Homophobic Fundis with Bad Taste

[Ian McColgin]

A little C&P

Published on Monday, August 29, 2005 by the Associated Press

ANTI-GAY CHURCH PROTESTS AT GI FUNERALS

By Beth Rucker

Members of a church say God is punishing American soldiers for defending a country that harbors gays, and they brought their anti-gay message to the funerals Saturday of two Tennessee soldiers killed in Iraq.
The church members were met with scorn from local residents. They chased the church members cars' down a highway, waving flags and screaming "God bless America."

"My husband is over there, so I'm here to show my support," 41-year-old Connie Ditmore said as she waved an American flag and as tears came to her eyes. "To do this at a funeral is disrespectful of a family, no matter what your beliefs are."

The Rev. Fred Phelps, founder of Westboro Baptist in Kansas, contends that American soldiers are being killed in Iraq as vengeance from God for protecting a country that harbors gays. The church, which is not affiliated with a larger denomination, is made up mostly of Phelps' children, grandchildren and in-laws.

The church members carried signs and shouted things such as "God hates fags" and "God hates you."

About 10 church members protested near Smyrna United Methodist Church and nearly 20 stood outside the National Guard Armory in Ashland City. Members have demonstrated at other soldier funerals across the nation.

The funerals were for Staff Sgt. Asbury Fred Hawn II, 35, in Smyrna and Spc. Gary Reese Jr., 22, in Ashland City. Both were members of the Tennessee National Guard.

Hundreds of Smyrna and Ashland City residents and families of other soldiers turned out at both sites to counter the message the Westboro Baptist members brought.

So many counterdemonstrators were gathered in Ashland City that police, sheriff's deputies and state troopers were brought in to control traffic and protect the protesters.

The church members held protesting permits, and counterprotesters in Smyrna turned their backs to Westboro Baptist members until time expired on the protest permits.

"If they were protesting the government, I might even join them," Danny Cotton, 56, said amid cries of "get out of our town" and "get out of our country."

"But for them to come during the worst time for this family - it's just wrong."

© 2005 Associated Press

###

Edited to correct spelling in headline. I usually retype the heads into caps as I don't know how to make boldface down here. That misspelling was my fault.

[ 08-31-2005, 12:01 PM: Message edited by: Ian McColgin ]

[Jack Heinlen]

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."

Hunter Thompson

[Norman Bernstein]

The Rev. Fred Phelps, founder of Westboro Baptist in Kansas, contends that American soldiers are being killed in Iraq as vengeance from God for protecting a country that harbors gays. The church, which is not affiliated with a larger denomination, is made up mostly of Phelps' children, grandchildren and in-laws.

The church members carried signs and shouted things such as "God hates fags" and "God hates you."
Thankfully, these fringe lunatic groups are not representative of mainstream religion, as any thinking person knows....

However, they certainly don't do much to enhance the general view of religion and faith.

I'm less worried/interested/concerned about these sorts of crazies than I am about Pat Robertson, who DOES represent a fairly large chunk of mainstream Christianity. When religious leaders start caling for the assasination of foreign heads of state, one wonders just how far this can go.

[PatCox]

I don't know how fringe he is, he is just impolitic in expressing his views. Homophobia was a central theme of the last election. Pat Robertson has made statements quite similar, that the US is being punished by god for harboring homosexuals, Phelps is no more out there than Robertson's statement that feminism leads to lesbianism and withchraft.

SamF will tell you how homosexuality is inherently morally evil and its toleration is a sign of moral decline, its just the intellectualized version of the same tune.

[ 08-30-2005, 09:48 AM: Message edited by: PatCox ]

[Bob Cleek]

Thankfully, these fringe lunatic groups are not representative of mainstream religion, as any thinking person knows....

http://www.photo.net/photo/pcd0155/gay-parade-19.3.jpg

I'd say it has to cut both ways, no?

