Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Westboro Baptist Church

52 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

They only need 25,000 signatures to have their petition looked at......they already have over a 1/4 million. :happyhappy:

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

They only need 25,000 signatures to have their petition looked at......they already have over a 1/4 million. :happyhappy:

LOL ...man... why sign the petition . :rolleyes:

I do think that this group is cult ....it surely is not of the Spirit of God.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I'm not sure why you'd sign that?

It's only a matter of time before someone works one up for what you believe. They may be misguided and hateful, but they sure aren't fooling anyone.

Designating them a Hate Group is a Slippery Slope that the powers that be want you to take a trip on.

How about praying for them?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I was reading a book written by Pastor Richard Wurmbrand this morning. It was about his time in Romanian prisons being tortured for the Gospel and then his subsequent release to the West to testify about the wrongs and evils of National Socialism and its partner that followed Godless Anti-Christian Communism. It's not folks like Westboro Baptist who are the problem. It's the encroaching Worldwide National Socialism that will be our downfall. The current folks who are leading our Nation are more intolerant than the Westboro Baptists.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Many thousands have signed the online petition to the White House to have this 'church' designated a hate group. I intend to sign it myself.

http://www.nola.com/...group_labe.html

As a matter of principle I wouldn't sign it because I don't think the government has a right to designate anyone a "hate group." It will end up being used as a political tool for someone to one day say "well, these people are Christians and look how they act, all Christians must be like them so all Churches must be hate groups." The government shouldn't have the right to label generally law abiding citizens with any negative tag, so long as they follow the law, no matter how wicked and hateful they act. As despicable as what they do is, the constitution gives them the right to do it as long as they don't physically hurt anyone or proactively threaten or incite violence (I have heard of them spitting on people, which could certainly legally be considered a simple assault of some sort and should be, but aside from that most of what they do seems to be picketing and carrying signs that are incredibly hateful), but otherwise, their rights to speak, congregate, and believe whatever they want should be protected from the government, just like yours or mine, because, guaranteed, there are no shortage of people in the chain of decision makers going up from the bottom rung of those who over see designations such as this who would love nothing more than to have all churches become designated as hate groups and would have no problem with using their example as a base with which to build from.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Many thousands have signed the online petition to the White House to have this 'church' designated a hate group. I intend to sign it myself.

http://www.nola.com/...group_labe.html

As a matter of principle I wouldn't sign it because I don't think the government has a right to designate anyone a "hate group." It will end up being used as a political tool for someone to one day say "well, these people are Christians and look how they act, all Christians must be like them so all Churches must be hate groups." The government shouldn't have the right to label generally law abiding citizens with any negative tag, so long as they follow the law, no matter how wicked and hateful they act. As despicable as what they do is, the constitution gives them the right to do it as long as they don't physically hurt anyone or proactively threaten or incite violence (I have heard of them spitting on people, which could certainly legally be considered a simple assault of some sort and should be, but aside from that most of what they do seems to be picketing and carrying signs that are incredibly hateful), but otherwise, their rights to speak, congregate, and believe whatever they want should be protected from the government, just like yours or mine, because, guaranteed, there are no shortage of people in the chain of decision makers going up from the bottom rung of those who over see designations such as this who would love nothing more than to have all churches become designated as hate groups and would have no problem with using their example as a base with which to build from.

Well I suppose you can see evil and conspiracy in anything....even an online petition to categorize the Westboro loons as what they are. The families of our fallen, and others, don't need to be revictimized by these demon possessed people. I intend to sign it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Well I suppose you can see evil and conspiracy in anything....even an online petition to categorize the Westboro loons as what they are. The families of our fallen, and others, don't need to be revictimized by these demon possessed people. I intend to sign it.

