|
Home > Frequent
Questions
"Look
on my works, ye mighty, and despair!" - Percy Shelley
| Questions
about the WBC |
|
| Questions
about Free Speech |
|
| Questions
about God / the Bible |
|
| Questions
about this site |
|
| Questions
about me |
|
Westboro Baptist Church
What do the people at Westboro Baptist Church
believe?
I strongly suggest you
check out
their FAQ, which spells out quite clearly what they believe
and why.
You may also read the primer I've compiled
concerning their beliefs and activities by
clicking here.
[Top]
Do you believe WBC members are “real”
Christians?
Yes.
[Top]
Would you characterize them as members of a
cult?
Originally, I didn’t see them as members
of a cult because they didn’t show most of the characteristics
of one. Now, however, I’ve had to revise my earlier opinion.
They’ve steadily moved in a cultish
direction over the past couple of years:
- Their focus on eschatology – in this
case, that the world will end soon (probably before any of
them dies) – is deeply troubling. In fact, they believe with
a certainty that none of them will taste of death before they’re gathered up in at the end of days.
- This emphasis on end-times is also an
effective scare tactic for maintaining the membership at its
current level.
- The membership follows their leader to
the point where they adopt his mannerisms, goals, and beliefs.
When Fred Phelps develops a new hermeneutic, or an insult
for his ideological enemies, the other
members adopt and parrot it uncritically. It becomes part of
their regular response pattern - the angry script they have
ready for anyone who dares to question them.
- Their leader is accountable to no
earthly authority.
- Their punishing schedules don't allow
time for critical reflection.
- Their language has become more
militant; and their targets, far broader.
- They’ve also begun to question the
King James Bible, which hitherto they considered infallible.
This means they no longer
accept any Bible is authoritative but rather they believe their
own interpretations and omissions hold more weight that commonly
accepted scholarship.
- From an entry posted on WBC's
blog on April 1, 2009: [begin
quote] Romans 9:22 What if God, willing to shew
his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with
much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to
destruction:
Notice that
italics? That means the King James (fag!) translators
did not want to piss off his royal faggy boy so they
added those words. That actually should say “God,
willing to shew his wrath”. [end quote]
(As an aside, the word “if”
(and the construction, "what if") most certainly
does
appear in other translations, both older and younger
than the KJV, and in the original Greek as well. In
other words, WBC is wrong.)
Indeed, they are a cult; and the turn they've
taken is quite worrying.
This does not change the fact they’re entitled to freedom to
express their ideas through picketing – even at funerals.
[Top]
Do you believe the members
of WBC are racists?
Some of them are and some of them aren't.
(Click
here for additional quotes and information on this subject.)
[Top]
Was WBC really firebombed in 1995?
At around 11 PM on August 20, 1995,
Shirley Phelps Roper was preparing to retire for the evening
when she felt the shockwave of a blast significant enough to rattle her
windowpanes and cause a heavy wall-hanging to fall.
Read her account...
(archived at TRTBW)
A 26-year-old male, Kent Lindsrom, was
eventually convicted of causing damage to property over $500.
The judge described his detonation of a small explosive on
Phelps Roper's property as an act of terrorism in
the sentencing transcript
originally provided by WBC, but Lindstrom
spent less than a month in jail.
I have no reason to doubt the particulars
of Phelps Roper's story. It seems plausible that her family was
put in danger by the permissive attitude officials had taken
towards eliminationist rhetoric aimed at the Phelpses, and
further that her complaint might have been handled in a hostile
manner.
Click here to see the Shawnee County Court Record.
[Top]
Free Speech
Why should we allow WBC members to picket
unmolested?
Three reasons:
- They have the right to do so through
the US First Amendment.
- Everyone's rights are in danger when
anyone's rights are in danger.
- Your hatred, especially as expressed
through violent counter-action, only makes them stronger.
In response to a series of articles they
ran on him, Fred Phelps sent an open letter to the Topeka
Capital-Journal. It read, in part:
"Why do you suppose that seemingly
rational people by their majority react [to our message] in such
anger? Even after seeing these words literally thousands of
times? The answer is simple. Because you know it's true."
What about the argument they are disturbing
the peace by engaging in actions that could incite violence?
WBC protesters
almost never engage in violence
during their protests. If counter-protesters or angry onlookers cannot exercise the same level of restraint,
they have only themselves to blame.
Do you agree with Canada’s anti-hate speech
legislation?
No.
I agree with the provisions in Section 318
of the Criminal Code of Canada that bald incitements to genocide
against an identifiable group should be legally actionable --
but for the same reason as any other unvarnished incitement to
violence should be curtailed, and not merely because such
incitements are directed towards a protected class.
My problem is with
Section 319:
319. (1) Every
one who, by communicating statements in any public place,
incites hatred against any identifiable group where such
incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is
guilty of
(a) an
indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for
a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
(2) Every one
who, by communicating statements, other than in private
conversation, willfully promotes hatred against any
identifiable group is guilty of
(a) an
indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for
a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
(3) No person shall
be convicted of an offence under subsection (2)
(a) if he
establishes that the statements communicated were true;
(b) if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted
to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious
subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious
text;
(c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of
public interest, the discussion of which was for the
public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed
them to be true; or
(d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the
purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to
produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group
in Canada...