[ljb5]

Originally posted by Bob Cleek:
I'd say it has to cut both ways, no?No.

The homosexual man is permitted to express himself because of a principle we call "liberty."

The actions of homophobes are not equivalent because they are trying to prevent other people from enjoying their freedom.

If there were an effort by homosexuals to criminalize heterosexuality --- that would be "cutting both ways." However, I know of no such movement, so there is no logical parallel.

[ 08-30-2005, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

[Keith Wilson]

Man, that guy better be careful or he's going to get a nasty case of roadrash. :eek:

Fred Phelps makes me embarrassed to be a member of the same species.

And what was Alan’s favorite quote about the winds of history?

[huisjen]

Offhand, I'd actually trust the guy on roller scates more than the fundi who ran the church I was brought up in.

http://www.carlstevens.org/images/Carl%20Stevens.jpg

Nice orange wig, huh?

Dan

[Jack Heinlen]

I wish the "statesman" would shut up already. It gets everyone all fired up, and accomplishes nothing good. Go back home and try preaching the gospels for a change. Like this idiot would listen.

[ 08-31-2005, 12:18 AM: Message edited by: Jack Heinlen ]

[Bob Cleek]

The homosexual man is permitted to express himself because of a principle we call "liberty."

My point exactly. Aside from the tastelessness of doing so at a funeral, which is another issue entirely, aren't the fundis just as entitled to demonstrate against homosexuality as that guy in the gay parade is to demonstrate in favor of it?

And while I'm in a pissy mood... get off this "homophobia" horse****. Just because somebody finds homosexual conduct detrimental to the society they wish to live in doesn't mean that they are subconsciously phobic about homosexuals. The argument that dismisses someone's reasoned objections to another's conduct as "whatever-phobia" is a load of crap. People have an absolute right to express their positions regarding public conduct in their communities. That's how laws are made. "Freedom" ends where it impacts another's quiet enjoyment of their own space. What kind of society would we have if no one's "freedom" was limited? The answer, for the moment, can be found in the streets of New Orleans!

[John of Phoenix]

Or Baghdad, for that matter.

[Hughman]

In another generation, witch trials, book burnings, and trials by ordeal will be the law of the land.

The judges will be absolutely certain of the truth.

Just like Baghdad.

[Domesticated_Mr. Know It All]

".....and they brought their anti-gay message to the funerals Saturday of two Tennessee soldiers killed in Iraq."

:confused: :mad: :(

[PatCox]

Mr. Cleek, the gay guy is basically saying "here I am, this is me." He is not attacking anyone.

The fundamentalist whackjob is saying "you are evil." There are logical implications to saying someone is evil, we lock up and kill evil people.

There is a difference. The gay guy is not condemning anyone else, not aking them to change their life, or be like him.

The wahckjob is trying to dominate, to force his views on others. His is an aggressive act.

And I would tend to believe that if homosexuals were not persecuted and subjected to so much crap from whackos like phelps, and the more subtle homophobes as well, they wouldn't have the need to act out like idiots.

I do believe the guy on skates is as crazy as Phelps, but he was probably driven to his craziness by persecution, and in any event, his craziness is harmless.

[Chris Coose]

Originally posted by Bob Cleek:
People have an absolute right to express their positions.... even if it ain't the "missionary".

[ljb5]

Originally posted by Bob Cleek:
Aren't the fundis just as entitled to demonstrate against homosexuality as that guy in the gay parade is to demonstrate in favor of it?Legally entitled, yes. I don't dispute the right of free speech.

Morally supportable? No.

The gay man attacks no one, condemns no one, coerces no one, wishes ill on no one, insults no one and slanders no one.

http://www.kotv.com/pages/catimages/anti-gay-protest110804-2.jpg

Can you truly not see the difference?

I don't know if that meets the legal definition of 'slander' but it certainly crosses the line into insulting and attacking.