I don't see it as a conspiracy. I see it as an opportunity to persecute the Church that someone will invariably take. This sort of thing is not unthinkable and people have been arrested in canada and great britain for doing nothing more than calling homosexuality sinful in public. The bare fact of the matter is that it's not unconstitutional to assemble and picket, no matter what your beliefs are, and it's not unconstitutional to be a loon if you aren't committing a crime while being one. It's not incredibly difficult or conspiracy minded to think that Christians may be persecuted by a secular government or that if you give an inch they may take a mile. The line isn't even that hard to draw from point A to point B on this.

Westboro baptist is openly anti-homosexual and uses very strong and at times vulgar language which I will not repeat here to impart that upon the public. Any Bible believing Church is going to preach that homosexuality is sinful, because it is. There are no laws that list fallen soldiers or slain school children as a "protected" group. However, in 2009 the democrats attached a rider to a defense appropriation bill that added homosexuals into the groups protected from "hate crimes." So, if westboro Baptist WERE to be designated as a hate group, the only justification that could be used in court to defend that decision would be for their stance and language regarding homosexuality. This is straight from the FBI's website and this is the description of what it takes to be labeled a hate group (actual document - http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/hcguidelinesdc99.pdf):

Hate Group — An organization whose primary purpose is to promote animosity, hostility, and malice against persons belonging to a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or

ethnicity/national origin which differs from that of the members of the organization, e.g., the Ku Klux Klan, American Nazi Party.

(I underlined sexual orientation)

So, for anyone who's looked into westboro Baptist, it should be fairly clear that the only activity that they really partake in against a "protected group" is their speech against homosexuals.

How many Godly, Bible believing pastors, deacons, and congregants are going to say that homosexuality is a sin if asked? Pretty much all of them. I honestly believe that if we let this precedent be set then someone is absolutely going to try this, probably successfully. The bible uses VERY strong language against homosexuality. I think it's quite possible that the path this could lead to could very well make it possible to find yourself on an FBI watch list for repeating God's Word. I don't think this is conspiracy minded or that there's necessarily a conspiracy to do so, but this is one of those things that could, and I believe would, opportunistically arise and be pressed in washington on the behalf of homosexual partisans.

To briefly summarize, once again, I believe the only realistic way that westboro could be labeled a hate group is through using their speech against homosexuals, because no one else they picket or speak against is a protected class. I believe that you and I and probably most of the people on this board see their speech with regards to homosexuals as hateful and not loving and certainly not being a light unto the world. Secular champions of the homosexual cause are not going to see much of a difference at all in their speech and what most of the Bible believing followers of Jesus believe with regards to homosexuality and even if they do they have no reason to say so because it wouldn't justify their ends. Simply thinking homosexuality is a sin is enough to get you labeled as a bigot in every day life in a lot of places in this country, right now. It's not a stretch to think that there are people in power who would use this group of people being added to the list to attempt to take it a lot farther, in my opinion.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Simply thinking homosexuality is a sin is enough to get you labeled as a bigot in every day life in a lot of places in this country, right now. It's not a stretch to think that there are people in power who would use this group of people being added to the list to attempt to take it a lot farther, in my opinion.

Being designated a 'hate group' in the U.S. is not persecution. Nothing would happen to these people other than being put into a category where they belong. Their protests would still be legal.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Many thousands have signed the online petition to the White House to have this 'church' designated a hate group. I intend to sign it myself.

http://www.nola.com/...group_labe.html

As a matter of principle I wouldn't sign it because I don't think the government has a right to designate anyone a "hate group." It will end up being used as a political tool for someone to one day say "well, these people are Christians and look how they act, all Christians must be like them so all Churches must be hate groups." The government shouldn't have the right to label generally law abiding citizens with any negative tag, so long as they follow the law, no matter how wicked and hateful they act. As despicable as what they do is, the constitution gives them the right to do it as long as they don't physically hurt anyone or proactively threaten or incite violence (I have heard of them spitting on people, which could certainly legally be considered a simple assault of some sort and should be, but aside from that most of what they do seems to be picketing and carrying signs that are incredibly hateful), but otherwise, their rights to speak, congregate, and believe whatever they want should be protected from the government, just like yours or mine, because, guaranteed, there are no shortage of people in the chain of decision makers going up from the bottom rung of those who over see designations such as this who would love nothing more than to have all churches become designated as hate groups and would have no problem with using their example as a base with which to build from.

i don't think so. Reasonable people can tell the difference between legitimate Christian churches and Westboro. Protected free speech in the Constitution is narrowly defined. Free speech is not the right to say anything you want so long as you don't physically harm someone. The founding fathers would NEVER have included what Westboro does or what the KKK says as falling under protected speech.

