• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Forum moderator applications are now open! Click here for details.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Westboro Equality House - Home accross from WBC to be painted pride colors

900
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 51
  • Seen Jul 22, 2016
But, that's not what I said. O_o

I said coverage of the public taking a stand is great. Want to see more of it. But news just on whatever stupidity Westboro did today isn't answering them back in an even louder voice. That only amplifies their own voice. That's what I'm saying. We need more of what you're describing and less of what's commonly being covered in the news.

Have you not thought that giving this group coverage is in fact a very important means of fighting back against them? It's a form of public shaming. The more people are aware of this group and their actions, the more people are disgusted by them and are willing to stand up against them. This kind of coverage serves as a medium by which counter-protests can be organized. Why would you want to shut off a vital part of the fight?

Yes, you may roll your eyes every time another news story about the WBC comes out, but just remember, every time one does, there could be a hundred more people made aware of this group that there wasn't before (and believe me, there are plenty of people who don't know about this group). Of those 100 people, maybe 10 of which will join in the fight against them.

No, I don't want the news to stop. I want even more news about them than there was before. I want more people exposed to the hatred and intolerance of this group. I want more people disgusted by their behaviours and willing to do their part to see that this group's actions are blunted... or possibly even stopped.

By wanting the news about the WBC to stop, you hinder our efforts.

No, I'm pretty sure they aren't classified as a hate group which is why they are still tax exempt.

Sorry, I should have been more specific, they ARE classified as a hate group -- in Canada and in the UK, which is why there is a travel ban against the WBC from entering those countries. In the U.S. they are designated as a hate group, but only by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is not a government run group, so their designation doesn't mean much by law.
 
Last edited:

droomph

weeb
4,285
Posts
12
Years
Have you not thought that giving this group coverage is in fact a very important means of fighting back against them? It's a form of public shaming. The more people are aware of this group and their actions, the more people are disgusted by them and are willing to stand up against them. This kind of coverage serves as a medium by which counter-protests can be organized. Why would you want to shut off a vital part of the fight?

Yes, you may roll your eyes every time another news story about the WBC comes out, but just remember, every time one does, there could be a hundred more people made aware of this group that there wasn't before (and believe me, there are plenty of people who don't know about this group). Of those 100 people, maybe 10 of which will join in the fight against them.

No, I don't want the news to stop. I want even more news about them than there was before. I want more people exposed to the hatred and intolerance of this group. I want more people disgusted by their behaviours and willing to do their part to see that this group's actions are blunted... or possibly even stopped.

By wanting the news about the WBC to stop, you hinder our efforts.



Sorry, I should have been more specific, they ARE classified as a hate group -- in Canada and in the UK, which is why there is a travel ban against the WBC from entering those countries. In the U.S. they are designated as a hate group, but only by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is not a government run group, so their designation doesn't mean much by law.
They're like animals in the sense that they can't differentiate against good and bad attention. The best way is to ignore them, I agree.

However, if they truly think that, I think the best way to make them stop is show them what it says on that bible thing they use because why not?

from least to most relevant:

Romans 13 said:
8 Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, "You shall not commit adultery," "You shall not murder," "You shall not steal," "You shall not covet,"[a] and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." 10 Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.


Romans 14 said:
Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters. 2 One person's faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3 The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. 4 Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.

5 One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. 6 Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives for ourselves alone, and none of us dies for ourselves alone. 8 If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. 9 For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister[a]? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat. 11 It is written:

"'As surely as I live,' says the Lord,
'every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will acknowledge God.'"
12 So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.

13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister. 14 I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean. 15 If your brother or sister is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy someone for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let what you know is good be spoken of as evil. 17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18 because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and receives human approval.

19 Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a person to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21 It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother or sister to fall.

22 So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if they eat, because their eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.[c]


Romans 1-2 said:
32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2 Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3 So when you, a mere human being, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness is intended to lead you to repentance?

5 But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. 6 God "will repay each person according to what they have done."[a] 7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8 But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9 There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10 but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11 For God does not show favoritism.

12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.) 16 This will take place on the day when God judges people's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

I have nothing to say but that. It's not even right what they're doing, and even more so with these passages in mind.
 