[ 08-30-2005, 10:07 PM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

[ljb5]

Originally posted by C223:
Then why do they call straight people "breeders"? I guess they are perfect...</font> I'm not sure that is an insult -- more like a descriptive moniker.</font> If it is an insult, it's a very mild one.</font> After a few thousand years of persecution, I think they can be forgiven for a few insults once in awhile.</font>In the big picture, are you aware of a movement to criminalize straight sex or straight marriage? Have you ever heard a gay man say, "God hates you"?
Do gays tell others how to live their lives, or do they simply ask for the right to live their own?

It is not a parallel situation. The gay guy sure looks funny in that green outfit -- but his purpose is to celebrate, not condemn -- to uplift, not tear down -- to love, not to hate.

Here's a webpage called, " www.GodHatesFags.com (http://www.godhatesfags.com/)"

Why is there no " www.GodHatesBreeders.com (http://www.godhatesbreeders.com/)"?

www.GodHatesGays.com (http://www.godhatesgays.com) takes you to (surprise, surprise) Fred Phelps.

Why is there no "www.GodHatesStraights.com (http://www.godhatesstraights.com), huh?

[ 08-30-2005, 11:07 PM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

[Ian McColgin]

Not just Nazis. There have been plenty of self-loathing gay people who like leather and dominance-submission games. McCarthey's two aids Shine and Cohen spring to mind. J. Edgar (now there's a give-away just in the name) Hoover.

Not all gay people are marvelous. I had a welfare client from Provincetown back in the early '80's. He'd been totally disabled when his erstwhile lover tossed him over the balcony. The welfare office did not want him coming in and refused to do home visits because he had AIDS. In his physical and mental torment, a little hard to deal with and often inappropriately expressed rage was to be expected. So my guy was charged with attempted murder when he tried to spit on a welfare worker, all the while sputtering that he'd give the fellow AIDS.

I've another friend who's a gold bug libertarian goes to one of those far right evangelical Roman Catholic Churches that still do it in Latin and hates himself every time he makes love with his partner of the last thirty years.

Lotta diversity out there.

All of which creeps around to the issue of homophobia.

I did mean it.

We know Rev. Phelps as he and his flock of idiots like to prance about Provincetown every couple of summers trying as hard as they can to provoke a riot. They misbehave worse there than ever they do at military funerals. Make David Wells look calm.

There could be people who actually have a reasoned but non-prejudiced stand against gay sex. But everyone to whom I've talked has beneath the voice of reason a deep visceral loathing of the gay bit. Sometimes tempered, as in an artist friend of mine - you'd think a mid -60's product of that art school out in Provincetown would be more relaxed - by a voyeuristic interest in watching lesbians, but still just frothy about how disgusting male homosexuality is.

I like the Ron White (Blue Collar Comedy) take on how he can prove to anyone that that person is really gay.

Starts on a good ol boy fellow red neck saying

Ron White: I can prove you're gay.

Fellow Red Neck: Nah you freak. I'm no fudge packer.

RW: Sure. I mean, you like porn don't you? Like real good porn of a woman really getting it from a man.

FRN: You bet.

RW: Or better yet, really giving it to a man.

FRN: Of course.

RW: And in this porn, do you like it if the guy's got just a little three inch weenie.

FRN: No

RW: What do you really want to see?

FRN: I like it when the guy is packing at least 10 inches and . . . . .ewweough. . .

Homophobia. It adds spice.

[RichKrough]

Brother Phelps has been branching out lately..

god hates sweden (http://www.godhatessweden.com) god hates canada (http://www.godhatescanada.com/) God hates America (http://www.godhatesamerica.com/)

[ 08-31-2005, 08:46 AM: Message edited by: RichKrough ]

[Memphis Mike]

Rubber bullets aren't good enough for these people.

http://www.kotv.com/pages/catimages/anti-gay-protest110804-2.jpg

[ljb5]

Originally posted by C223:
They sure as hell arent as perfect as you paint them to be.I didn't say they are perfect.