The founding fathers wanted free speech to protect us from the government when we speak out against the government and to give us the freedom to protest government policies without fear of government reprisal. If I walk up to a woman and speak to her in sexually suggestive language, that is not protected speech as I can be prosecuted for sexual harrassment, even though I did not incite violence or do her any harm. I cannot publically slander a person on TV or the radio or in newspapers and think that I can fall back on protected free speech.

In short, the Westboro bunch should not be given constitutional protection for what they do.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Simply thinking homosexuality is a sin is enough to get you labeled as a bigot in every day life in a lot of places in this country, right now. It's not a stretch to think that there are people in power who would use this group of people being added to the list to attempt to take it a lot farther, in my opinion.

Being designated a 'hate group' in the U.S. is not persecution. Nothing would happen to these people other than being put into a category where they belong. Their protests would still be legal.

It is persecution as it adds you to a watch list which gets you surveiled by the FBI and allows them to obtain warrants to monitor your activity without your knowledge based, in part, on that designation, which is counter to a constitutionally established right to privacy.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Simply thinking homosexuality is a sin is enough to get you labeled as a bigot in every day life in a lot of places in this country, right now. It's not a stretch to think that there are people in power who would use this group of people being added to the list to attempt to take it a lot farther, in my opinion.

Being designated a 'hate group' in the U.S. is not persecution. Nothing would happen to these people other than being put into a category where they belong. Their protests would still be legal.

What exactly does it accomplish to have the government designate a church a hate group? Why do we need such a designation? All of us can see them for what they are doing, and make up our own minds.

When I see Westboro Baptist Church, I see people that are deceived. They believe that America is under judgment, and everytime something bad happens, it is judgment. There are a lot of people that believe that, but where they cross the line is when they rejoice in and celebrate evil things happening to innocent people. I wrote them a message trying to convince them that their attitude is wrong, and showing them how Jeremiah recognized judgement coming upon Judah, and warned the people, yet he prayed for them, and mourned over the evil that was happening to his people. I don't want the government interfering in any matters pertaining to a church. It will only lead to them designating churches a hate group for speaking out against homosexuality or anything else they don't like. Even if that doesn't happen, I have no respect for the designation of a government that forces states to allow the killing of innocent unborn babies, and pushes for gay marriage. I understand your frustration, and I am glad to speak out against this church as doing things God wouldn't approve of, but I can't sign this petition.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Simply thinking homosexuality is a sin is enough to get you labeled as a bigot in every day life in a lot of places in this country, right now. It's not a stretch to think that there are people in power who would use this group of people being added to the list to attempt to take it a lot farther, in my opinion.

Being designated a 'hate group' in the U.S. is not persecution. Nothing would happen to these people other than being put into a category where they belong. Their protests would still be legal.

It is persecution as it adds you to a watch list which gets you surveiled by the FBI and allows them to obtain warrants to monitor your activity without your knowledge based, in part, on that designation, which is counter to a constitutionally established right to privacy.