Atomic Pirate

I always win.
930
Posts
12
Years
Okay, this is good and all, but stop giving these clowns publicity! We all need to ignore them, because they've even stated that they want publicity. It just seems like the news outlets like to go nuts every time one of those loons does anything, regardless of whether it's notable or not. They're just feeding the fire.
 
Last edited:
900
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 51
  • Seen Jul 22, 2016
Okay, this is good and all, but stop giving these clowns publicity! We all need to ignore them, because they've even stated that they want publicity. It just seems like the news outlets like to go nuts every time one of those loons does anything, regardless of whether it's notable or not. They're just feeding the fire.

I've already stated why this won't work. Numerous times. There is a simple truth which some people have a problem comprehending: ignoring a problem does not make it go away. All these people advocating ignorance are quite frankly only making it more difficult for those of us who are in the trenches trying to fight this kind of bigotry.
 

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness
8,123
Posts
19
Years
I've already stated why this won't work. Numerous times. There is a simple truth which some people have a problem comprehending: ignoring a problem does not make it go away. All these people advocating ignorance are quite frankly only making it more difficult for those of us who are in the trenches trying to fight this kind of bigotry.
It's not ignoring a problem, it's ignoring their message. The coverage amplifies and legitimatizes their horrible message. It's like propaganda, it works when it is repeated.

I don't think showing what's wrong, which is what you seem to be advocating, works. I think showing why it's wrong works. The why is the message you want to spread and amplify, not the message of the WBC.
 
900
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 51
  • Seen Jul 22, 2016
It's not ignoring a problem, it's ignoring their message. The coverage amplifies and legitimatizes their horrible message. It's like propaganda, it works when it is repeated.

I don't think showing what's wrong, which is what you seem to be advocating, works. I think showing why it's wrong works. The why is the message you want to spread and amplify, not the message of the WBC.

Yes, I agree, the coverage amplifies their message, but it by no means legitimises their message. Quite the contrary, it serves a very important purpose, that being to expose the very real threat that this group poses to society. Because of the coverage this group has been getting in the media, more and more people are aware of them, and because they are aware of them, and detest all that this group stands for, the coverage they receive serves to increase the numbers of people who are wanting to stand up to fight against this group. Without this coverage, we wouldn't have the numbers of people fighting this group that we have.

I understand clearly what you are saying, but in this instance, I have to disagree with you. If we were to do what you suggest, this group's influence and power would actually increase. It wouldn't die off like what is happening now. Because of the coverage, that group is losing members. They do watch they coverage they receive, and some within the group are embarrassed by their actions, and have left. Businesses, aware of what this group stands for, have started denying them services.

So I'm advocating for more coverage, not less, because the more coverage they receive, the harder it is for them to deliver their message. And that's because we're growing in numbers, while their numbers is shrinking, and thus their message is dying.
 

Atomic Pirate

I always win.
930
Posts
12
Years
Yes, I agree, the coverage amplifies their message, but it by no means legitimises their message. Quite the contrary, it serves a very important purpose, that being to expose the very real threat that this group poses to society

Okay, I'm pretty sure everyone already knows their ideals, so there is no need to keep covering them. We all know they're crazy, so it's really time to move on and stop covering anything they say or do.
 
900
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 51
  • Seen Jul 22, 2016
Okay, I'm pretty sure everyone already knows their ideals, so there is no need to keep covering them. We all know they're crazy, so it's really time to move on and stop covering anything they say or do.

It's a mistake to assume that "everyone" knows about this group and their ideals. Go out into the real world and you'll discover that there is a large percentage of people who haven't even heard of the group. In my own work, I've encountered so many people who haven't heard of them, including people in the LGBT community.

Just because you've heard of them, doesn't mean the person standing next to you has.
 

Atomic Pirate

I always win.
930
Posts
12
Years
It's a mistake to assume that "everyone" knows about this group and their ideals. Go out into the real world and you'll discover that there is a large percentage of people who haven't even heard of the group. In my own work, I've encountered so many people who haven't heard of them, including people in the LGBT community.

Just because you've heard of them, doesn't mean the person standing next to you has.

Most people I know have heard of them, but it is possible that some don't know of them. Honestly, though, that's not the point here. The point here is that everyone knows that people with these ideals exist, and to constantly bring this group up to the point that they are getting more publicity than, you know, real issues does not do anything but help them achieve their goal of maximum publicity and media coverage.

And it's not like this media attention possesses any importance, for the most part. Just looking up "Westboro Baptist Church" on Google News brings up such trivial articles as:

Westboro Baptist Church Founder Fred Phelps May Be Gay...

Jennifer Lawrence Is Even Liked By The Westboro Baptist Church

Okay, so how does any of this matter in the long run? How and why does this require news coverage? How is an opinion about the sexuality of the cult's founder more worthy of being covered than, say, the current gun debate or the situation in North Korea?

I might understand the heavy news coverage more if the group was actually a threat to gay rights, but as it stands, they are a group of 70-something lunatics who are too small to actually have a say in our country's laws and position on homosexuality.

Plus, given the age of Mr. Phelps, he will soon die and the group will go into a power vacuum afterward, due to their lack of a charismatic leader.
 
900
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 51
  • Seen Jul 22, 2016
Most people I know have heard of them, but it is possible that some don't know of them. Honestly, though, that's not the point here. The point here is that everyone knows that people with these ideals exist, and to constantly bring this group up to the point that they are getting more publicity than, you know, real issues does not do anything but help them achieve their goal of maximum publicity and media coverage.

You're making a generalized statement that has no basis in reality. Go ahead, go out there and ask complete strangers if they've ever heard of the WBC. You might be surprised to discover that most haven't.

And i
t's not like this media attention possesses any importance, for the most part. Just looking up "Westboro Baptist Church" on Google News brings up such trivial articles as:

Westboro Baptist Church Founder Fred Phelps May Be Gay...

Jennifer Lawrence Is Even Liked By The Westboro Baptist Church

Okay, so how does any of this matter in the long run? How and why does this require news coverage? How is an opinion about the sexuality of the cult's founder more worthy of being covered than, say, the current gun debate or the situation in North Korea?

Uh huh, okay, the "not so important" argument. Seriously, I get that enough from homophobes. Are you seriously suggesting that the civil rights of your fellow citizens isn't all that important? It must be gratifying to those who are gay and who know you that you think news about North Korea making another threat is more important than news that could affect their civil rights.


I might understand the heavy news coverage more if the group was actually a threat to gay rights, but as it stands, they are a group of 70-something lunatics who are too small to actually have a say in our country's laws and position on homosexuality.

You honestly think this group does not pose a threat to the LGBT community? Are you kidding me? People who hold similar views, who do not belong to this group, but feel emboldened by their actions have killed people who are gay. They've beaten and raped gays and lesbians. When some are afraid of going outside with their boyfriends and holding their hand because they might encounter one of these people and end up on the receiving end of that person's hatred, either verbally or physically, you actually have the audacity to suggest that this group poses no threat? Even in Canada, a pretty gay-friendly country, my boyfriend is afraid of holding my hand in public. It's not an irrational fear, it's a very real one, created because there are people out there who pose a very real threat to us. And many of those believe in everything the WBC believes. Even as recently as three years ago, there was a politician, who during an election, suggested that gays and lesbians should be rounded up and executed by the state. And you think groups like the WBC pose no threat? Unreal!
 
Last edited:

Atomic Pirate

I always win.
930
Posts
12
Years
Uh huh, okay, the "not so important" argument. Seriously, I get that enough from homophobes.
Wow, that's judgmental. So now I'm a homophobe because I think that constant coverage of these nuts isn't a good idea. How intelligent and mature you must be.

Are you seriously suggesting that the civil rights of your fellow citizens isn't all that important? It must be gratifying to those who are gay and who know you that you think news about North Korea making another threat is more important than news that could affect their civil rights.
The "issues" of whether or not Fred Phelps is gay and the cult's opinion on Jennifer Lawrence have no bearing in civil rights. Plus, yes, I do in fact believe that the threat of nuclear war is more important than a civil rights issue that is already being resolved. I mean, more states are legalizing gay marriage, so why bring attention to a fringe cult rather than the threat of nuclear war?

You honestly think this group does not pose a threat to the LGBT community? Are you kidding me? People who hold similar views, who do not belong to this group, but feel emboldened by their actions have killed people who are gay.
Elaborate?

And you think groups like the WBC pose no threat? Unreal!
Okay, everyone who knows of this group agrees that they are crazy. Even the freakin' Ku Klux Klan counter-protested them, and they hate just about everyone. If you think that this cult actually poses a threat to our country, then give me proof.
 
900
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 51
  • Seen Jul 22, 2016
Wow, that's judgmental. So now I'm a homophobe because I think that constant coverage of these nuts isn't a good idea. How intelligent and mature you must be.

Um, no, if you think I called you a homophobe then I seriously suggest you go back and read what I said again. I said the argument you made was similar to those I've heard from homophones. Trust me, if I for one instance thought you were homophobic, I would have come out and said it. But since I don't, I didn't. What I think is that your opinion on this is jaded and not very well thought out. I've already explained why constant coverage is actually a good thing. You've rejected my opinion, and that is fine. But please do me the favour and stop putting words in my mouth.

The "issues" of whether or not Fred Phelps is gay and the cult's opinion on Jennifer Lawrence have no bearing in civil rights. Plus, yes, I do in fact believe that the threat of nuclear war is more important than a civil rights issue that is already being resolved. I mean, more states are legalizing gay marriage, so why bring attention to a fringe cult rather than the threat of nuclear war?

Because the chances of nuclear war occurring are about as high as me winning the lottery, and since I don't play, the chances of that happening are nil. Fretting about something that will most likely never happen is a waste of both time and energy. North Korea making threats is about as common an occurrence as rain falling. I think you should be more concerned about what's happening in your own country rather than a small, insignificant, and poor country like North Korea.

Elaborate?

Do you really want me to compile a list of people who have assaulted, raped, or killed people who are gay because they hold similar views as the WBC? It is quite long you know.

Okay, everyone who knows of this group agrees that they are crazy. Even the freakin' Ku Klux Klan counter-protested them, and they hate just about everyone. If you think that this cult actually poses a threat to our country, then give me proof.

Again you are making a generalization. No, everybody who knows of this group does NOT think they are crazy. There are enough people out there who agree completely with the WBC, and some who think the WBC doesn't go far enough.

The WBC does not pose a threat to the country, they pose a threat to the LGBT community. Specifically, they pose a threat to the civil rights of people who identify as being gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered.

I'm sorry you can't see that.
 

Atomic Pirate

I always win.
930
Posts
12
Years
The WBC does not pose a threat to the country, they pose a threat to the LGBT community. Specifically, they pose a threat to the civil rights of people who identify as being gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered.

I'm sorry you can't see that.

If that is true, and it is necessary that a few hate groups get covered more than anything regarding our national security, then why just these guys? I don't see people like you giving the same kind of obsessive attention to more dangerous groups like skinheads or the KKK, so why give all the attention to some tiny, extremist cult? Why prioritize covering this group over other, more dangerous and certainly more violent groups?

Could it be that you simply hold the rights of homosexuals above the rights of other minorities? Or that you're biased against this cult because they are a religious group?

Either way, it makes no sense how people like you moan and whine about some tiny cult in Kansas when there are nationwide hate groups that pose a far larger threat to minorities.
 
900
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 51
  • Seen Jul 22, 2016
If that is true, and it is necessary that a few hate groups get covered more than anything regarding our national security, then why just these guys? I don't see people like you giving the same kind of obsessive attention to more dangerous groups like skinheads or the KKK, so why give all the attention to some tiny, extremist cult? Why prioritize covering this group over other, more dangerous and certainly more violent groups?

As soon as one of these other groups you mention do something that merits attention, then you'd better believe we'd be all over them, just as we are all over the WBC. Other groups we're fighting against include: NOM (National Organization for Marriage), Focus on the Family, the Heritage Foundation. And many others.

Could it be that you simply hold the rights of homosexuals above the rights of other minorities? Or that you're biased against this cult because they are a religious group?

I hold no one's rights above others. No one. It matters to me not which minority group we're talking about. I would be just as fervently against discrimination based on gender, race, religion, disability, age, or any other recognized minority group. You are right, though, in thinking that I do hold a special place in my heart for the LGBT community, but that is because it so happens to be a community to which I belong.

And please, don't accuse me of religious bigotry. While I personally may be an atheist, I would defend just as fervently anyone's right to their religious beliefs just as much as I would everyone's right to marry the person they love regardless of gender, even if those beliefs include believing homosexuality is a sin. I really couldn't care less what other people believe, unless they seek to impose those beliefs on others--and then you'd better believe I'll be in their faces.

Either way, it makes no sense how people like you moan and whine about some tiny cult in Kansas when there are nationwide hate groups that pose a far larger threat to minorities.

You are, of course, assuming that we don't stand up for any other minority group other than the LGBT community, and you couldn't be any more wrong. Just because people spend a lot of time defending against one group, does not mean they don't keep their eyes out for other groups that may be seeking to do harm. And when those groups do pop up by doing something that threatens a minority group, you'd better believe we're there to fight against that prejudice as well.

For example, my federal government (I am Canadian) just recently shot down an effort by a back-bench MP to reopen the abortion debate in the country. I, and thousands of other Canadians, signed a strongly worded petition to get the government to stop that effort. And I'd like to think our efforts, in some way, however small, helped to influence the government's decision to put a stop to this back-bench MP's agenda.
 

Oshy

♩♫♩
61
Posts
11
Years
  • Seen Apr 23, 2013
It's really good that they did this. America is a free country. People would die to get into hear. I mean, you hear all kinds of stories about people escaping their homes and moving into the US. But there is really nothing wrong with being gay in my eyes, even if it is against my Religion. And I go against my Catholic Religion for the sake of other people. Look at Pokemon for example: In battle, two males can use the move 'Charm' on each other, same with the females. So why should gay people have to go through all of this because they were born that way?
 

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness
8,123
Posts
19
Years
For example, my federal government (I am Canadian) just recently shot down an effort by a back-bench MP to reopen the abortion debate in the country. I, and thousands of other Canadians, signed a strongly worded petition to get the government to stop that effort. And I'd like to think our efforts, in some way, however small, helped to influence the government's decision to put a stop to this back-bench MP's agenda.
I don't want to put you down or anything, but that debate wasn't going to be re-opened even if the petition had zero signatures. But, good on you for taking initiative on something you believe in I guess
 
900
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 51
  • Seen Jul 22, 2016
I don't want to put you down or anything, but that debate wasn't going to be re-opened even if the petition had zero signatures. But, good on you for taking initiative on something you believe in I guess

Maybe it was, and maybe it wasn't. You never can tell with this government. They're as predictable as a leaf in the wind. :)
 

Echidna

i don't care what's in your hair
2,077
Posts
13
Years
Eh, these guys. They get enough hate as is, I don't think hating on them anymore is gonna help anyone so I just elect to ignore them. It's not like they get any shortage of mockery and negative coverage as is. I mean the supposedly 'objective' journalism trend has even gone as far as to flame these guys. I'm just too tired to have to trouble my brain with them. I can't be sure of what I'm about to say, but in my opinion sooner or later they're gonna be in hell so till then, sit and watch. No need to go all public troll on them or even take your time to scream at them in the streets. Meh, just my 2 cents~
 

Atomic Pirate

I always win.
930
Posts
12
Years
I mean the supposedly 'objective' journalism trend has even gone as far as to flame these guys.
I really hate to post here again, but I'd like to bring up that there really isn't any objective journalism anymore. There is a trend of hyper-partisan thinking in America, and it has corroded our news system. The conservatives are engrossed in that tripe Fox News, and the liberals read the tabloid known as Huffington Post. Even the "objective" news outlets such as CNN are guilty of bias on many different issues.

But still, I'd stick with CNN over Huffington or Fox any day.
 
Back
Top