I said they (unlike homophobes) do not have an organized political movement to denounce or restrict other people.

Their political 'agenda' is to perserve their own rights and protect themselves.

When pushed, they will push back (and why should they not??).

[Scott Rosen]

Echoes of Orwell. The term "homophobic" has become politicized and is losing its meaning. It is now very difficult to have an intelligent discussion about homosexuality.

If people can be born homosexuals, then people can be born having a revulsion to homosexuality. It is possible, and maybe typical, for men to find the idea of homosexuality revolting. It doesn't follow that the sense of revulsion is the product of fear or prejudice.

I can't relate to homosexuality. For me, it's like eating worms or spiders. Some people can do it with relish; I get nauseated just thinking about it. But I'm not afraid of worm eaters, and I hold no ill will toward them. If they want to eat worms, so be it. I understand that someone could make me a worm and spider smoothie, season it with fruit, chocolate and sugar, feed it to me in a dark room, and, as long as I don't know what it is, I might like it.

Same with sex. In a dark room, if you THOUGHT the person perfomring sexual acts on you was a woman, you might enjoy it. How would you feel when, turning on the lights, you found out it was a man who removed all of his body hair and put on a woman's perfume? These are not new ideas. Shakespeare played games with the gender of his characters, and got some pretty good laughs in his day.

[Meerkat]

Originally posted by Keith Wilson:

And what was Alan’s favorite quote about the winds of history?It turned out to be gas... ;)

[ljb5]

Originally posted by Scott Rosen:
If people can be born homosexuals, then people can be born having a revulsion to homosexuality. It is possible, and maybe typical, for men to find the idea of homosexuality revolting. It doesn't follow that the sense of revulsion is the product of fear or prejudice.Scott, that's an interesting take, but wholly irrelevant.

Whether your revulsion is by choice or pre-determined... whether it stems from fear, disgust or religious fervor....

...it ain't none of your business what others do.

You are entitled to your hate, fear, revulsion or disgust...just as others are entitled to their love, lust, friendship and companionship. But keep it to yourself. Live and let live. Disagree with them, but defend to the death their right to act freely.

The problem arises only when some people think their entitlement transcends themselves and they try to impose it on others. That's contrary to the principles of liberty. It's un-American.

[ 08-31-2005, 11:06 AM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

[LeeG]

interesting is one way of putting it.

[Ian McColgin]

I agree with Scott that to be a snake eater is not for everyone.

Perhaps the pun was aquired bad taste. Ah well.

I definatly agree that homophobic is sometimes a bit glibly raised. Also too often glibly dismissed.

I was originally thinking that the remanent feeling of disgust and revulsion at homosexuality is a sign of well-buried homophobia. May be. At some deep level. Perhaps a little. But it's pretty unimportant for the many many people who retain that revulsion at the thought of doing it and have, acknowledge, and love gay people in their families.

Just as there are homophobes who adapt their sexual activity to prison or other all male societies, so too there are people for whom homosexual acts are personally impossible but who are not homophobic.

It's quite American to vigorously, sometimes tastelessly, express opinions. That's why Phelps gets to spread his message of hate. He actually does it far more harm than good anyway.

Were Phelps to actually have his way and deny freedoms to others, that would be unAmerican.

But spilling hatred on the street? I'm afraid that's very American.

[Scott Rosen]

Originally posted by ljb5:
Whether your revulsion is by choice or pre-determined... whether it stems from fear, disgust or religious fervor....

...it ain't none of your business what others do.I never said it was my business. I have absolutely no interest in knowing or caring what other consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes. In fact, I'd prefer not to know. And I think the government ought to keep its nose out of people's bedrooms as well. By the same token, no one has the right to outlaw my feelings of revulsion or my right to express those in words.

[Scott Rosen]

Originally posted by Ian McColgin:
I definatly agree that homophobic is sometimes a bit glibly raised. Also too often glibly dismissed.