I think all of us feel fine about this particular church being persecuted, because they cause others pain, but at the same time, this designation is not Constitutional, and getting the government involved only makes things worse. I prefer to see private citizens picketing Westboro Baptist Church or even having a counter demonstration against their demonstrations. We the people can handle this without the government. I don't know of anyone that agrees with what this church is doing. I doubt they see how evil their actions are, and they are so deceived, they see the persecutions as coming because they are righteous. I feel sorry for those caught up in this church. They are being taught to hate. We should hate sin, but should not hate people, and should not be happy at the suffering of others.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I, personally, will not sign it, on principle. While I have no love for what they do, I do feel they have the right to do it-freedom of religion. Once we start asking the government to come down and label any religions instition a "hate group" then its just a downhill slope from there, sooner or later, the government will start making any church a hate group and outlawing them altogether. We dont need government interference, that will just lead to our rights taken away-we need to realize that the people of westboro, need Christs love to, and find a way to stop them without the government. Maybe if the media would just stop advertising what they do, it would go along way. They need Christs love-not government interference.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I, personally, will not sign it, on principle. While I have no love for what they do, I do feel they have the right to do it-freedom of religion.

Freedom of religion was never meant to include what they do. i think a little common sense is needed instead of thinking that everything some nut does in the name of religion is protected by the Constitution. We need to go back to the intent of the founders instead of letting the liblerals define what freedom of religion means for us. Getting rid of the nuts will in now way create a slippery slope.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Simply thinking homosexuality is a sin is enough to get you labeled as a bigot in every day life in a lot of places in this country, right now. It's not a stretch to think that there are people in power who would use this group of people being added to the list to attempt to take it a lot farther, in my opinion.

Being designated a 'hate group' in the U.S. is not persecution. Nothing would happen to these people other than being put into a category where they belong. Their protests would still be legal.

It is persecution as it adds you to a watch list which gets you surveiled by the FBI and allows them to obtain warrants to monitor your activity without your knowledge based, in part, on that designation, which is counter to a constitutionally established right to privacy.

Westboro members are the persecutors, in this case, not the government. Their actions demand and require intervention. It is part of the government carrying the sword on the behalf of the rest of us. They need to be on a watch list and be monitored.

Sorry, but you have a warped view of what persecution is. It is their actions not their beliefs that need monitored. Their actions are public so they have no reasonable right to privacy as regards their activities.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I, personally, will not sign it, on principle. While I have no love for what they do, I do feel they have the right to do it-freedom of religion.

Freedom of religion was never meant to include what they do. i think a little common sense is needed instead of thinking that everything some nut does in the name of religion is protected by the Constitution. We need to go back to the intent of the founders instead of letting the liblerals define what freedom of religion means for us. Getting rid of the nuts will in now way create a slippery slope.

no, freedom of religion, is just that, freedom of religion. it means we can worship what we want, theres also the right of free assembly. Freedom of religion is not "freedom to only those we choose" we ask the government to step in here, we might as well kiss our freedom of religion goodbye-this is just one more step towards taking it way. Look at the big picture here, they claim to be a church. Now, their actions are definetly not loving, but if the church steps into that, what stops them from going into churches that are loving from there? I mean what do you really expect the government to do? so what, they title them a hate group. Thats nothing, they will just say they are being persecuted for their cause, and continue on just as strong or stronger because of it. The next step, is to start making laws governing what they can, and cannot do, and arrest them for doing so. What then? this is the government we are talking about here-you give them a little power, and they will take a lot, it will just escalate, to any church that says anything against sin of any kind, will then be labeled a hate group and members arrested.

I urge you to think with your head, and not with your emotions. Bringing the government into this wont stop westboro-if anything it will just amplify their cause, anything the government does to them will be persecution and they will just be martyrs for their cause, and it will come back to bite us. The only way to effectively stop them, is combat evil with good-not retaliation. Its time we stop asking the government to fix our problems for us, and for us to fix it ourselves. The bikers, and others who show up to block them from protesting, thats a good thing-in fact it pretty much shut down their last protest, but has anyone ever thought to hand out Bibles to them? maybe stand outside their church and praying for them?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I, personally, will not sign it, on principle. While I have no love for what they do, I do feel they have the right to do it-freedom of religion.

Freedom of religion was never meant to include what they do. i think a little common sense is needed instead of thinking that everything some nut does in the name of religion is protected by the Constitution. We need to go back to the intent of the founders instead of letting the liblerals define what freedom of religion means for us. Getting rid of the nuts will in now way create a slippery slope.

