* . But our actions aren't sanitized or forgiven by pure motives** especialy if you're on the receiving end.

RUE

Friday, May 18, 2007 9:24 PM (P)

Finn,

See, now you're excusing hate speech because someone else started it first. Hypocrititcal much?

PS In fact, you'll not find me called for anyone to be killed, for any reason. On the hate speech meter, I fall well below 'Falwell'.

SIGNYM

Friday, May 18, 2007 9:27 PM (P)

Quote:
There ARE some people I fantasize about being slowly eaten by ants... eyes first... But our actions aren't sanitized or forgiven by pure motives especialy if you're on the receiving end

Did you catch the "but" in my statement? Apparently not! Because you clearly didn't understand my point that being "righteous" is no excuse for making other people suffer! That includes me, Finn, you, and Falwell.

So thanks for proving that I've been very consistent and for also demonstrating that you don't have friggin' clue as to what other people are saying. No matter than you must have spent about five hours hunting up that quote so you could take it out of context.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Friday, May 18, 2007 9:38 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
See, now you're excusing hate speech because someone else started it first. Hypocrititcal much?

I’m not excusing anything. It’s just not hate speech. And not going to be, regardless of how many time you accuse it. Hate speech is bigoted speech attacking or disparaging a social or ethnic group or a member of such a group. Terrorists attacking your country do not qualify, and suggesting that they should be killed is a not uncommon practice when dealing with terrorist attacking your country. This isn’t difficult. It doesn’t take a rocket scientists to understand these things.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Friday, May 18, 2007 10:28 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
There ARE some people I fantasize about being slowly eaten by ants... eyes first... But our actions aren't sanitized or forgiven by pure motives especialy if you're on the receiving end

Quote:

Did you catch the "but" in my statement? Apparently not! Because you clearly didn't understand my point that being "righteous" is no excuse for making other people suffer! That includes me, Finn, you, and Falwell.

So thanks for proving that I've been very consistent and for also demonstrating that you don't have friggin' clue as to what other people are saying. No matter than you must have spent about five hours hunting up that quote so you could take it out of context.

See the difference now?

SIGNYM

Friday, May 18, 2007 11:25 PM (P)

No.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

RUE

Friday, May 18, 2007 11:40 PM (P)

"Hate speech is bigoted speech attacking or disparaging a social or ethnic group or a member of such a group." Or member of a religion? You see, Falwell didn't espouse trials, convictions and due process. What he espoused was to 'blow them away in the name of the lord'. In other words, wipe groups of people off the map not for anything they've done but for what they are.

But that's Bush's approach as well - kill people first on suspicion - and I know you're OK with that as well.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 12:05 AM (P)

What Falwell said was pretty stupid, but you've now crossed the line to being even more stupid. You can't tell the difference between terrorists and a religious group, and you're obviously very invested in the hate. There's nothing I can do for you.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RUE

Saturday, May 19, 2007 12:31 AM (P)

What Falwell called for was indiscriminate killing - no charges, no trial, no jury, no verdict. Just that Bush should 'blow them away' at his discretion. That's beyond stupid. And it's not very Christian-like either.

But you can't see that because you would support all manner of hate as long as it comes under the cover of YOUR religion. Yes, you came out of the closet along time ago when it comes to killing - it's OK as long as your OK with it. Sweet religion you got there.

PS And you have yet to find a quote of mine where I say ANYONE should be killed. So I guess it's true - the person who doesn't have an issue with a hate-monger would be - yes, another hate monger.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 12:45 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
But you can't see that because you would support all manner of hate as long as it comes under the cover of YOUR religion. Yes, you came out of the closet along time ago when it comes to killing - it's OK as long as your OK with it. Sweet religion you got there.

Yeah, and I bash baby seals in the head and talk in the theater. Is it possible for you to disagree with anyone honestly? You’re glad Falwell is dead because of 9 words he said which you’ve taken out of context and now you’re accusing me of condoning mass murder, I guess. Like I said, you’re obviously very invested in the hate, and a very insecure person.

PS, I didn’t look for any, nor do I intend to. Unlike you, I don’t demonize or hate the people I disagree with.

mmbah bye

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RUE

Saturday, May 19, 2007 1:18 AM (P)

Finn,

Is it possible for YOU to debate anything honestly?

I invited you to take a look at the many Falwell quotes available and cited that one merely as an example (and I pointed out it was just one example). There's plenty more of that because Falwell was a hate-filled guy. It's what he preached. You're more than OK with that, you defend it. What does that make you?

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Saturday, May 19, 2007 1:29 AM (P)

Because it has now been three days, I think I shall respond in kind.

SignyM:
Do you agree that to hate Falwell because Falwell hated homosexuals is counter-productive? Do you not become that which you hate? I quoted your posting from the Dead Terrorists thread because this thread on Falwell lead me to draw some interesting conclusions. A number of Posters in the Dead Terrorists thread condemned the perceived relief other Posters drew from the death of al Zarqawi. This thread on the death of Falwell has been a complete 180. Why do you suppose that is? Perhaps we are so completely locked into our partisan prisons that there can be no middle ground. Perhaps Posters feel more sympathy for a man who murdered people than they do for one who called for murder. Perhaps their convictions are not as set in stone as they think they are.

Rue:

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
reposted as the thread has gone on -

For the record I have my own personal philosophy that's not NT. Insofar as Falwell preached hate I thought he poisoned humanity. And while I don't and didn't hate him personally I'm relieved he's no longer spreading his message. If he had simply stopped preaching rather than dying that would have worked for me as well.

So you did not have a problem with the messenger, just the message. You think the message will change now that he's gone?

I would very much like an answer if you please.

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
This is what you said: "Some Posters even gave reasons for their hate ... " And yet, only one poster said they hated Falwell. Just one. The math is very simple.

Now you want to argue semantics, well okay.

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Almost no one here used the word hate.

Actually a majority of the Posters in this thread used the word hate which means your statement was erroneous. Not in your opinion though because you changed the meaning to Posters specifically stating that they hated Falwell, kudos. Another in a long line of goalpost shifts which you have slickly perpetrated in this thread IMHO. Up to and including the following,

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
But that's Bush's approach as well - kill people first on suspicion - and I know you're OK with that as well.

I'll give credit where credit is due though. How you manage to slam Bush in EVERY thread, no matter the original topic, shows real commit(ed)ment.

RUE

Saturday, May 19, 2007 1:42 AM (P)

BDN

When most people used the word hate they were talking not about how they felt about Falwell but about Falwell's message being one of hate. Only one person said they hate Falwell. I actually knew you were going to say this, so a while ago I copied up a bunch of quotes where people used the word 'hate':

this man who spread so much distrust and hate
Big difference between "not agreeing" and the hate-mongering he was responsible for
Fallwell ... used the faith of others to push his agenda of hate
First he'd say something unabashedly hateful
Insofar as Falwell preached hate

As far as I'm concerned you don't know how to read.

FUTUREMRSFILLION

Saturday, May 19, 2007 1:47 AM (P)

I call this "words of an idiot" -

If you're not a born-again Christian, you're a failure as a human being.
-- Rev Jerry Falwell

God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve.
-- Rev Jerry Falwell, blaming civil libertarians, feminists, homosexuals, and abortion rights supporters for the terrorist attacks of Tuesday, September 11, 2001, to which Rev Pat Robertson agreed

The ACLU's got to take a lot of blame for this.
-- Rev Jerry Falwell, blaming civil libertarians for the terrorist attacks of Tuesday, September 11, 2001, to which Rev Pat Robertson again agreed, quoted from AANEWS #958 by American Atheists
And, I know that I'll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way -- all of them who have tried to secularize America -- I point the finger in their face and say, "You helped this happen."
-- Rev Jerry Falwell, blaming civil libertarians, feminists, homosexuals, and abortion rights supporters for the terrorist attacks of Tuesday, September 11, 2001

I put all the blame legally and morally on the actions of the terrorist, [but America's] secular and anti-Christian environment left us open to our Lord's [decision] not to protect. When a nation deserts God and expels God from the culture ... the result is not good.
-- Rev Jerry Falwell, backpedaling amidst criticism of his statement blaming civil libertarians, feminists, homosexuals, and abortion rights supporters for the terrorist attacks of Tuesday, September 11, 200

I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be!

AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.

The idea that religion and politics don't mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country.

It appears that America's anti-Biblical feminist movement is at last dying, thank God, and is possibly being replaced by a Christ-centered men's movement which may become the foundation for a desperately needed national spiritual awakening.
-- Jerry Falwell

The Jews are returning to their land of unbelief. They are spiritually blind and desperately in need of their Messiah and Savior.

Grown men should not be having sex with prostitutes unless they are married to them.
-- Jerry Falwell, on CNN's Crossfire, May 17, 1997

We're fighting against humanism, we're fighting against liberalism ... we are fighting against all the systems of Satan that are destroying our nation today ... our battle is with Satan himself.

Billy Graham is the chief servant of Satan.
-- Rev Jerry Falwell (attributed: source unknown)

The ACLU is to Christians what the American Nazi party is to Jews.
-- Rev Jerry Falwell (attributed: source unknown)

I am such a strong admirer and supporter of George W. Bush that if he suggested eliminating the income tax or doubling it, I would vote yes on first blush.

I believe that global warming is a myth. And so, therefore, I have no conscience problems at all and I'm going to buy a Suburban next time.

It is God's planet - and he's taking care of it. And I don't believe that anything we do will raise or lower the temperature one point.

Textbooks are Soviet propaganda.

The whole global warming thing is created to destroy America's free enterprise system and our economic stability

I listen to feminists and all these radical gals -

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 1:55 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
You're more than OK with that, you defend it. What does that make you?

I guess it makes me someone who isn’t willing to find gratification in the death of a person simply I disagreed with him. I defended him; because he never really did anything wrong enough to find pleasure in his death or to mock him on his deathbed. I just disagree with what he had to say. I wish you could understand that, but I think you’re too consumed with your own inflexible and intolerant political views. And I also think that the idea of finding compassion for a conservative Christian leader is very threatening to you.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RUE

Saturday, May 19, 2007 2:16 AM (P)

"I also think that the idea of finding compassion for a conservative Christian leader is very threatening to you."

As much as I disagreed with Pope John Paul II I was deeply saddened by his death. He was, I thought, misguided but sincere in his efforts. I have similar feelings for Billy Graham who seems to have acquired a genuine love of humanity and some humility in his old age. So yes, I know how to disagree with a position but respect and feel compassion for the person.

Falwell ??? Beyond disagreeing with his position, the guy was a hate-filled nutcase. And he spent his life exhorting others to go thou and do likewise.

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Saturday, May 19, 2007 2:25 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
As far as I'm concerned you don't know how to read.

I'm a selective reader, much like yourself.

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 4:52 AM (P)

Quote:
.... which you’ve taken out of context and now you’re accusing me of condoning mass murder

Finn, sa I recall you HAVE condoned mass murder. It's just that those you want to murder are not 'people' in your mind, so it's OK.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 4:59 AM (P)

Quote:
Do you agree that to hate Falwell because Falwell hated homosexuals is counter-productive?

I have come to realise that all hate is counterproductive. We often hate that which we fear. ETA: However, there is a HUGE difference between silently fantasizing about someone getting their just reward (while recognising that is a bd thing) and actively promoting hate and intolerance on a national platform. And if you try and argue that they're THE SAME :rollyeyes: then you have just committed the fallacy of slippery slope.

Quote:
I quoted your posting from the Dead Terrorists thread because this thread on Falwell lead me to draw some interesting conclusions. A number of Posters in the Dead Terrorists thread condemned the perceived relief other Posters drew from the death of al Zarqawi. This thread on the death of Falwell has been a complete 180. Why do you suppose that is? Perhaps we are so completely locked into our partisan prisons that there can be no middle ground. Perhaps Posters feel more sympathy for a man who murdered people than they do for one who called for murder. Perhaps their convictions are not as set in stone as they think they are.

Perhaps they don't like hypocrites who cloak their venom with a religion of compassion and forgiveness. Like treacle on poison.

Quote:
Actually a majority of the Posters in this thread used the word hate which means your statement was erroneous. Not in your opinion though because you changed the meaning to Posters specifically stating that they hated Falwell, kudos. Another in a long line of goalpost shifts which you have slickly perpetrated in this thread IMHO. Up to and including the following,

Maybe you should rename yourself big damn bonehead bc this is the second argument in this thread that you seriously flubbed. BTW I don't hate you. You just made me giggle.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 6:12 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Finn, sa I recall you HAVE condoned mass murder. It's just that those you want to murder are not 'people' in your mind, so it's OK.

It makes it easy to hate people you don't agree with if you concoct lies about them, doesn't it?

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SOUPCATCHER

Saturday, May 19, 2007 8:10 AM (P)

Falwell's group, the Moral Majority, spread a tremendous amount of information via mailings. They hit their high water mark pre-widespread-internet-usage. In that time period, putting together an effective mailing list of thousands of households (hundreds of thousands?) was extremely difficult and time consuming.

It is fascinating, for me, to read some of the early mailings that Falwell's group was sending out. Here's a link to a transcript of a brochure, aimed at public school children, that the North Carolina branch of the Moral Majority was distributing in 1981.
http://www.progressivehistorians.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1443
A few of these "Don'ts" are just good common sense but many of them are aimed at trying to keep children from any type of speculation (and it's funny how they are so against science-fiction). You can get a feel for the kinds of children that the Moral Majority were hoping to raise, those that accept without question what their spiritual leaders tell them.

It also reminds me vividly of the general perception of the US government that was present in the denomination I grew up in. During the seventies it was accepted fact (gospel, if you will) that a good Christian should stay as far away from politics as possible. That you only rendered unto Ceasar that which was Ceasar's, but you never actually worked for Ceasar if you could avoid it. It was also accepted, though not discussed with outsiders, that the government would be the agent of persecution of the faithful during the time of troubles.

That view was radically altered by Falwell (and other charismatic evangelical leaders) over just a short span of time. So radically altered that the focus shifted to coopting the power of the United States government to convert people to Christ. The perception changed from the government as necessary evil to be tolerated to the government as an entity instrumental in spreading evangelical Christianity.

Vectors. The vector that Falwell was on, and trying to move the country towards, was a seventeeth century combination of church and state. The full power of the United States working to convert the world to Christianity, and destroying those who resisted.

Falwell: rock throwing villager writ large.

edit to add: The true danger that Falwell represented was as an authority figure who gave the green light to the crazies. It's not an accident that the rise in Christianist terrorism that the United States experienced (abortion clinic bombings and assassinations a la Eric Rudolph) followed closely the exhortions of Falwell and others concerning the evils of abortion and homosexuality. Falwell never committed hate crimes or terrorism himself but his message gave legitimacy to these harmful actions.

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 12:43 PM (P)

Quote:
Finn, as I recall you HAVE condoned mass murder. It's just that those you want to murder are not 'people' in your mind, so it's OK.-Signy
It makes it easy to hate people you don't agree with if you concoct lies about them, doesn't it?-Finn

How about...

Quote:
Yes the US has invaded many countries in the last 100 years, so what? How many of those countries remained independent or became independent with free governments follow US invasion?

Damn few. But you kind of gloss over all that collateral damage, which amounts to several million people killed over the past 50-some-odd years, not counting WWII and the Korean War. Why?

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 2:17 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Damn few. But you kind of gloss over all that collateral damage, which amounts to several million people killed over the past 50-some-odd years, not counting WWII and the Korean War. Why?

Points for desperation, but no dice.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Saturday, May 19, 2007 3:34 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
I quoted your posting from the Dead Terrorists thread because this thread on Falwell lead me to draw some interesting conclusions. A number of Posters in the Dead Terrorists thread condemned the perceived relief other Posters drew from the death of al Zarqawi. This thread on the death of Falwell has been a complete 180. Why do you suppose that is? Perhaps we are so completely locked into our partisan prisons that there can be no middle ground. Perhaps Posters feel more sympathy for a man who murdered people than they do for one who called for murder. Perhaps their convictions are not as set in stone as they think they are.
Perhaps they don't like hypocrites who cloak their venom with a religion of compassion and forgiveness. Like treacle on poison.

So Falwell was a radical christian who interpreted the bible his way. Much like al Zarqawi was a radical muslim who interpreted the Koran his way. So why is one more hate-worthy in your opinion than the other?

Quote:
Maybe you should rename yourself big damn bonehead bc this is the second argument in this thread that you seriously flubbed.

In your not so humble yet slighty slanted opinion.

Quote:
BTW I don't hate you. You just made me giggle.

You sure it wasn't just gas?

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 3:54 PM (P)

Quote:
So Falwell was a radical christian who interpreted the bible his way. Much like al Zarqawi was a radical muslim who interpreted the Koran his way. So why is one more hate-worthy in your opinion than the other?

But that's not my opnion. Did you see anywhere in this thread where I said I hated Falwell? What I said about Falwell- "I'm glad he's not around mucking up other people's lives", was perhaps a bit less harsh than what I said about al Zarqawi being killed, which was "It's about time." I should not have said that about either but at least I'm consistent in identifying hate-mongers of any stripe. What about you?

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 4:13 PM (P)

Quote:
But you kind of gloss over all that collateral damage, which amounts to several million people killed over the past 50-some-odd years, not counting WWII and the Korean War. Why?- Signy

Points for desperation, but no dice. - Finn

What's the difference between killing 3,000 civilians for political or military gain, or killing 3,000,000? Beside the number, I mean? One you find abhorent the other excusable.

This is where your definitions gets you in trouble. Because you don't believe in killing people... except that people are more people-like when they're innocent (and the more innocent the better, like the unborn) and besides it's not really killing if we had a good enough reason even if they were innocent.

But if you were to stand before the Almighty (assuming you believe in such) and He were to ask you for your rationale for excusing and condoning the killing of millions, what would you say? "We didn't mean to"? "We had good reasons"? "We were defending you"? "Oops"? The innocent peeps- women, children, and your very favorite person: the unborn- are just as dead. So what is that? Serial manslaughter? You didn't learn lessons from the first 1,000,000 times? You're still making excuses?

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 4:31 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
What's the difference between killing 3,000 civilians for political or military gain, or killing 3,000,000? Beside the number, I mean? One you find abhorent the other excusable.

Nope, that’s your imagination. Specifically crafted to protect your views from other people’s opinions. After all, as long as you can imagine the people you disagree with as mass murders, it’s easier to dismiss them in favor of your own views, isn’t it?

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
This is where your definitions gets you in trouble. Because you don't believe in killing people... except that people are more people-like when they're innocent (and the more innocent the better, like the unborn) and besides it's not really killing if we had a good enough reason even if they were innocent.

But if you were to stand before the Almighty (assuming you believe in such) and He were to ask you for your rationale what would you say? "We didn't mean to"? "We had good reasons"? "We were defending you"? "Oops"? The innocent peeps- women, children, and your very favorite person: the unborn- are just as dead. So what is that? Serial manslaughter? You didn't learn lessons from the first 1,000,000 times? You're still making excuses?

What a load of self-righteous crap. In your eyes the innocent and the guilty are the same. That’s pretty much how Zarqawi and bin Laden saw it to, by the way. They didn’t draw a distinction between innocent and guilty.

A woman who kills her rapist in defense is a murderer? Because the actions of the rapist cannot be used to draw any distinction between the rapists and any other guy walking the street.

A man who kills someone attempting to kill him or his family is a murderer? Because the actions of the killer cannot be taken into consideration.

If a boy runs out into traffic and gets hit by a truck. Is the truck driver a murderer?

That is twisted.

Oh, and I also remember you saying that you won't draw a distinction between a murderer and new born child. At the time, I thought I was just misunderstanding you, but it's clear now that I was not.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 5:32 PM (P)

Finn, have you ever read the Onion article of the interview with God? In which he expressed how pissed He was that the ONE law (as in the current translations) that he thought he made unamiguous Thou shall not kill is the one we fuck up over and over in the name of righteousness? Or, if you don't like the current translation, what about the teachings of the NT and the example of Jesus? If anyone is guilty of a load of self-righteous crap it's you.

Quote:
In your eyes the innocent and the guilty are the same. That’s pretty much how Zarqawi and bin Laden saw it to, by the way. They didn’t draw a distinction between innocent and guilty.

No. First of all in their eyes we are ALL guilty. They simply draw their lines in ways you don't accept. Like you and like al Zarqawi- I draw distinction between innocent and guilty. But it's not for the purpose of taking life. If anyone is LIKE al Zarqawi it's you. Because- unlike al Zarqawi and unlike YOU- I in no way justify killing people for any reason except self defense or the defense of others. And there are true accidents that simply could not have been prevented. You justify killing people for the same reason al Zarqawi did: in the name of morality. Or democracy. Or capitalism. Or for whatever cause allows you to kill more people that you save. And you have defended the killing of thousands of innocent people just for that very reason. Who made you God that you feel justified in taking a life? Multiple lives? Hundreds of thousands of lives? Or condoning killing?

Quote:
A woman who kills her rapist in defense is a murderer? ... A man who kills someone attempting to kill him or his family is a murderer?

No. Why, oh why are you so thick-headed? That is self defense.

Quote:
If a boy runs out into traffic and gets hit by a truck. Is the truck driver a murderer?

If the truck driver was driving drunk and and has already "accidentally" killed 1000 boys with his truck while driving drunk, it damn well is. That's the situation that I find you defending.

Quote:
Oh, and I also remember you saying that you won't draw a distinction between a murderer and new born child. At the time, I thought I was just misunderstanding you, but it's clear now that I was not.

As far as the right to a life- no, I DON'T draw a distinction. But would I give them the same access to society at-large? Of course not.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 5:55 PM (P)

So you would never have supported America’s action in WWII, because to do so would be condoning mass murder. But by not supporting America’s action in WWII, you are essentially giving the pass to Nazi’s Germany’s extermination, and to do so would be to condone mass murder.

This fundamentalist view that you have is not only illogical and naïve, but insulting and disturbing, because it allows you to condemn anyone you don’t agree with as evil. I’ve spoken with fundamentalist before and it’s usually pointless to discuss anything with them. You won’t consider any opinion or point I have, instead you’ll simply interject the opinions and points you want me to have. Anything I saw will be used to justify this idea that you have that I am a mass murderer. This is what I mean by hating people because of their opinions. In your eyes, I’m evil, not because of my actions or the opinions that I hold, but because of the opinions you attribute to me. You’ve created this image of the mass murdering Finn, not me. And that is hate. And you really can't discuss anything with people like that.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 6:00 PM (P)

Quote:
So you would never have supported America’s action in WWII, because to do so would be condoning mass murder.

No, I consider that legitimate and successful "defense of others."

Finn- Can I ask you to consider something? Is it possible to imagine the most heinous criminal possible without thinking of the death penalty? Is it possible to divide the concept of "guilt" from the concept of death? Or are the two so inextricably linked that you can't imagine one without the other? Have you created a sliding scale of humanity based on "innocence"?

And what about the ones that you KNOW are innocent who're killed in war? The ones who got in the way of bigger concerns? Have you created another sliding scale of humanity based on convenience?

BTW- how do you consider my views "fundamentalist"? I think that they're not only consistent with each other but with reality. And you keep tagging yourself as a "mass murderer". I haven't said you were. What I'm saying is that your lack of insight causes inconsistencies within your own belief system.
------------------
Always look upstream.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 6:15 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Finn- Can I ask you to consider something? Is it possible to imagine the most heinous criminal possible without thinking of the death penalty? Is it possible to divide the concept of "guilt" from the concept of death? Or are the two so inextricably linked that you can't imagine one without the other? Have you created a sliding scale of humanity based on "innocence"?

And what about the ones that you KNOW are innocent who're killed in war? The ones who got in the way of bigger concerns? Have you created another sliding scale of humanity based on convenience?

You already know the answers to these questions. The only thing I care about is killing millions of people. My only regret in life is that there are only six billion people to kill.

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
BTW- how do you consider my views "fundamentalist"? I think that they're not only consistent with each other but with reality. And you keep tagging yourself as a "mass murderer". I haven't said you were. What I'm saying is that your lack of insight causes inconsistencies within your own belief system.

Oh it doesn’t get much more fundamentalist then you. You’d have made Falwell proud. So intolerant and inflexible in your “fundamentals” that you’ll condemn someone as evil for not following the way of righteous.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 6:19 PM (P)

Finn, why do you so bitterly keep putting words in my mouth? The only thing I'm accusing you of is excessive righteousness. And believe me, I'm not about to use THAT as an excuse to have you killed, or to call upon God or others to do it for me!

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 6:34 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Finn, why do you so bitterly keep putting words in my mouth? The only thing I'm accusing you of is excessive righteousness. And believe me, I'm not about to use THAT as an excuse to have you killed, or to call upon God or others to do it for me!

Bitterly putting words in your mouth.

“What's the difference between killing 3,000 civilians for political or military gain, or killing 3,000,000? Beside the number, I mean? One you find abhorent the other excusable.”

Evidently, I have no problem with the death of millions of people, unqualifiedly. I'm sure I never said that so, clearly those words come from someone else. You’re whole point was to insult me with vindictive personal attacks because you don’t like the fact that I’m not willing to join in with hating Falwell on his deathbed.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 6:42 PM (P)

Quote:
Evidently, I have no problem with the death of millions of people, unqualifiedly

No, evidently you have no problems qualifying death as justified or excusable

Quote:
You’re whole point was to insult me with vindictive personal attacks because you don’t like the fact that I’m not willing to join in with hating Falwell on his deathbed.

No, my point was that you have a very inconsistent view of what's "right" and what's "wrong", and which way it wobbles depends on whether or not you agree with a person's underlying motives. And yes, to the best of my recollection you HAVE defended invasions and other "interventions" which have clearly killed many innocent people which were not at all defensive. Time permits, I will go look them up and either find out I was wrong - in which case I owe you a huge apology for busting your chops over a mistaken perception- or I find out that I'm right.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

KHYRON

Saturday, May 19, 2007 7:04 PM (P)

This whole thing reads like a smear campaign against Finn. Finn doesn't like the way people reacted to Falwell's death, so Sig tries to undermine his opinion by pointing to unrelated topics where Finn's viewpoint is unpopular.

So what's your strategy, Sig? Harp on about Finn's attitude towards American interventionism until he's bored and leaves or he's seemingly so discredited in the eyes of other posters that they'll ignore his objections and continue expressing their dislike of Falwell? That way they could do it in peace until they feel they have sufficiently expressed their moral superiority, without being made to feel guilty about it.

Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 7:09 PM (P)

On backing despots

Quote:
I'm sending money to support my investment. The US does this a lot. We send money to many different places to support our investments. How these people choose to deal with their problem is up to them.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 7:18 PM (P)

Khyron, this has been a long-standing discussion between myself and Finn over such issues as American intevention abroad, the use of torture, collateral damage, and abortion. Finn approves of killing people if they're "guilty" or if they get in the way of some bigger goal. Righteousness becomes an all-encompassing reason for doing all kinds of unrighteous things. I don't. For me, when you decide to take lives you had better be prepared to show that you saved more than you killed.

How does this relate to Falwell? Just on the observation that Finn's protective feelings are inconistent. He's protective about one hate-monger but not about another. I'm not calling for "God to take him home" or wishing for someone "to blow him away in the name of the Lord" or even saying that he is "an abomination"... unlike *ahem* some people I could point to. All I would like Finn to do is sit down and think. Really think, and think hard about how righteousness is a dangerous notion.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 7:34 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
No, my point was that you have a very inconsistent view of what's "right" and what's "wrong", and which way it wobbles depends on whether or not you agree with a person's underlying "motivations". And yes, to the best of my recollection you HAVE defended invasions and other "interventions" which have clearly killed many innocent people which were not at all defensive. Time permits, I will go look them up and either find out I was wrong - in which case I owe you a huge apology for busting your chops over a mistaken perception- or I find out that I'm right.

The quote that you took out of context was a part of post that I made comparing the US invasions with Soviet invasions to refute your claim that the US was worse then the Soviet Union. It was not necessarily justifying US military intervention, and it could not possibly have been construed in context, as an excuse for mass murdering millions. But you took from it only what you wanted to see in it, which was that Finn is a mass murdering son of a bitch. So it’s probably a waste of your time to go back and look at my posts, because you’re not going to come back with anything you don't want to see. But then again, it’s probably not your intent to come back with anything different. You and I have different points of view, particularly on military intervention. We aren’t going to see eye-to-eye on everything, but accusing me or attempting to paint me as condoning mass murder by taking quotes of mine out of context is pejorative and intolerant. And it’s not going to be conducive to any kind of discussion, but then it’s not discussion that you want, but rather to discredit a person you don’t like.

And I see nothing inconsistent with my opinion on Falwell. Instead of searching for unrelated topics to smear me with, why don’t you find an example of a person whose death I found pleasure in purely for that person’s opinions? Probably because you can’t.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 8:37 PM (P)

Quote:
The quote that you took out of context was a part of post that I made comparing the US invasions with Soviet invasions to refute your claim that the US was worse then the Soviet Union

No, sorry Finn. I should have posted a link. In was in relation to coup that we funded in Iraq in 1963. In part

Quote:
The Iraqi leader made himself even more of a marked man when, in that same year, he began to help create the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC)... and in 1962 he created a national oil company to exploit the nation’s oil. In February 1963, Kassem told the French daily, Le Monde, that he had received a note from Washington -- "in terms scarcely veiled, calling upon me to change my attitude, under threat of sanctions against Iraq... All our trouble with the imperialists [the US and the UK] began the day we claimed our legitimate rights to Kuwait." A few days after Kassem’s remarks were published, he was overthrown in a coup and summarily executed; thousands of communists were killed. The State Department soon informed the press that it was pleased that the new regime would respect international agreements and was not interested in nationalizing the giant Iraq Petroleum Co., of which the US was a major owner. The new government, at least for the time being, also cooled its claim to Kuwait.

When it become clear that the CIA "backed" this plot and that "backed" meant sending money, you said

Quote:
I'm not intentionally causing his murder nor am I condoning it. I'm sending money to support my investment. The US does this a lot. We send money to many different places to support our investments. How these people choose to deal with their problem is up to them. So my point is that it is disingenuous to claim that the US/Britain assassinated someone, when actually all they did was support their interests in this part of the world.

www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=5209

I know we also went round and round on

torture -you support limited torture
abortion- which you are against because of the sanctity of human life
the death penalty-which you support because it's not innocent human life)
wartime collateral damage-in your view necessary to achieve higher goals such as "democracy" or "free trade" as well as defensive action

As far as Falwell is concerned- I already said that it was wrong to celebrate his death.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 8:48 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
I know we also went round and round on.

Actually you don’t know half as much as you think you do, but none of this has to do with the topic. And Khyron is right. All you’re doing is pulling out as many unrelated complex topics as possible, taking quotes out of context, putting words in my mouth and distorting the issue to make it impossible for me to respond to anything while attempting to discredit me because you don't like what I have to say. None of which is related to the Falwell debate. This is not discussion; it's just Gestapo tactics. You're confusing the issue because you’re too small-minded to deal with the debate honestly.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Saturday, May 19, 2007 9:02 PM (P)

Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=5209

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
So thanks for proving that I've been very consistent and for also demonstrating that you don't have friggin' clue as to what other people are saying. No matter than you must have spent about five hours hunting up that quote so you could take it out of context.

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 9:39 PM (P)

Quote:
None of which is related to the Falwell debate. This is not discussion; it's just Gestapo tactics. You're confusing the issue because you’re too small-minded to deal with the debate honestly.

And since I've already agreed that we shouldn't be celebrating Falwell's death, what more do you want me to say on the topic? This is one of those times when we agree. I just want the same consideration extended without prejudice to hate-mongering blowhards of all faiths. Including me.

Or explain to me why not.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 9:43 PM (P)

BBDN- The difference between your post and mine is that you got my point totally bass-awkards.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 9:51 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
And since I've already agreed that we shouldn't be celebrating Falwell's death, what more do you want me to say on the topic? This is one of those times when we agree. I just want the same consideration extended without prejudice to hate-mongering blowhards of all faiths. Including me.

No what you want is to paint people who disagree with you as evil, and so you are the hate-mongering blowhard.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

KHYRON

Saturday, May 19, 2007 9:57 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
And since I've already agreed that we shouldn't be celebrating Falwell's death, what more do you want me to say on the topic?

If you want to discuss other topics with Finn, you should start a new thread. Because otherwise it comes across as I described in my last post.

Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 10:16 PM (P)

Quote:
Voicing pleasure at the death of another human being whose only crime is not agreeing with you or sharing your religious views comes across as pretty assholish to me. I’m sure that somewhere he has family that miss him. And whether I agreed with his political views or particular brand of Islam there were many that did and felt that his ministries were an important part of their lives.

Could you say this about the Ayatollah Khomeini, for example? All HE did was "talk". Never killed anyone.

Quote:
No what you want is to paint people who disagree with you as evil

No Finn, not evil. Inconistently moral

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, May 19, 2007 10:36 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Could you say this about the Ayatollah Khomeini, for example? All HE did was "talk". Never killed anyone.

Haven’t you heard? I want to kill everyone who isn’t a white Anglo-Saxon Christian Fundamentalist teletuby-hating gay-bashing anti-Semitic islamophobic grasshopper-bashing hating-all-people-whose-name-begins with-“W” anti-catholic anti-Irish racist-zionist-nazi.

As enjoyable as it’s been listening to you paint me as the anti-Christ (and yourself as god incarnate, all praise SignyM), unfortunately I have to go sit with my elderly grandmother, being the son-of-bitch that I am. So this will have to be my last post.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SIGNYM

Saturday, May 19, 2007 10:44 PM (P)

Well Finn, I don't know how many times in this thread I tried to say that you were not evil, a mass-murdering SOB, or the latest incarnation of Hitler. All I've done is quote you or reference previous posts to try and get you to bang one idea of yours against another to hopefully develop some insight as to WHY you would feel one way in one context but differently in the same situation of a different flavor. Nonetheless, you insist on putting words in my mouth.

last time: I don't think you're evil. If you were, you wouldn't be so bothered.

I hope your elderly grandmother is doing well. If she is half as nice as mine was you're a lucky man. If not, you're a devoted grandson.

Peace.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

SOUPCATCHER

Saturday, May 19, 2007 11:23 PM (P)

Another fascinating tidbit on Falwell. Although he is probably best known for his hatred of homosexuals and his position as acceptable front man for the more terrorist minded of the anti-abortionists he was also an opponent of the Civil Rights movement. Some of the last practicers of discrimination in education were private religious colleges. It wasn't until the IRS started revoking the tax-exempt status of these institutions that changes were made. Although changes were not made without a fight. Bob Jones University took a case all the way to the Supreme Court trying to argue that their discriminatory policies (including a ban on interracial dating) should not remove their first amendment protections. They lost that one in 1982.

A whole generation of evangelical leaders (Falwell among them) were galvanized to get political by this removal of tax-exempt status. They were pretty pissed at the Supreme Court for not agreeing with them that their discrimination at their educational institutions was protected religious activity.

* edit to add: I was surprised to learn that Roe v Wade as a rallying cry for Protestants is a pretty recent thing. The Southern Baptist Convention was not anti-abortion (although Falwell was, he disagreed with his denomination) following the Roe v Wade decision. Anti-abortionism was more of a Catholic thing. And Catholics had always been thought of as the enemy - Rome as Babylon, the Pope as the anti-Christ, etc. (paraphrased from the Sara Robinson post I linked to above).

* edited one more time to add: Bob Jones University actually didn't lift their interracial dating prohibition until the year 2000. They paid the million dollars in back taxes, after losing their court case in the early eighties, and presumably paid taxes every year after that. It was more important, to them, to keep that interracial dating prohibition on the books and lose their tax-exempt status than it would have bee to remove their discriminatory policies and requalify for tax-exemption.

Two sort of related things. What's everyone's take on the tax-exempt status of religious organizations? Where's Geezer's opinion in all this? (when somebody hosts a party and ducks out the back door it starts to look suspicious )

SIGNYM

Sunday, May 20, 2007 2:34 AM (P)

Jerry Falwaell made a career out of speaking ill of the dead. AIDS was God's punishment. The 911 victims deserved death for tolerating homosexuality and free speech. Considering how he dished it out, his treatment has been quite tame. I consider that a testament to his victims' restraint.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

SOUPCATCHER

Sunday, May 20, 2007 8:33 AM (P)

What was frustrating about Falwell, and this is something he shared with the other prominent leaders of the Christianist right from his generation, is that he was so damn provincial. It really sucks when someone rises to that level of power and influence and still maintains a narrow uninformed worldview. I hope that his generation will be the last to share that trait. There are indiciations that the next generation of evangelical leaders are much less hidebound and reactionary (although it doesn't take much to be less hidebound and reactionary than Falwell and Robertson and Dobson et al).

I won't hold my breath but I wish them well. The money changers don't like being cleaned out of the temple.

PIRATENEWS

Sunday, May 20, 2007 8:46 AM (P)

A special place in Hell?

Quote:

The Secret Life of Jerry Farwell: Televangelist linked to 9/11 terror flight school run by CIA

At the same time the Rev. Jerry Falwell was accusing pagans, abortionists, feminists, gays, lesbians, the ACLU and People For the American Way of sharing responsibility for the 9/11 attack the televangelist owed over one million dollars in unpaid loans to the owner of the terror flight school in Florida which trained Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi, the MadCowMorningNews has learned...

"Falwell’s accountant told me, ‘if I can pay you in chunks off the books so Jerry doesn’t see it, I can get it handled,’ Burchill said.

“So we worked out a payment schedule. After that checks drawn on Liberty University came in for a few months, until Falwell figured out what was going on and put a stop to it.”

That the avuncular Southern Baptist minister was “stripping out” his church’s bank account at the end of the month is no doubt news to his supporters. Picture him trying to peddle forgiveness for that down the aisles at Liberty Baptist...

One of the flight trainers who trained Atta in Venice moonlighted flying missionary flights for televangelist Pat Robertson’s Operation Blessing.

During the 1980s Falwell— at the same time Robertson was involved a bizarre sideline for a preacher, diamond mining in West Africa— had been an outspoken supporter of apartheid in South Africa...

www.madcowprod.com/05182007.html

And these gems:

Quote:

Mrs. Betty Bowers' Eulogy for Rev. Jerry Falwell: All's Well That End's Falwell
www.bettybowers.com/nl_may2007.html

Landover Baptist Sermon: In Surprise Move, God Snuffs Out Jerry Falwell
www.landoverbaptist.org/news0507/falwell.html

Almost as good as her rants about that FABULOUS faggot GW Bush.
www.bettybowers.com/isbushgay.html

A sodomite with his finger on the nuke button... Does that sound right to you?

"You can't stop the signal!"
-Mr Universe, Pirate TV

FIREFLY SERENITY PILOT MUSIC VIDEO V2
Tangerine Dream - Thief Soundtrack: Confrontation
https://video.indymedia.org/en/2007/02/716.shtml
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=8cd2bd0379340120e7a6ed00f2a53ee5
.1044556
www.myspace.com/piratenewsctv

DRIVE BY MIND CONTROL: FREE TV EPISODES ONLINE
www.myspace.com/driveonfox

www.scifi.com/onair/

SIGNYM

Sunday, May 20, 2007 4:21 PM (P)

Oh my!

Well, ya gotta laugh or else ya just gotta cry.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

SIGNYM

Sunday, May 20, 2007 4:55 PM (P)

Quote:
Two sort of related things. What's everyone's take on the tax-exempt status of religious organizations?

They should be taxed like everyone else. (As should corporations) To the extent that they spend money on charitable work- food, housing, dental and medical care for working poor, indigent, runaways; non-religious family, metnal health, and drug counseling; non-religious eduction etc- that can deducted- just like with everyone else.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2