I was originally thinking that the remanent feeling of disgust and revulsion at homosexuality is a sign of well-buried homophobia. May be. At some deep level. Perhaps a little. But it's pretty unimportant for the many many people who retain that revulsion at the thought of doing it and have, acknowledge, and love gay people in their families.Sexual urges and behavior cannot be neatly divided into the two simple catagories of straight and gay. Sexuality exists on a three dimensional continuum, with many people falling somewhere between and among the extremes.

I admit I don't understand homosexuality. I also admit to not having the self-analytic powers to know whether I have some level of deep-seated homophobia. I also don't know what portion of my revulsion is in-born, and what portion is learned. It's not something I give much thought to. What I do know is that as far back as I remember, I found women to be exciting, and I never even contemplated the possibility of male to male romantic love or sex.

What I know or don't know about sexuality is irrelevant, so long as I accord homosexuals basic human dignity and respect, the protection of the law and the right to privacy in their homes.

Ian, I suggest that such revulsion may not be a 'remnant', but may be something innate to some people's sexuality, stronger in some people, weaker or non-existent in others.

[ 08-31-2005, 11:46 AM: Message edited by: Scott Rosen ]

[Bob Cleek]

I agree with Scott! If anybody thinks that there isn't a homosexuall political agenda just as obvious as that of the Fundamentalists, they've never been to San Francisco or P-town!

[Scott Rosen]

Originally posted by ljb5:
You are entitled to your hate, fear, revulsion or disgust...just as others are entitled to their love, lust, friendship and companionship. But keep it to yourself. Live and let live. Disagree with them, but defend to the death their right to act freely.I wrote that I find the thought of male to male sex revolting. I didn't say that I hate or fear homosexuals. I believe in basic human rights for all; I didn't say homosexuality was evil, or even immoral. But I still can have strong negative feelings about the things some people do.

You may remember from some of my other posts, I've been a pretty vocal advocate for equal rights regardless of sexual orientation.

In any event, I find it much more revolting to think of the people who get enjoyment out of big, ugly or noisy fiberglass powerboats.

[ljb5]

Originally posted by Scott Rosen:
I believe in basic human rights for all; I didn't say homosexuality was evil, or even immoral.Glad to hear it. My comments weren't directed at you specifically, but at the subject in general.


In any event, I find it much more revolting to think of the people who get enjoyment out of big, ugly or noisy fiberglass powerboats.Now I'm disgusted.

The thing I can't figure out is why gay-haters seem to spend so much time and mental energy thinking about gay sex.

Some of them have an encyclopedic knowledge of the more bizarre (and disgusting) practices.

[ 08-31-2005, 12:14 PM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

[Scott Rosen]

Originally posted by ljb5:
The thing I can't figure out is why gay-haters seem to spend so much time and mental energy thinking about gay sex.They doth protest too much.

[Norman Bernstein]

Hey, Scott....

I'm in agreement. I'm a big advocate of gay rights... even if I personally find the imagery of male homosexuality to be 'distasteful' (to put it mildly).

I find it a bit ironic that even for those who also find gay sex distasteful, many men find images of two WOMEN together to be stimulating smile.gif

As for the big, ugly, noisy fiberglass powerboat thing, I'm in agreement... but it's partially from personal experience. Three years ago, a slight bit of insanity overtook me, and I sold my 40' sloop and bought a 41' aft cabin powerboat... you know the kind, unbelievably ugly, noisy, fuel hog. I knew within less than a month that I made a mistake.

Last fall, I traded in the powerboat for a new 43' sloop.... I guess sanity returned!

[Katherine]

Smryna, been there several times, nice little town, doesn't need this kind of crap. I was raised Babtist and never taught to hate anyone. I'm actually a little surprised that this idiot and his followers didn't camp out on Nissan's front lawn down there. Nissan now has domestic partner benifits for same sex partners.