I despise what they are doing, protesting at military funerals, and thanking God for dead soldiers. I always ask why they would get joy from the death of innocent people, who often times oppose the positions the federal government has taken to bring God's wrath upon us. If they are going to protest, they should protest the government, and homosexual activists. They should be praying for God's mercy, not rejoicing in his judgements. I despise their actions, but I do believe that they do have the right to freedom of religion and freedom to protest, even if they are very warped individuals. I do believe this will create a slippery slope as we go further and further towards acceptance of evil. Main stream Christian churches will get labeled a hate group.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Being designated a 'hate group' in the U.S. is not persecution. Nothing would happen to these people other than being put into a category where they belong. Their protests would still be legal.

If absolutely nothing changes beyond them being classified as a "hate group" then exactly what good does the petition and classification do? If they still have the right to protest and disrupt these funerals, then what is the use of the petition? If it is not to get them to stop their stupid protests at funerals, then what exactly is it for?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

we live in countries were we are free to say what we want while their are others who live in countries were they don"t have the freedom like we do in our countries

.An American got in trouble for putting up a video discussing what he finds wrong with the philippines

On Monday, March 19th, the City of Cebu has reacted to the buzz. Sun-Star’s article “” said that City Councilor Sisinio Andales wanted Jimmy Sieczka declared “persona non grata” in the city. He will file a resolution before the City Council next week.

he is lucky he did not get black listed i also have to be care full as a foreigner i try not to rock the boat as i know if i do begin to question or do what this guy did i could be stopped from entering my wifes country

The Philippines now has a law that bans abductions carried out by government forces, a practice known as enforced disappearances.

Under the new law, anyone convicted of carrying out enforced disappearances can be sentenced to life in prison without parole. The law also prohibits the use of secret detention facilities, and bans the military from using a list of suspected communist insurgents to justify holding people indefinitely

This group knows it can say what it wants all due to living in a country that gives them this freedom i can not see how the government can stop this group by signing the petition will it stop this lot

has any church leader or pastor challenged this group ?

i do not want to step on no ones toes yet i know their are others in third world countries who have not got the freedom we have yet want the very same freedom we have in our countries

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

no, freedom of religion, is just that, freedom of religion.

By the way WE interpret it, today. That was not the original intent of the founders. The original intent was to protect Christian freedom from a state run church and in particular from persecution by the North American branch of the Church of England that existed in Virginia at the time the first amendment was ratified.

Freedom of religion was never meant to give quarter to people like Westboro. They are the very antithesis of what the first amendment stands for. To use the first amendment to protect the rights of people, who, by their very actions violate that ammendment is nothing short of ludicrous.

Freedom of religion is not "freedom to only those we choose" we ask the government to step in here, we might as well kiss our freedom of religion goodbye-this is just one more step towards taking it way.

No freedom we have is absolute. To argue that freedom of religion covers these actions by these people not only dehumanizes, but it diminishes the freedom itself.

Look at the big picture here, they claim to be a church. Now, their actions are definetly not loving, but if the church steps into that, what stops them from going into churches that are loving from there?

Please... The government doesn't need Westboro as a pretext for restricting the rest of us. They will do that anyway. We are called "haters" anytime we call out sin for what it is.

The only way to effectively stop them, is combat evil with good-not retaliation.

It's not retaliation. It is something that should have been done a long time ago. It is a good thing that they are at least singled out from the rest of us and labled for what they are. Most people, even those who are not Christians, are able to differentiate between real Churches and Westboro.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

shiloh, by the original intent. Yes, the vast majority of the founding fathers were christians, and it was to ensure their freedom-as well as all other religions. It was for the christians, but not only for the christians. Freedom of religion means all have the right to worship in their own way-period. It wasnt just for the christians, and if they were here today, to say otherwise would be contrary to what they very believe. It was a right made for them, but included everyone. I think they would agree with me.

and your right, were already called haters by others now, but not the government. first, why give the government any toe hold? especially seeing as what it leads to. And furthermore, if its only a "title" as you claim, then why does the government need to label them anything? we already know what they are, why would we need the government to tell us what they are? are we so bad that we need the government to tell us something? If its only a title, then we don't need it. If its more then that, then we dont want it, for reasons already said.

It is retaliation. For, us as to christians, to have the government call them a hate group, is childish, and its retaliation. Its like 1st grade again, "mommie, hes a meanie-head" time for us to put a helmet on, and pull out our Bibles, and show westboro the true meaning of love-not that we can play at their game.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

shiloh, by the original intent. Yes, the vast majority of the founding fathers were christians, and it was to ensure their freedom-as well as all other religions. It was for the christians, but not only for the christians. Freedom of religion means all have the right to worship in their own way-period. It wasnt just for the christians, and if they were here today, to say otherwise would be contrary to what they very believe. It was a right made for them, but included everyone. I think they would agree with me.

and your right, were already called haters by others now, but not the government. first, why give the government any toe hold? especially seeing as what it leads to. And furthermore, if its only a "title" as you claim, then why does the government need to label them anything? we already know what they are, why would we need the government to tell us what they are? are we so bad that we need the government to tell us something? If its only a title, then we don't need it. If its more then that, then we dont want it, for reasons already said.

It is retaliation. For, us as to christians, to have the government call them a hate group, is childish, and its retaliation. Its like 1st grade again, "mommie, hes a meanie-head" time for us to put a helmet on, and pull out our Bibles, and show westboro the true meaning of love-not that we can play at their game.

:thumbs_up:

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I can see Shiloh's point about the original intent of giving us freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights, but if we really take it as it meant from the start, the federal government still has no right to interfere with Westboro Baptist Church. If anyone has the authority to restrict a church like that, according to original intent, it would be the state of Kansas. The Constitution was written to limit the power of the federal government, not the states, but that has been twisted over the years. You could take the same argument and use it on gun control. The federal government has no authority to pass any gun control measures, but according to original intent, the states do. They can go so far as to completely restrict the ability to own guns, or they can let you own any military grade weapon they want. Of course, that is going by original intent, and that hasn't been the standard for many years.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

shiloh, by the original intent. Yes, the vast majority of the founding fathers were christians, and it was to ensure their freedom-as well as all other religions. It was for the christians, but not only for the christians. Freedom of religion means all have the right to worship in their own way-period. It wasnt just for the christians, and if they were here today, to say otherwise would be contrary to what they very believe. It was a right made for them, but included everyone. I think they would agree with me.

The problem is that what WBC is doing isn't worship. Picketing funerals and harrassing people isn't worship. I think that is where the confusion lies. We are not talking about their right to worship the way they want. They have crossed at line and their actions cannot be labeled, "worship.' Just because they are doing it in the name of their god, doesn't suddenly mean that their actions are protected religious worship. So using the first ammendment to defend their actions under the freedom of worship doesn't really hold up.

and your right, were already called haters by others now, but not the government. first, why give the government any toe hold? especially seeing as what it leads to. And furthermore, if its only a "title" as you claim, then why does the government need to label them anything? we already know what they are, why would we need the government to tell us what they are? are we so bad that we need the government to tell us something? If its only a title, then we don't need it. If its more then that, then we dont want it, for reasons already said.

By supporting the petition, we set ourselves apart from the WBC. We in effect telling the government and everyone else that we condemn their actions, that we are not gay haters (despite the claims of some), and that stands as a viable witness to the community.

It is retaliation. For, us as to christians, to have the government call them a hate group, is childish, and its retaliation. Its like 1st grade again, "mommie, hes a meanie-head" time for us to put a helmet on, and pull out our Bibles, and show westboro the true meaning of love-not that we can play at their game.

That is ridculous. It is not retaliation. We are not retaliating against anyone. We are simply agreeing with the government's accruate assessment of the WBC. So your attempt of belittlement isn't going to work. I would have hoped you could have come up with something a more intelligent line of argumentation than that.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0