The caveat in Part 3, which I have bolded
and underlined, does not protect those deemed to be "breaching
the peace" from prosecution.
The Westboro picketers could theoretically
be arrested under this section of the Criminal Code - i.e.,
Section 319, Part 1 - because they protest knowing full well
that these pickets are sometimes attended by violence from
counter-protesters.
In peaceably exercising their freedom of
speech, people should not be penalized because their messages
may be offensive enough that counter-protesters feel justified
in using violence to silence dissent.
This section of the Criminal Code allows
for the seizure of property related to the offences outlined
above, which means the WBC picketers' signs could be (and
in fact have been) confiscated.
Most people who read about Westboro
Baptist Church are so afraid of hate speech that they make no
effort to dig up and expose the root of it. They do this because they were
conditioned to it by a society so bent on securing justice for
everyone that it has forgotten diversity means allowing even the
most heinous points of view to coexist with more benign
opinions.
Any laws that regulate all but libelous or slanderous
speech and calls to actual violence are ill-considered.
Are you worried about being arrested or
otherwise penalized by authorities in Canada for this website?
No, and nor are any of the opinions I've
expressed here colored by such a fear. I don't anticipate
official interference with this site since, contrary to what
Fred Phelps believes, I've seen many people here exercise their
freedom without censure.
I have a right, guaranteed by Part One,
Article Two of the 1982
Charter of Rights and Freedoms, to post the materials you
see on this site. This right is reaffirmed in the
Criminal Code of Canada (Section 319, Part 3, Items c and d).
[Top]
God and the Bible
Does the Bible really condemn homosexual
acts as immoral?
Yes.
In the Old Testament, Leviticus 18:22
In the New Testament, Romans 1:18-27
It is for homosexuals to figure out their
relationships to God, just
like everyone else. Each must investigate for him or herself
whether the Biblical prohibitions against homosexuality are
specific to the times they were written or applicable today.
The WBC believes absolutely that these
prohibitions are applicable today, and further that Western
society in general and America in particular is doomed beyond
all hope of redemption for having failed to stamp out practices that are
detestable to God.
Where can I read the Bible and learn more
about it?
There are many absolutely fantastic resources online, all
of which are free, where you can read the Bible, study it
in-depth, and learn about it through the devotionals and sermons of
others. These include the following:
E-Sword - An excellent piece of Bible study software
that allows you to read several full translations of the Bible
while giving you access to Greek and Hebrew text with full
support and search functions
Grace Gems
- A repository of timeless books, sermons, and devotionals
Thru The Bible - A five-year expository journey through
the Bible with Dr. J. Vernon McGee\
The Writings of
Charles Spurgeon - An archive of this influential
preacher's sermons and publications
Reassessing
Jewish-Christian Relations - A lecture by Dr. Amy-Jill
Levine, a professor of New Testament studies at Vanderbilt
Divinity School
Introduction to the Hebrew Bible - A series of Open
Courseware lectures on the Old Testament
If you need help understanding the Bible, and
are looking for counsel on how to use the study tools listed above,
feel free to e-mail me.
Should you need further direction on matters of faith, and don't
know where to go in your community,
Quaker Jane - a woman who approaches Bible study from the
Quaker tradition -
offers short-term spiritual direction at no cost.
[Top]
This Site
When did you start this site?
May, 2007
Are you a member of the Westboro Baptist
Church?
No.
Why are you doing
this?
Two reasons, the first being more
important than the second:
- God, the master of the universe and
creator of everything in it, flat out commanded me to speak
up for WBC’s right to picket – even at funerals. Whether
they like it (or whether you like it) doesn't matter.
- In order for Freedom of Speech to
apply to anyone, it must apply to everyone. When I saw
footage of people hurling rocks and bottles at the WBC
picketers, I also saw a threat against the freedoms of
speech and religion.
[Top]
About Me
Have you ever read/studied the Bible?
Yes - I read it every day,
Do you agree with their interpretation of
the Bible?
No.
Phelps and his people are Five-Point
Calvinists who believe absolutely in the doctrine of
predestination; that people are not saved from eternal damnation
except for those few specifically called to salvation by God.
Their main proof text is found in Romans 9.
I'm a heretic by their lights, which wins me an
eternal ass-kicking as carried out by the grinning imps of hell.
Are you afraid of going to hell?
Everyone should fear God (Ecclesiastes
12:13). I
don't know what my fate will be; I can only hope he has mercy on
me and mine.
There is a God of justice who will deal
with me as I deserve. In fact, God has been more than fair and
more than patient. If I am hell-bound in the end, I can say
naught but that I had it coming.
Do you hate gays and lesbians?
No.
Are you a homosexual?
No.
What if they were to picket your
house or the funeral of someone you love?
I'd do exactly the same as I'm doing now.
[Top]
I tell you the
truth: I'd rather have
spit in my eye than a knife in my back.
|