[ljb5]

Originally posted by C223:
Let me kick up some dust with this article. It almost sounds like the Bilge.That's about three different types of stupid all rolled into one.

First, Starbucks can print whatever the heck they want on their cups.

Second, a quote from a gay man is not promoting homosexuality.

Third, it's just another example of conservatives trying to boss people around.


To these companies, she says: "If you want my money, support some of my causes."Gee, is it possible that they don't care about your money quite so much -- and maybe care about their cause?

It reminds me of the Simpsons when Homer says to God, "You've just made a powerful enemy!" These Christian fundamentalists with their protests and their boycotts always think they'll win by intimidating others. What would happen if they discovered how insignificant they are and how little others will bend to accomodate them.

I hope they try to boycott Starbucks. They'll quickly discover that people like Starbucks -- and they're impotent to do anything about it.


The group believes corporations have a responsibility to reflect the diversity of their customers by taking a balanced approach — or staying out of divisive social issues altogether.The group can believe the moon is made out of blue cheese, but that don't make it so.

Why did you post this? To show an example of conservatives acting like whiny, bossy retards? Well done.

[ 08-31-2005, 01:58 PM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

[Bob Cleek]

"It's the economy stupid!" All politics is about economics. As a demographic group, gays have far more money than straights. They don't (until very recently) lose half their assets in divorces. They (generally) don't have to raise expensive children. They are (generally) better educated and live in metropolitan areas where they earn (generally) higher incomes. Thus, they have more money to contribute to political causes. "Money is the mother's milk of politics." Their political power is disproportionate to their numbers. This, and the dissonance of the gay political agenda ("Gay is normal.") is what scares the Fundamentalists. It ain't "homophobia," it's just politics.

[ljb5]

To these companies, she says: "If you want my money, support some of my causes."If you want your coffee, shut up and pay for it!

Cleek, you are an odd bird.

Do you believe your own b.s., or do you just spout it?

If it were about the economics, wouldn't you support gay marriage so they'd lose half their assets in divorce -- and wouldn't you support adoption so they'd have to spend hundreds of thousands raising and educating their children?

[ 08-31-2005, 02:19 PM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

[Meerkat]

Originally posted by C223:

A comedian once asked why people were homophobes. Were they afraid gay men would break in and decorate?I think they're more afraid that THEY are going to break out and decorate! :D

[Meerkat]

Originally posted by Norman Bernstein:

I'm in agreement. I'm a big advocate of gay rights... even if I personally find the imagery of male homosexuality to be 'distasteful' (to put it mildly).
Funny how you gay advocates are always careful to mention how it's MALE homoerotica that is distasteful - and tend to get hugely aroused over FEMALE homoerotica... ;)

[ljb5]

Originally posted by C223:
Bite me bitch boy.Easy there, C3PO.... it's just a friendly discussion.

I still don't understand why you posted it.

Do you think Starbucks did something wrong by printing that quote?

Do you agree with conservatives telling other people how to run their companies?

Are you worried Stabucks might go bankrupt?

Cripes, these conservatives are a whiny lot. They don't like words printed on a coffee cup -- so they make a stink about it. Live and let live, dude.

[Meerkat]

Originally posted by C223:
Let me kick up some dust with this article. It almost sounds like the Bilge.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/ localnews/2002455480_starbucks29m.html (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002455480_starbucks29m.html)They should call themselves "Concerned Ovulating Women" of America - COWs :D

[ljb5]

Originally posted by Meerkat:
They should call themselves "Concerned Ovulating Women" of America - COWs :D I love it when someone describes themselves as "concerned."

What they really mean is, "judgemental busybodies."

[Katherine]

Originally posted by Meerkat:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by C223:
Let me kick up some dust with this article. It almost sounds like the Bilge.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/ localnews/2002455480_starbucks29m.html (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002455480_starbucks29m.html)They should call themselves "Concerned Ovulating Women" of America - COWs :D </font>[/QUOTE]:rolleyes: