Fred Phelps and WBC to protest VaTech Funerals

[TsarBomba]

No joke, Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist Church cronies are going to "protest" at the funerals of the victims of the Virginia Tech tragedy, in attempt to impart on the greiving families Phelps' view God is punishing them for living in Evil America. Apparently the police say that there is little, if anything, they can do about these planned protests. Appeals to simple human decency will fall on deaf ears.

I got this from Phelps' "God Hates America" website. In their words, not mine:

WBC will preach at the funerals of the Virginia Tech students killed on campus during a shooting rampage April 16, 2007. You describe this as monumental horror, but you know nothing of horror -- yet. Your bloody tyrant Bush says he is 'horrified' by it all. You know nothing of horror -- yet. Your true horror is coming. "They shall also gird themselves with sackloth, and horror shall cover them; and shame shall be upon all faces, and baldness upon all their heads" (Eze. 7:18).
Why did this happen, you ask? It's simple. On April 16, 2007, this nation, through the offices of your military and conspirators therewith took a shot at the servants of God -- your marksman was limp and lame and he had terror all around, so he did a lousy job. But what you get for your trouble is that your God shot at you! The LORD your God sent a crazed madman to shoot at your children, and he didn't miss. Get this straight -- God sent this South Korean madman to kill 31 of your children at Virginia Tech. Was God asleep while this took place? Was He on vacation? Of course not. He willed this to happen to punish you for assailing His servants.

[ClintonHammond]

Somebody needs to put that nutter away.

[strathmeyer]

Why doesn't their god hate other countries, too?

[cyr]

Apparently he does, at least Sweden and Canada.

(can't post URLs, but they should be obvious...)

[Rrose Selavy]

- deleted posted in wrong thread.

[TsarBomba]

The Phelpes have now agreed not to protest the VA Tech funerals (http://images.mikeonline.com/images/linksandinfo/WBC_message070420.htm) after they were given a few hours of national radio time. Talk about making a deal with the Devil.

[Katana]

I wonder how long it will be before some grief-crazed relative of a fallen soldier walks into their "church" spraying bullets.

[Fell]

Why doesn't their god hate other countries, too?

http://www.godhatessweden.com/

At the top, links relating to the other three things god hates.

[The Kilted Yaksman]

If Fred Phelps "protested" at the funeral of one of my relatives, I'm afraid I'd have to "protest" the continued presence of his teeth in his gums, and take my chances with the courts.
Anybody who knows me knows I am not a violent person, but he pushes all of my anger buttons.

[wolfgirl]

The Phelpes have now agreed not to protest the VA Tech funerals (http://images.mikeonline.com/images/linksandinfo/WBC_message070420.htm) after they were given a few hours of national radio time. Talk about making a deal with the Devil.I know this guys says he thinks he's doing the right thing by giving these monsters air-time to stop them from protesting. But publicity and a spotlight are just what these pieces of ****** want. Giving it to them simply makes them more anxious to do it the next time.

[wolfgirl]

I wonder how long it will be before some grief-crazed relative of a fallen soldier walks into their "church" spraying bullets.Not soon enough...I don't advocate violence, but I certainly wouldn't shed a tear if this happened.

[triadboy]

They shall also gird themselves with sackloth, and horror shall cover them; and shame shall be upon all faces, and baldness upon all their heads" (Eze. 7:18)

So I will be bald and wear a potato sack? That ain't so bad.

[ponderingturtle]

http://www.godhatessweden.com/

At the top, links relating to the other three things god hates.

Is one of them figs?

[DOC]

No joke, Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist Church cronies are going to "protest" at the funerals of the victims of the Virginia Tech tragedy, in attempt to impart on the greiving families Phelps' view God is punishing them for living in Evil America. Apparently the police say that there is little, if anything, they can do about these planned protests. Appeals to simple human decency will fall on deaf ears.

I got this from Phelps' "God Hates America" website. In their words, not mine:

Well I'm a Christian and I disagree with Phelps. God did not cause this event. This event was caused by the sin of a man and probably the cumulative effect of the sins of others to this man. God allowed it to happen because he gave humanity the perfect gift of free will. My belief is that this event grieves God as much a anyone but He can't take back the gift of free will once it is given...

I also believe that God will punish sin either now or in the future. Because sin is repulsive to a perfect God.

[scratchy]

http://www.godhatessweden.com/
I cant tell you how proud i am, being swedish. Any country that isnt hated by him - according to Phelps that is - should really ask themselves what theyre doing wrong.

[triadboy]

Well I'm a Christian and I disagree with Phelps. God did not cause this event. This event was caused by the sin of a man and probably the cumulative effect of the sins of others to this man. God allowed it to happen because he gave humanity the perfect gift of free will. My belief is that this event grieves God as much a anyone but He can't take back the gift of free will once it is given...

I also believe that God will punish sin either now or in the future. Because sin is repulsive to a perfect God.

This all sounds as insane as Phelps to me.

[edited to remove the word "nearly" as in "...nearly as insane..."]

[TsarBomba]

God allowed it to happen because he gave humanity the perfect gift of free will. My belief is that this event grieves God as much a anyone but He can't take back the gift of free will once it is given...

I also believe that God will punish sin either now or in the future. Because sin is repulsive to a perfect God.

After reading this Christian perspective, all I can say is: Thank God I Am An Atheist.

[Meadmaker]

Sometimes, I find myself looking for a loophole in that "free speech" clause. There really ought to be a way to shut this guy up, or at least keep him away from funerals.

[Kopji]

God plans to take away our free will sometime in the future, he's just not ready yet. He is waiting until a bunch of ancient prophecies are timed just right - so he can say I told you so. That's really important.

The Phelps are who they are, but I sure don't understand how the media can keep making complete whores of themselves and sleep at night.

[saizai]

DOC - The moment you say "God can't ", you are saying that it isn't omnipotent. And that, assuming you're a normal Christian using the usual definitions, makes it not a god.

Thus you must conclude that God can but [I]chooses not to. On an ongoing basis.

E.g. it would not be a violation of free will for God to resurrect all those killed by Cho right now. Cho still had the free will to shoot them and kill them and die. Don't resurrect him, that causes a loop. But resurrect everyone else.

Whose free will would that violate?

How many people would immediately convert if such a thing were to happen?

So what's the pro vs con equation for choosing not to do it?

[The Mutha]

Phelps and family announced that they were going to protest at the funerals of the Amish girls killed in that school shooting a couple of months ago. They "agreed" not to protest in exchange for getting an hour on some national radio program.

Ol' Fred has to be ancient by this time, how much dang longer can the idiot hang onto this world?

[DOC]

DOC - The moment you say "God can't ", you are saying that it isn't omnipotent. And that, assuming you're a normal Christian using the usual definitions, makes it not a god.

Thus you must conclude that God can but [I]chooses not to. On an ongoing basis.

Well I agree with your last sentence about choosing not to. There are several things God chooses not to do like remembering our sins when we ask for forgiveness. (Jeremiah 31:34)

I disagree with your first sentence. God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.

E.g. it would not be a violation of free will for God to resurrect all those killed by Cho right now. Cho still had the free will to shoot them and kill them and die. Don't resurrect him, that causes a loop. But resurrect everyone else.

Whose free will would that violate?

How many people would immediately convert if such a thing were to happen?


God is also not in the doing tricks business. The devil tried to get Christ to do tricks in the desert and He wouldn't do it. God wants you to come to Him for the right reasons -- not because of some well performed trick.

[TsarBomba]

God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.


You mention . . . God and . . . logic in the same breath. 'Nuf said.

[Hokulele]

Your original statement was:

... He can't take back the gift of free will once it is given...


Why not? This is not a case of simultaneous existence/non-existence, but a simple removal of an existing property of human nature. If god cannot do this, god is not omnipotent. QED.

[sophia8]

I cant tell you how proud i am, being swedish. Any country that isnt hated by him - according to Phelps that is - should really ask themselves what theyre doing wrong.How do we get God to hate Scotland? Suggestions needed.

[Mashuna]

How do we get God to hate Scotland? Suggestions needed.

It's ok, you've already got bagpipes.

[Lothian]

This event was caused by the sin of a man and probably the cumulative effect of the sins of others to this man. God allowed it to happen.

I also believe that God will punish sin either now or in the future. Because sin is repulsive to a perfect God.

God is not in the absurdity business.

I honestly see no significant difference between your beliefs and those of Phelps. Both to me are absurd.



God is also not in the doing tricks business.Do you believe in miracles ?

[Katana]

DOC - The moment you say "God can't [insert anything here]", you are saying that it isn't omnipotent. And that, assuming you're a normal Christian using the usual definitions, makes it not a god.

{snip}

{snip}

I disagree with your first sentence. God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.

{snip}


Beyond any theological differences, I'm not following you here, DOC.

How did you come to this interpretation of what saizai was saying?

[triadboy]

-- and God is not in the absurdity business.

This is the same God who created man KNOWING he was going to sin. And when he did sin, God got upset and cursed his creation. Eventually, He killed everyone except one family. Then, two thousand years later, he impregnated a human female with His seed and produced his only son - and set in motion a plan to have his son killed and resurrected, which would somehow pay for the sins committed by the original man.

That's absurd.

God is also not in the doing tricks business.

He gave Moses a magic trick-stick to compete with the Pharoahs magicians. He also made an ass talk. That's a nice trick.

God wants you to come to Him for the right reasons -- not because of some well performed trick.

I'm not going to migrate to an entity that remains COMPLETELY unknown, unseen and unheard. If He would do a couple of tricks, it might get my attention.

[strathmeyer]

God is also not in the doing tricks business. The devil tried to get Christ to do tricks in the desert and He wouldn't do it. God wants you to come to Him for the right reasons -- not because of some well performed trick.

Which tricks doesn't your god do? He obviously only reveals himself to people such as yourself and not people like me. Isn't that a trick?

[saizai]

Is manifesting as a burning bush "a trick"? What about parting a sea? What about turning someone to salt? Razing a city? Casting plagues?

Hm, most of his tricks seem to be the violent kind, and stopped ~ 2k years ago. Odd, that.

[Tanstaafl]

My favorite explanation of why miracles occurred in biblical times but have stopped since:

That was the development phase of the project, we're in the maintenance phase now.

[wolfgirl]

God is not in the absurdity business.Oh, now that's got to be one of the funniest things I've heard all day...no, all week...no, make that so far this year! Everything about the concept of gods is patently absurd!

[Darth Rotor]

My favorite explanation of why miracles occurred in biblical times but have stopped since:

That was the development phase of the project, we're in the maintenance phase now.
:D

Well played.

For richorman:

I wonder if the Patriot Guards Riders would arrive to counter Phelps and friends, or if their bikerness makes them unwelcome at Virginia Tech.

Anyone have an insight into that? They have done yeoman work in Texas at funerals for soldier's families.

DR

[saizai]

DR - Guess we won't find out, since he's been bought off.

Personally I think they'd be accepted. Biker or not they seem a respectful bunch. ;)

<-- is also a biker

[Rufo]

Well I'm a Christian and I disagree with Phelps.
Who exactly, even among Christians, agrees with Phelps outside the WBC? He's voluntarily made everyone enemies, even many who share a large part of his beliefs.

If I was a Christian, I would probably believe Fred Phelps was Satan. He is like a twisted parody of most Christians I meet - instead of cherrypicking parts of his religion's teachings that are nice, he picks the most horrible and hateful ones. Instead of interpreting everything for the best, he interprets it for the worst. He's a caricature, a distorted mirror image of the 'loving Christian', a living embodiment of hate.

Even without being a Christian, I still find it somewhat frightening that a person can be so obsessed with hate without any obvious reason. I just hope that I will one day find out that the WBC is just a sick joke, and I'll be relieved. Maybe I'll even laugh at it.

[Lonewulf]

If I was a Christian, I would probably believe Fred Phelps was Satan. He is like a twisted parody of most Christians I meet - instead of cherrypicking parts of his religion's teachings that are nice, he picks the most horrible and hateful ones. Instead of interpreting everything for the best, he interprets it for the worst. He's a caricature, a distorted mirror image of the 'loving Christian', a living embodiment of hate.

I wouldn't.

He'd be a lowly demon, incapable of convincing the public. Satan has better rep.

[TsarBomba]

:D

Well played.

For richorman:

I wonder if the Patriot Guards Riders would arrive to counter Phelps and friends, or if their bikerness makes them unwelcome at Virginia Tech.

Anyone have an insight into that? They have done yeoman work in Texas at funerals for soldier's families.

DR

The reports I read on the 'net said that the PGR was planning on coming to VA Tch to counter the Phelpses, but that was cut short when Gallagher made his deal with the Devil (i.e. Fred Phelps).

[TsarBomba]

I just hope that I will one day find out that the WBC is just a sick joke, and I'll be relieved. Maybe I'll even laugh at it.

I have read serious criticisims of WBC by fundamentalist Christian groups that assert that Phelps and WBC are actually part of some atheist conspiracy to defame Christianity.

[strathmeyer]

Really? It'd be nice if I heard any religious group speak out against WBC anywhere, ever.

[Lonewulf]

I have read serious criticisims of WBC by fundamentalist Christian groups that assert that Phelps and WBC are actually part of some atheist conspiracy to defame Christianity.

Faith healers, too?

[DOC]

Originally Posted by DOC
Well I'm a Christian and I disagree with Phelps. God did not cause this event. This event was caused by the sin of a man and probably the cumulative effect of the sins of others to this man. God allowed it to happen because he gave humanity the perfect gift of free will. My belief is that this event grieves God as much a anyone but He can't take back the gift of free will once it is given...

I also believe that God will punish sin either now or in the future. Because sin is repulsive to a perfect God.



This all sounds as insane as Phelps to me.

[edited to remove the word "nearly" as in "...nearly as insane..."]


Well then, you must believe that the 81% of Americans who claim to be Christians are insane. And you probably believe Abraham Lincoln was insane too. Read his 2nd Inaugural Address sometime.

[DOC]

Originally Posted by DOC

God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.

You mention . . . God and . . . logic in the same breath. 'Nuf said.

You imply that God and logic should not be mentioned in the same breath. Well then, you must believe that George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and all 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence were not logical people.

http://www.wtv-zone.com/Mary/forsakenroots.html

[Achán hiNidráne]

Here we go again... another tedious episode of "Historical Ignorance For Right-Wing Christians" with your host, DOC.

[tkingdoll]

Well then, you must believe that the 81% of Americans who claim to be Christians are insane.

Are you saying that because a lot of people believe something, then it must be true? Because if you are saying that, then the helicopter lizard will deny you entrance to Honeyland. And that's a real pity.

[Skeptic Guy]

Originally Posted by DOC
Well I'm a Christian and I disagree with Phelps. God did not cause this event. This event was caused by the sin of a man and probably the cumulative effect of the sins of others to this man. God allowed it to happen because he gave humanity the perfect gift of free will. My belief is that this event grieves God as much a anyone but He can't take back the gift of free will once it is given...

I also believe that God will punish sin either now or in the future. Because sin is repulsive to a perfect God.






Well then, you must believe that the 81% of Americans who claim to be Christians are insane. And you probably believe Abraham Lincoln was insane too. Read his 2nd Inaugural Address sometime.

No, you miss the point. What's insane is saying that the reason this tragedy happened was because of sin and not because this kid was mentally ill. I would also guess that his conservative religious upbringing didn't help either.

ETA: 81% of the population just believes in something that isn't necessarily so, but they don't go around shooting people because of it.

Originally Posted by DOC

God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.



You imply that God and logic should not be mentioned in the same breath. Well then, you must believe that George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and all 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence were not logical people.

Please keep this discussion in the Thomas Jefferson was a Christian thread. I think Fowlsound has already dealt with it there.

[Whyatica]

Originally Posted by DOC

God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.



You imply that God and logic should not be mentioned in the same breath. Well then, you must believe that George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and all 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence were not logical people.

FAIL.

Just because something's popular doesn't make it true, science does not work via a popular vote.

[DOC]

Here we go again... another tedious episode of "Historical Ignorance For Right-Wing Christians" with your host, DOC.

What's incorrect about this wesite

http://www.wtv-zone.com/Mary/forsakenroots.html

[Cleon]

What's incorrect about this wesite

http://www.wtv-zone.com/Mary/forsakenroots.html

The contents, design, layout, pretty much everything, really. That site is a complete and total affront to God, Man, and aeronautical pasta-based dieties.

[triadboy]

Originally Posted by DOC

God allowed it to happen because he gave humanity the perfect gift of free will. My belief is that this event grieves God as much a anyone but He can't take back the gift of free will once it is given...

Well then, you must believe that the 81% of Americans who claim to be Christians are insane.

Do 100% of xians believe in Free Will?

Insane may be a little strong. I'll stick with Dawkins and say "Delusional".

[thaiboxerken]

DOC seems to use a shotgun approach to debate. He lists entire websites and says "what's wrong with this?" Just ignore the shotgun blasts and only respond to any specific points DOC makes, if and when he makes them. Didn't Thomas Paine sign the Declaration of Independence or have something important to do with American history?

[triadboy]

What's incorrect about this wesite

http://www.wtv-zone.com/Mary/forsakenroots.html


What's incorrect about this website?

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html

[skeptifem]

Originally Posted by DOC






Well then, you must believe that the 81% of Americans who claim to be Christians are insane. And you probably believe Abraham Lincoln was insane too. Read his 2nd Inaugural Address sometime.


you reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallly seem to have a problem with understanding that a popularity doesnt equal truth. this is like the thrid time youve said something about how something is super popular so it MUST have merit.

and every time you ignore it when people ask you why you think popularity proves anything.

PLEASE explain why something being popular means it has any sort of merit. please. youve been asked numerous times and ignore it every single time.


eta: i am especially curious since you have said you have taken logic classes.

[clerihew80]

What's incorrect about this wesite

http://www.wtv-zone.com/Mary/forsakenroots.html

Nothing particularly, other than the fact that it's a gross misrepresentation and oversimplification of the issue of the founding fathers' religious beliefs. And the music is annoying.

P.S. Does DOC stand for "Disciple of Christ"? Just curious.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by DOC

God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.



You imply that God and logic should not be mentioned in the same breath. Well then, you must believe that George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and all 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence were not logical people.

http://www.wtv-zone.com/Mary/forsakenroots.html
Your ignorance and lack of capacity for repairing it is amazing. You still persist in the Jefferson stupidity after being thoroughly trounced, disproven, shown to be completely misinterpreting items and quoting known false "scholars". Not that there is anything wrong with that when you otherwise have no leg to stand on.

On the bright side, I do agree that it is o.k. to mention Dog and logic in the same sentence - even the same breath if the sentence is long. An example: "There is no way of using logic in a rational manner that can prove there is a Dog." or "Logic is the easiest way to prove Dog not only does not exist but cannot exist!" or "The same type of "logic" that is used to prove Dog exists will just as easily prove that a steaming mound of elephant rule 8 created the universe and controls it yet."

[fuelair]

P.S. By wild coincidence, Phelps resembles a steaming pile of elephant rule 8 - but though he smells worse, he neither created the universe nor does he run it. I'll go now - I'm sure you and Phelps have a lot to talk about.

[Ducky]

eta: i am especially curious since you have said you have taken logic classes.

I am skeptical of this claim of DOC's (ETA: and to be frank, I am skeptical he has ever been to college, much less has an advanced degree as he claims), considering I have counted so far in this thread the following logical fallacies:

Argument from Authority (http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Argument_from_Authority), Argument from Popularity (http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Argument_from_Popularity), Attribution (http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Attribution), Hasty Generalization (http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Hasty_Generalization), Strawman (http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Strawman)

He committed all of these and more in the Jefferson thread, as well as completely ignored anything that was contrary to his world-view and preconceived notions. So you can add Argument from Incredulity (http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Argument_from_Incredulity) to that list, as well as Moving the Goalposts (http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Moving_the_Goalposts) when in post #2 of the thread offered Jefferson's own words to refute all of his OP's points, he then went on to change the subject to a general topic of seperation of church and state. When that didn't work, DOC clumsily tried to use Ad Hominems (http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Ad_Hominem) against judges and the ACLU by smearing their actions or intentions in an insulting and inaccurate light.

Regardless of the topic in any thread, he apparently wants to add the Non-sequitur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_%28logic%29) of Lincoln's 2nd inaugural address or what he wants to believe is all of the founding father's beliefs, despite being shown his incredulous stance on the founding fathers is completely inaccurate. This behavior displays what I believe to be a complete lack of understanding of logic and discourse.

Furthermore, it's a horrible attempt on his part to derail a thread into his own little debate about his fundy principles so he can run back to his parishoners and his preacher and say "Look! I totally won against the atheist liberal communist anti-american ACLU lovers!"

I now also predict that DOC will declare this post as not contributing to this forum at all, and that it is nothing but a personal attack on him, despite it being factually correct in his logical fallacies.


On topic:

To say this tragedy at VT happened because of sin is to completely negate the very real mental instability and illness of the person who perpetrated this, and it also serves to cheapen the deaths of those who died, and insult their families as they mourn. It is a despicable stance that is only slightly worse than telling a cancer patient that god gave that patient cancer to teach them a lesson, or somehow infer that the patient deserved it cosmically.

It is a loathsome and callous act to protest any funeral, let alone the funerals of those who have died in a tragic event, or died serving their country. Fred Phelps is a horrible man for his actions.



ETA2:

If the skepticwiki links don't work, please make your way to skepticwiki.no-ip.org and click on logic and logical fallacies until our DNS issues are resolved.

[strathmeyer]

Well then, you must believe that the 81% of Americans who claim to be Christians are insane. And you probably believe Abraham Lincoln was insane too. Read his 2nd Inaugural Address sometime.

Where the heck are these 81% of Americans that claim to be Christians? If you're going to make up a number, at least make it believable.

[Ducky]

Where the heck are these 81% of Americans that claim to be Christians? If you're going to make up a number, at least make it believable.

No idea as to the reliability of this website, but they seem to be citing direct polls and studies (the direct studies I have yet to find online to verify) and it seems to be as follows:

Polling data from the 2001 ARIS study, described below, indicate that:

81% of American adults identify themselves with a specific religion:
76.5% (159 million) of Americans identify themselves as Christian.
This is a major slide from 86.2% in 1990. Identification with Christianity has suffered a loss of 9.7 percentage points in 11 years -- about 0.9 percentage points per year. This decline is identical to that observed in Canada between 1981 and 2001. If this trend continues, then by about the year 2042, non-Christians will outnumber the Christians in the U.S.

52% of Americans identified themselves as Protestant.
24.5% are Roman Catholic.
1.3% are Jewish.
0.5% are Muslim, followers of Islam.

The fastest growing religion (in terms of percentage) is Wicca -- a Neopagan religion that is sometimes referred to as Witchcraft. Numbers of adherents went from 8,000 in 1990 to 134,000 in 2001. Their numbers of adherents are doubling about every 30 months. 4,5 Wiccans in Australia have a very similar growth pattern, from fewer than 2,000 in 1996 to 9,000 in 2001. 10 In Canada, Wiccans and other Neopagans showed the greatest percentage growth of any faith group. They totaled 21,080 members in 1991, an increase of 281% when compared with 1990.

14.1% do not follow any organized religion. This is an unusually rapid increase -- almost a doubling -- from only 8% in 1990. There are more Americans who say they are not affiliated with any organized religion than there are Episcopalians, Methodists, and Lutherans taken together. The unaffiliated vary from a low of 3% in North Dakota to 25% in Washington State. "The six states with the highest percentage of people saying they have no religion are all Western states, with the exception of Vermont at 22%."

A USA Today/Gallup Poll in 2002-JAN showed that almost half of American adults appear to be alienated from organized religion. If current trends continue, most adults will not call themselves religious within a few years. Results include:


About 50% consider themselves religious (down from 54% in 1999-DEC)

About 33% consider themselves "spiritual but not religious" (up from 30%)

About 10% regard themselves as neither spiritual or religious.


source. (http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_prac2.htm)

So I'm not sure where DOC is getting his numbers, but aside from an appeal to popularity being a logical fallacy, I don't see his numbers supported.

[DOC]

Originally Posted by DOC

God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.

You imply that God and logic should not be mentioned in the same breath. Well then, you must believe that George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and all 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence were not logical people.


Just because something's popular doesn't make it true, science does not work via a popular vote.


I agree with the first and second part of your quote although sometimes science (and religion) follow the money.

[Ducky]

Originally Posted by DOC

God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.

You imply that God and logic should not be mentioned in the same breath. Well then, you must believe that George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and all 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence were not logical people.





I agree with the first and second part of your quote although sometimes science (and religion) follows the money.

You've got this non-sequitur thing down. Do you have anything relevant to this thread?

[DOC]

So I'm not sure where DOC is getting his numbers, but aside from an appeal to popularity being a logical fallacy, I don't see his numbers supported.



From the Wiki article "Religion in the United States"

* A 2006 CBS News Poll of 899 U.S. adults found that 82% of those surveyed believed in God, while 9% believed in "some other universal spirit or higher power," 8% believed in neither, and 1% were unsure.

* A 2004 Newsweek Poll of 1,009 U.S. adults, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, found that 82% of those surveyed believed that Jesus was God or the Son of God.

* A 2000 Newsweek Poll of 752 U.S. adults, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, found that 94% of those surveyed believed in God, while 4% did not and 2% were unsure.

* A 1998 Harris Poll of 1,011 U.S. adults found that 94% of those surveyed believed in God.

I agree -- popularity does not guarantee truth. Why some people assume I don't believe that, I don't know. But when people use words like insane and imply a lack of logic with regards to religion they are indirectly putting down the vast majority of Americans. As well as putting down almost all of the US Presidents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_States

[MRC_Hans]

From the Wiki article "Religion in the United States"

* A 2006 CBS News Poll of 899 U.S. adults found that 82% of those surveyed believed in God, while 9% believed in "some other universal spirit or higher power," 8% believed in neither, and 1% were unsure.

* A 2004 Newsweek Poll of 1,009 U.S. adults, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, found that 82% of those surveyed believed that Jesus was God or the Son of God.

* A 2000 Newsweek Poll of 752 U.S. adults, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, found that 94% of those surveyed believed in God, while 4% did not and 2% were unsure.

* A 1998 Harris Poll of 1,011 U.S. adults found that 94% of those surveyed believed in God.

I agree popularity does not guarantee truth. Why do people assume I do? But when people use words like insane and imply a lack of logic with regards to religion they are indirectly putting down the vast majority of Americans. As well as putting down almost all of the US Presidents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_States

Obviously, such figures will depend much on how you ask the question. You can word the enquiry about whether people believe in god so you will get "yes" only from religious fundies, or so you only "no" from die-hard atheists, or anything in between.

Religion certainly implies a lack of logic at its very base.. Insane, I'd reserve for the more fundie persuations.

Hans

[Ducky]

From the Wiki article "Religion in the United States"

* A 2006 CBS News Poll of 899 U.S. adults found that 82% of those surveyed believed in God, while 9% believed in "some other universal spirit or higher power," 8% believed in neither, and 1% were unsure.

* A 2004 Newsweek Poll of 1,009 U.S. adults, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, found that 82% of those surveyed believed that Jesus was God or the Son of God.

* A 2000 Newsweek Poll of 752 U.S. adults, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, found that 94% of those surveyed believed in God, while 4% did not and 2% were unsure.

* A 1998 Harris Poll of 1,011 U.S. adults found that 94% of those surveyed believed in God.

I agree popularity does not guarantee truth. Why do people assume I do? But when people use words like insane and imply a lack of logic with regards to religion they are indirectly putting down the vast majority of Americans. As well as putting down almost all of the US Presidents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_States

You've committed a logical fallacy of equivocation. Belief in God does not equate to Christianity. On top of that, you've shown very succinctly how polls prove they can be contradictory and thus unreliable.

Now, no one has said you think popularity "guarantees truth" so that is a strawman argument on your part. What we have pointed out is your willingness to state that popularity of a belief must lend credence to its viability in truth, which we have demonstrated is a logical fallacy. Or did your statement of the following not mean to portray popularity in an idea lends credence to it?


Originally Posted by DOC

Well then, you must believe that the 81% of Americans who claim to be Christians are insane.


That statement is designed to say that since 81% of people who believe in God (and your own quotations of numbers negates the accuracy of this just as my post did) must have something correct due to majority. Also, to say that someone uses the term "insane" with a lack of logic shows you didn't read or comprehend why that word was used. This is par for the course with you.

Yet once again, you say "they are indirectly putting down the vast majority of Americans. As well as putting down almost all of the US Presidents." This is still a fallacy of appeal to popularity, and a fallacy of appealing to authority. The amount of believers is irrelevant to the demonstrative evidence for a belief.

Once again, do you have anything that is remotely on point for this thread, or are you going to insist on your derail further? This thread is not about the majority of beliefs in america, nor is it about presidents and belief, or the founding fathers. It is specifically about Fred Phelps making a mockery of the memorial services of victims of a horrific tragedy. Please try to stay on point.

[DOC]

Where the heck are these 81% of Americans that claim to be Christians? If you're going to make up a number, at least make it believable.


see post #62

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by DOC

God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.

Excuse me, but God is very much in the absurdety business. The very concept of a being that defies all logic and all natural laws is an absurdity, in the basic meaning of the term.

You imply that God and logic should not be mentioned in the same breath. Well then, you must believe that George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and all 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence were not logical people.

This is a fallacy. I'd call it a strawman (but maybe this particular brand has another name). At most it is saying that they were not perfectly logical people, but that is entirely another thing. Even the most hard-nosed logician has some illogical convictions.

Hans

[Ducky]

Good to see you posting MRC_Hans. I always enjoy your posts.

[Ducky]

This is a fallacy. I'd call it a strawman (but maybe this particular brand has another name). At most it is saying that they were not perfectly logical people, but that is entirely another thing. Even the most hard-nosed logician has some illogical convictions.

Hans

Actually, I'd call that fallacy the appeal to authority fallacy. (That is, an appeal to incorrect authority)

[DOC]

Your ignorance and lack of capacity for repairing it is amazing. You still persist in the Jefferson stupidity after being thoroughly trounced, disproven, shown to be completely misinterpreting items and quoting known false "scholars"."


I invite anyone to go to the "Thomas Jefferson's Admiration and Financial support of Christianity forum" in the religious forum section and read any 20 of my 170 posts and see for yourself what a joke the above quote is. It's probably best to start at post #61 because I only left 2 other posts before that.

[Ducky]

I invite anyone to go to the "Thomas Jefferson's Admiration and Financial support of Christianity forum" in the religious forum section and read any 20 of my 170 posts and see for yourself what a joke the above quote is. It's probably best to start at post #61 because I only left 2 other posts before that.

I invite anyone to go read any 20 posts responding to any of DOC's posts in that thread as evidence that DOC simply ignores any evidence to the contrary of his beliefs.

Now, once again DOC, do you have anything ON POINT in this thread, or are you simply going to continue to try to derail this thread? This thread is not about the majority of beliefs in america, nor is it about presidents and belief, or the founding fathers. It is not about your accuracy or inaccuracy in posting your assumptions about history. It is specifically about Fred Phelps making a mockery of the memorial services of victims of a horrific tragedy. Please try to stay on point.

[DOC]

Originally Posted by DOC

God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.

Excuse me, but God is very much in the absurdety business. The very concept of a being that defies all logic and all natural laws is an absurdity, in the basic meaning of the term.


Well then maybe you know something about logic and natural laws, that Isaac Newton, the inventor of calculus and the laws of gravity, didn't know. He was a strong believer in God and the Bible and even wrote a book about the biblical books Daniel and Revelation.

[Ducky]

Originally Posted by DOC

God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.




Well then maybe you know something about logic and natural laws, that Isaac Newton, the inventor of calculus and the laws of gravity, didn't know. He was a strong believer in God and the Bible and even wrote a book about the biblical books Daniel and Revelation.

Argument from authority. Newton didn't know quite as much about those laws as we do today, thanks to many intelligent scientists since. Either way, whether he believed in God or not is irrelevant to this thread.


Now, once again DOC, do you have anything ON POINT in this thread, or are you simply going to continue to try to derail this thread? This thread is not about the majority of beliefs in america, nor is it about presidents and belief, or the founding fathers. It is not about your accuracy or inaccuracy in posting your assumptions about history. It is specifically about Fred Phelps making a mockery of the memorial services of victims of a horrific tragedy. Please try to stay on point.

[MRC_Hans]

Good to see you posting MRC_Hans. I always enjoy your posts.Thanks! And allow me to return the compliment. Actually, I post with reasonable regularity, but I think we are often in different areas.

Big house, this forum.

Hans

[Ducky]

Thanks! And allow me to return the compliment. Actually, I post with reasonable regularity, but I think we are often in different areas.

Big house, this forum.

Hans


Indeed, I need to make it over to your corner more often. :)

[PenguinWarrior]

Originally Posted by DOC

God can't make something exist and not exist at the same time because that is an absurdity. I learned that in a freshman logic course -- and God is not in the absurdity business.




Well then maybe you know something about logic and natural laws, that Isaac Newton, the inventor of calculus and the laws of gravity, didn't know. He was a strong believer in God and the Bible and even wrote a book about the biblical books Daniel and Revelation.

He also believed in the correctness of alchemy. Are you claiming alchemy is true? If so please demonstrate by turning lead into gold. Of course, I will need said gold shipped to me as evidence. And will need to keep it for...posterity.

[MRC_Hans]

Well then maybe you know something about logic and natural laws, that Isaac Newton, the inventor of calculus and the laws of gravity, didn't know. He was a strong believer in God and the Bible and even wrote a book about the biblical books Daniel and Revelation.Ehr, was Newton any stronger a believer than anybody else in his era?

Anyway, you are just repeating your fallacy (and I agree it is an appeal to false authority): Isaac Newton was a great authority (for his time) on gravity, physics, etc. That does not make him an authority on religion. He may even have been an authority on religion too, but you still can't infer from one to the other.

Genesis, for God to say "let there be light", is violating (or, if you prefer, transcending) the laws of physics. The very concept of God the creator is that something can command the laws of physics, and that is a logical absurdety. Therefore, God must transcend logic.

Hans

[Lothian]

To defend Doc’s regular appeals to authority. I think the burden of proof does rest with the minority view. 500 years ago the burden was on Copernicus to argue that the earth went round the sun. Now the burden would be on the earthcentics.

However with less than a third of the population of the Earth being Christians and many of them in violent disagreement with each other, the burden of proving that the sins of men caused a loving Christiain God to allow this mass murder to happen belongs with Doc, irrespective of the number of famous dead people he wants added to his count.

[fuelair]

The problem is that most of his appeals to authority have been to discredited authority and/or never credited authority and many (I think all, but definitely many of his "proofs" vanished when others checked what he claimed to be documentary evidence. He has a point he wants to make .

[gnome]

DOC, you never responded to the questions of whether God is in the magic trick business. Apparently He used to be, but isn't anymore.

[Magyar]

Well I'm a Christian and I disagree with Phelps. God did not cause this event. This event was caused by the sin of a man and probably the cumulative effect of the sins of others to this man. God allowed it to happen because he gave humanity the perfect gift of free will. My belief is that this event grieves God as much a anyone but He can't take back the gift of free will once it is given...

I also believe that God will punish sin either now or in the future. Because sin is repulsive to a perfect God.

When I read drivel like this I can not decide whether I want to give into my dispair towards humanity in general or give into my inclination of torture, track down the purvayor of such filth and ignorance and do a Hanibal Lector on him.


Yes I know this is an emotional rant but I have to let it out otherwise I'll go postal.

[Chimera]

Originally Posted by DOC


You imply that God and logic should not be mentioned in the same breath. Well then, you must believe that George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, and all 56 Signers of the Declaration of Independence were not logical people.


Other logical thoughts of one or more founding fathers:

-Keeping African-Americans as slaves was okay.
-Women should not vote.
-Bloodletting and leeches were sound medical solutions to a variety of ailments.

[Lonewulf]

Other logical thoughts of one or more founding fathers:

-Keeping African-Americans as slaves was okay.

Which Jefferson was against. He wanted to make slavery illegal in the constitution, but he didn't have a strong enough backing to do so.

-Bloodletting and leeches were sound medical solutions to a variety of ailments.

Errr... you do realize that doctors today are considering leeches for certain kinds of operations, right? They have some uses.

Read: http://www.carolina.com/manuals/manuals3/Leeches%20in%20Modern%20Medicine.pdf

Not everyone in the past was stupid. (I'd also add that it wasn't necessarily "illogical" to believe in bloodletting/leeches the way they did, given what little means they had to discover the world at their time. It's easy to look back with hindsight, with modern technology and scientific gear, but to claim that others are illogical because they have a lesser amount of gear is kinda silly)

[Chimera]

Which Jefferson was against. He wanted to make slavery illegal in the constitution, but he didn't have a strong enough backing to do so.

Which is why I said "One or more of the founding fathers", not "all".

Errr... you do realize that doctors today are considering leeches for certain kinds of operations, right? They have some uses.

From what I understand, leeches are coming back in use today for a very specific purpose: to remove the buildup of blood in a particular place. But, the way bloodletting was used back in the day (for everything from anemia to insanity) was responsible for much medical harm. Some historians believe that it was a factor in George Washington's death.


Not everyone in the past was stupid. (I'd also add that it wasn't necessarily "illogical" to believe in bloodletting/leeches the way they did, given what little means they had to discover the world at their time. It's easy to look back with hindsight, with modern technology and scientific gear, but to claim that others are illogical because they have a lesser amount of gear is kinda silly)

I was using the idea of "logic" in a humorous way, or meant to. :) My intent was to respond to DOC's statement that the founding fathers used "logic" in their God belief, then looking at some of the other (what we now think of as "odd") practices from the day. Of course the stuff looks silly by today's standards, knowing what we do now. ;)

[drkitten]

the burden of proving that the sins of men caused a loving Christiain God to allow this mass murder to happen belongs with Doc, irrespective of the number of famous dead people he wants added to his count.

The central problem though, is that the famous dead peole DOC cites very seldom said or did any of the things he attributes to them.

[Lonewulf]

Which is why I said "One or more of the founding fathers", not "all".

From what I understand, leeches are coming back in use today for a very specific purpose: to remove the buildup of blood in a particular place. But, the way bloodletting was used back in the day (for everything from anemia to insanity) was responsible for much medical harm. Some historians believe that it was a factor in George Washington's death.

Okay, fair enough on both counts.

I was using the idea of "logic" in a humorous way, or meant to. :) My intent was to respond to DOC's statement that the founding fathers used "logic" in their God belief, then looking at some of the other (what we now think of as "odd") practices from the day. Of course the stuff looks silly by today's standards, knowing what we do now. ;)

Yes, it does. The overall point, I take it, is that as time advances, thought and understanding progresses. So relying on the opinions of people in the past does little to tell us of anything in the present. I would agree with this statement if that is what you are saying.

However, I feel that the founding fathers were fairly advanced in their time, and very few (that I know of) were truly Christian or religious in any account. True, some were deists, but at the least they advocated questioning the existance of God (Jefferson did, at the least), And at the most there were some that, if they were not borderline atheists, then they were straight atheists altogether...

[Cleon]

I invite anyone to go to the "Thomas Jefferson's Admiration and Financial support of Christianity forum" in the religious forum section and read any 20 of my 170 posts and see for yourself what a joke the above quote is. It's probably best to start at post #61 because I only left 2 other posts before that.

:dl:

Yes, please do. This would be the thread where virtually every claim DOC makes is thoroughly trashed, and yet he manages to ignore it every single time. (Note that fowlsound completely demolishes DOC's claims in the second post, but he oddly tells people not to start reading until #61...)

The thread is a fascinating example of cognitive dissonance in action. DOC gets trounced, but still thinks he's coming up smelling like roses.

[drkitten]

However, I feel that the founding fathers were fairly advanced in their time, and very few (that I know of) were truly Christian or religious in any account.

This borders on an argument about who is and is not a "true Scotsman."

Part of the problem, for example, is that many of the Founding Fathers were at least as "truly Christian" as most of the Christian right today. For example, Jefferson attended church. In 1790, attending church was a social expectation, especially since there wasn't much else to do on a Sunday. Today, attending church is no longer a social expectation, and therefore it's a much stronger marker of belief than it was two centuries ago.

If you want an analogy, think about the political message that you send by having ashtrays in your house. Fifty years ago, everyone had ashtrays, even if they didn't themselves smoke, because the social expectation was that some of your guests might, and you needed to make them comfortable. Today, the expectation is reversed; unless your hosts smoke, a polite guest will not smoke in their house. Today, I can infer from the presence of an ashtray the frequent presence of a smoker. In 1957, I could infer only the presence of someone with social awareness....

[thaiboxerken]

I'm thinking DOC has no idea what an absurdity is.

[fuelair]

:dl:

Yes, please do. This would be the thread where virtually every claim DOC makes is thoroughly trashed, and yet he manages to ignore it every single time. (Note that fowlsound completely demolishes DOC's claims in the second post, but he oddly tells people not to start reading until #61...)

. DOC gets trounced, but still thinks he's coming up smelling like roses.
Drop the "roses", replace with "steaming rule 8" and we prove the truth is out there!!!!!

[Lothian]

The central problem though, is that the famous dead peole DOC cites very seldom said or did any of the things he attributes to them.
I appreciate that but I understand that argument is happening elsewhere. I was hoping that here DOC might get back to proving that god allowed the killing of these people to punish man’s sins.
http://i.slickdeals.net/images/smilies2/tumbleweed.gif

[strathmeyer]

From the Wiki article "Religion in the United States"

* A 2006 CBS News Poll of 899 U.S. adults found that 82% of those surveyed believed in God, while 9% believed in "some other universal spirit or higher power," 8% believed in neither, and 1% were unsure.

* A 2004 Newsweek Poll of 1,009 U.S. adults, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, found that 82% of those surveyed believed that Jesus was God or the Son of God.

* A 2000 Newsweek Poll of 752 U.S. adults, conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, found that 94% of those surveyed believed in God, while 4% did not and 2% were unsure.

* A 1998 Harris Poll of 1,011 U.S. adults found that 94% of those surveyed believed in God.

I agree -- popularity does not guarantee truth. Why some people assume I don't believe that, I don't know. But when people use words like insane and imply a lack of logic with regards to religion they are indirectly putting down the vast majority of Americans. As well as putting down almost all of the US Presidents.

Not familiar with staging poles, eh? If the number is real, why is it so inconsistent? Why aren't any other methods used besides polling? Could it be because they would yield lower results? And you still haven't explained to me how I, having lived an otherwise normal life, have managed to avoid 82% of the US population?

[Cleon]

Not familiar with staging poles, eh? If the number is real, why is it so inconsistent? Why aren't any other methods used besides polling? Could it be because they would yield lower results? And you still haven't explained to me how I, having lived an otherwise normal life, have managed to avoid 82% of the US population?

I like how 82% believe in God, and 82% believe that Jesus was God or the Son of God.

Which means that everyone who believes in God is some form of Christian. Comes as a bit of a shock to us Jews.

[Tanstaafl]

I like how 82% believe in God, and 82% believe that Jesus was God or the Son of God.

Which means that everyone who believes in God is some form of Christian. Comes as a bit of a shock to us Jews.


Must really annoy the muslims.

[Skeptic Guy]

DOC = :bwall

[skeptifem]

uhhhhhhhhhh so no answer about doc bringing up the popularity of things to try and prove their merit?

[DOC]

Yes, please do. This would be the thread where virtually every claim DOC makes is thoroughly trashed, and yet he manages to ignore it every single time. (Note that fowlsound completely demolishes DOC's claims in the second post, but he oddly tells people not to start reading until #61...)

The thread is a fascinating example of cognitive dissonance in action. DOC gets trounced, but still thinks he's coming up smelling like roses.


I just paste what I said to foulsound in post 654 of the Jefferson forum because its the same ol', same ol'.

Pasted from TJ forum:

"I've noticed that some people in these forums seem to believe that by "continuously" saying things like:

1) all the sidestepping

2) all the rest of the crap you posted

3) we destroyed your stance

-- that it verifies the truth of the statement. By "continuously" doing this ploy though, they are really insulting the intelligence of the readers because it implies that the readers aren't smart enough to make up their own minds about the contents of the forum.

[Ducky]

I just paste what I said to foulsound in the TJ forum because its the same ol', same ol.

Pasted from TJ forum:

"I've noticed that some people in these forums seem to believe that by "continuously" saying things like:

1) all the sidestepping

2) all the rest of the crap you posted

3) we destroyed your stance

-- that it verifies the truth of the statement. By "continuously" doing this ploy though, they are really insulting the intelligence of the readers because it implies that the readers aren't smart enough to make up their own minds about the contents of the forum.

Oops, that's not all of it.

It also shows an intense bitterness for all things religious which is antithetical to the true American spirit. But when you think about it, the founder of the ACLU was at one time a communist and communism is certainly antithetical to the true American spirit. So we shouldn't be surprised.


Why did you leave this out DOC?

[Cleon]

-- that it verifies the truth of the statement. By "continuously" doing this ploy though, they are really insulting the intelligence of the readers because it implies that the readers aren't smart enough to make up their own minds about the contents of the forum.

Translation: Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

I said "yes, please do [read the thread]."

Breach of Membership Agreement removed.

[skeptifem]

lol some1 call whine-one-one


eta: i guess he reposted the same response in the jefferson thread. lol. he literally has nothing to say.

[DOC]

Originally Posted by DOC

"It also shows an intense bitterness for all things religious which is antithetical to the true American spirit. But when you think about it, the founder of the ACLU was at one time a communist and communism is certainly antithetical to the true American spirit. So we shouldn't be surprised."


Why did you leave this out DOC?


Because I wanted to concentrate on my 1st point and didn't want to overload the reader. But I'm glad you brought it up. Are you saying Religiosity is not part of the American Spirit. And are you saying communism is not antithetical to the American spirit.

[Cleon]

Because I wanted to concentrate on my 1st point and didn't want to overload the reader.

...with facts.

[Achán hiNidráne]

Originally Posted by DOC
And are you saying communism is not antithetical to the American spirit.

No, as most rational people here realize, "communism" has nothing to do with this conversation.

It only matters to Conservatives who for some reason still think that the "Ruskies" are going to invade any minute and that there are "Godless Commies" behind every rock and tree waiting for orders their from Moscow even nearly 20 years after the Soviet Union collapsed.

Have you no sense of decency (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/welch-mccarthy.html), DOC?

[Ducky]

Because I wanted to concentrate on my 1st point and didn't want to overload the reader. But I'm glad you brought it up. Are you saying Religiosity is not part of the American Spirit. And are you saying communism is not antithetical to the American spirit.

No DOC, *you* said those words. You are putting those words in my mouth. That's pretty intellectually dishonest, ace.

[gnome]

A lot of people used to be communists, until they saw what Stalin was up to.

[jman19999]

With regards to Phelps,

There are limits on free speech: (recall the "Clear and Present Danger Test")

1.) You can't cause harm to other people or their property

2.) You can't cause or create disturbances that would cause a riot or panic

3.) You can't cause a defamation of character to a person. (i.e attacking their moral or ethics code.)

I think there needs to be something in there along the line of showing proper respect, dignity, and maturity to friends and loved ones who's lives were forever shattered and destroyed by the Virgina Tech killings. My view is that if he pulls any crap, have security whisk him away. Deal with the court issues if they arise later.

There's a difference between free speech and acting like a classless idiot. Unfortunately, there are a growing number of people out there in today's society who don't know the difference.

Jeff

[skeptifem]

^^Ive always held the opinion that this is just plain harassment dressed up as protest, anyone really invested in getting laws on the books that are intolerant of gays would protest to people who could actually make that happen, or have some sort of influence in politics. Or maybe someone who is actually promoting the equality of gays.

[fuelair]

No, as most rational people here realize, "communism" has nothing to do with this conversation.

It only matters to Conservatives who for some reason still think that the "Ruskies" are going to invade any minute and that there are "Godless Commies" behind every rock and tree waiting for orders their from Moscow even nearly 20 years after the Soviet Union collapsed.

Have you no sense of decency (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/welch-mccarthy.html), DOC?

Doc would love the film from mid- 50's THEM! One of the subtexts is the giant ants size/power stems from atomic bomb, they hide among us in our own country underground where the merciless worker exist only to do the bidding of the ruler. They come out to turn/produce more commies all over the land and in a few years they spread and destroy civiization as we know it. (and when an FBI guy tells a doctor to hold onto a falsely accused "mental patient", goshdarnit the Dr. does - for the good of the country!!!)

[Achán hiNidráne]

Doc would love the film from mid- 50's THEM! One of the subtexts is the giant ants size/power stems from atomic bomb, they hide among us in our own country underground where the merciless worker exist only to do the bidding of the ruler. They come out to turn/produce more commies all over the land and in a few years they spread and destroy civiization as we know it. (and when an FBI guy tells a doctor to hold onto a falsely accused "mental patient", goshdarnit the Dr. does - for the good of the country!!!)

I never saw a Cold War subtext for that movie, but I can see it. I just thought it was cool because it had the U.S. Army fighting giant ants.

[fuelair]

I never saw a Cold War subtext for that movie, but I can see it. I just thought it was cool because it had the U.S. Army fighting giant ants.
Me too - but when I started teaching film I started looking for more subtexts
and if you lived through that period that one is almost not sub!!:D It is one of my favorites!!