Foo Fighters serenade Westboro Church protestors

page: 4
59
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 

For some reason your post made me think of Ted Haggard - go figure.




posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
After looking into things to see just who these fruitcakes actually were, I discovered this (forgive the source...they get it right sometimes too):


Incorporated in 1967 as a not-for-profit organization, WBC considers itself an “Old School (or Primitive)” Baptist Church. WBC’s leader is Fred Phelps and several of his children and dozens of his grandchildren appear to constitute the majority of the group’s members. WBC has no official affiliation with mainstream Baptist organizations.

Source



I have to take issue with the characterization of WBC as "Primitive Baptists". Their doctrine is nothing like the doctrine of Primitive Baptists. Primitive Baptists are for the most part stand-offish and isolationist, and would not be caught dead at a protest rally, and their doctrine specifically prohibits litigation, which absoultely cannot be said of WBC's money-making scams.

Primitive Baptists are so "conservative" in their doctrine that they don't even allow music in church services - everything is sung acapella, and all the song's I've heard in their services seem to carry the exact same "tune", regardless of which song it is.
Their preachers tend to preach in a nearly incomprehensible sing-song chant that gets worse as it progresses, reminiscent of an auctioneer getting "wound up", and it used to scare the hell outta me when I was a kid.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maluhia
reply to post by nenothtu
 

For some reason your post made me think of Ted Haggard - go figure.


He's of the same ilk - "do as I say, not as I do", and are "christian" to the core, as long as there's a buck to be made in it! There are lots of alleged "christians" out there in that same vein, and I think they'll all get theirs in the end, so the had BETTER gather what they can now, since that''s all they'll ever get!

"Laying up for themselves treasures on Earth" comes to mind - they'll never even get a sniff of heaven they way they're going.

No, "heaven" ISN'T SUPPOSED to smell like sulphur!



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12voltz
reply to post by intrepid
 

Fred Phelps jr is loving that attention.I bet he went home and looked at his butt cheeks in the mirror
Whats with some of those signs? "god hates cripple soldiers"!!! "America is doomed".
Can we get some WBC players on here , with some sources and evidence as required


WBC will never show up at ATS - you have to be able to read to participate here....



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deaf Alien
I have made a few threads and many posts about the fact that NOWHERE in the bible does it say that homosexuality is wrong. NOWHERE.


It does. It's one passage in Deuteronomy or Leviticus (can't remember which). It says that Homosexuality is an Abomination. The Old Testament also says that Shellfish are an Abomination so I guess I'm going to hell for every time I've eaten at Red Lobster. And it also says you can have 2 slaves. Make sure you get yours today! (sorry sarcasm doesn't come across very well on the Internet).

Jesus doesn't say anything like this, tho.

(Or in the words of Cap'n Malcolm Reynolds: "That's a dumb planet!"



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
listen at 4:41....
"I love that song"
WBC BUSTED!!!!



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by CynicalDrivel
 


True, but there's also:

1. Hate the sin, not the sinner.
2. Nobody's perfect.
3. He without sin cast the first stone.

And my favorite...
4. There's a certain spirit of individuality in sin, that gives you your character when it's not to excess.

The idea that somehow homosexuality, assuming it is a sin in God's eyes, is beyond par with any other sin (ie, it's exceptional and stands to the forefront of the most heinous of sins such as killing or raping or stealing) is a major stretch. At the very least, the only sin regarding sexuality from my point of view is sexual abuse, sexual violence and to a more inwardly focused angle, sexual addiction.

Maybe second to Jagged Little Pill by Alanis or Dookie by Green Day, I think the Foo Fighters were probably the first or one of the first CDs I bought for myself (someone gave me the Eagles' greatest hits, but that doesn't count and why you would indoctrinate a 14 year old like that is beyond me), ...can't remember...way back in 1995 or 96. I always felt they had this streak in them.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Maluhia
 


Even though I think my gay friends are peculiar as hell,

THIS IS THE BEST PROTEST AGAINST WESTBORO EVER!!!!!


DAVE AND THE BAND RULE!!!!



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 



I have to take issue with the characterization of WBC as "Primitive Baptists". Their doctrine is nothing like the doctrine of Primitive Baptists. Primitive Baptists are for the most part stand-offish and isolationist, and would not be caught dead at a protest rally, and their doctrine specifically prohibits litigation, which absoultely cannot be said of WBC's money-making scams.

Thank you for the reply and clarification. I really wasn't entirely clear on the 'Primitive' reference. My focus in sharing what I did was in the family nature of the WBC as opposed to a regular Church as the Media would have folks believe this is. However, your explanation of what that reference actually means adds to my understanding of this and I appreciate it.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by CryHavoc
 



It does. It's one passage in Deuteronomy or Leviticus (can't remember which). It says that Homosexuality is an Abomination. The Old Testament also says that Shellfish are an Abomination so I guess I'm going to hell for every time I've eaten at Red Lobster. And it also says you can have 2 slaves. Make sure you get yours today!

This info (and many other examples like it) deserves a thread of its own. Just make sure you wear all your sparring gear if you go for it.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 07:08 AM
link   
I went to the Concert on Friday at the Sprint Center in Kansas City, turned the corner and saw the WBC chuckleheads and I couldn't believe it. I am from Kansas so I have seen them around before, especially in Topeka where the d-bag Fred Phelps and his inbred family live.

We gave em hell tho. Walked up to them and gave them a peice of our mind. All they could manage to come back with was "Shut up you f*$%ing f@#$%s". Ahhhh it was a good laugh to say the least.

Just want to add that nobody here in Kansas supports Fred Phelps or his band of rejects. The whole #ed up cult is made up of his family. Nobody around here follows these nut jobs. Too bad the cops were all over the place or things could have been a little more exciting

Also got some pictures that I will post once I can figure out how to post them



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 09:13 AM
link   
Ah! Take that bigots! Dave sure showed them!



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Thank you for the reply and clarification. I really wasn't entirely clear on the 'Primitive' reference. My focus in sharing what I did was in the family nature of the WBC as opposed to a regular Church as the Media would have folks believe this is. However, your explanation of what that reference actually means adds to my understanding of this and I appreciate it.



"Primitive Baptist" is an actual, named recognized denomination. Among themselves, they frequently call themselves "Old Baptists". I don't really know how much this factors in to those names, but the association my mom belongs to has documentary evidence going back to 1782 or 83, and there is some ancillary evidence (archaeological and outside texts) that place it possibly as far back as 1774. it was an active church on the frontier before the Revolutionary War. As I said before, they are extremely conservative in the sense of not allowing new influences into their church, and are very resistant to change. No instrumental music in the church is but one example. Another is the fact that they still use "circuit preachers", holding services at any one church building once per month, moving on to the next for the next week. Nowadays, the parishoners frequently ride the circuit too, but it's a throwback to the frontier days when the population was thin, and preachers were few.

That's up in the Appalachians. There is at least one Primitive Baptist church in this area, but I don't know much about them beyond the fact that they are predominantly black churches here. I presume that they are similar if not identical to the Primitive Baptist churches in the mountains, and I know that in some cases they have held services together, in common, traveling from here to there.

Doctrinally, they are primarily "Calvinists", also an example of their conservatism. Calvinist doctrine was the predominant protestant doctrine in America among all of the protestant churches back then - the newer "free will" doctrines, Arianism and such, didn't take hold in America until roughly the 1820's.

These days I'm a "Calvinist" too, but not a Primitive Baptist or any other named denomination - I've not attended ANY services in a number of years, nor do I get along well with most "christians". That's after a long period of questioning and explorations, it's just what I settled in to as the most logical choice to my mind.

WBC, whatever they may call themselves, are neither Primitive Baptist nor Calvinist, going by their work. To preach to others, or demonstrate against them, demanding that they "look after their own souls" or "change" in some ineffable way to conform to Calvinist beliefs is entirely alien to Calvinists, who believe that no one can change themselves, "pull themselves up by their own bootstraps" as it were, and so preaching such would be a futile effort, destined to failure. That goes entirely against the Five Points, which Calvinism is based upon. Calvinists believe that "change" is a result of a calling from God, and in the absence of that, no amount of preaching, ranting, or raving is going to do anything more than cause resentment.

Perhaps oddly, I've never been in a church that subscribes to Calvinist doctrine where a collection was taken up. At most, a collection plate is left at the back of the church, and you either contribute or not, as "the spirit moves you". Primitive Baptist preachers in particular take no pay for their preaching. They all have outside jobs to support themselves with.

NO Primitive Baptists participate in litigation, since there is a biblical injunction against it. That, more than even the demonstrations they get tied up in, tells me that the WBC is NOT "Primitive Baptist". They seem to me to be some sort of inbred "family cult" that even us hillbillies would avoid like the plague, all the coarse jokes about us notwithstanding.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by dron020
This is why I love Rock Music. Sadly popular music today is pro establishment
That's because all those "anti-establishment folks" way back when ARE the establishment now.
What's left to fight when you become what you were fighting?



Originally posted by Floydshayvious WBC can tell me that I and my significant other are going to burn for an eternity, but giving them the power of attention is giving them ammunition - and that makes me just as dense.
Check the knee-jerk reaction at the door, for a moment while I play Devil's Advocate. What if there really are consequences to your choices in life? (Notice I stayed away from the gay thing. There are far more decisions out there than whom we sleep with.) The thing is that good, bad, or parallel, most things we do have consequences (not always a bad consequence, either), but a group like this makes it far easier to go against them rather than see if any of their claims have merit.


Now, that is a sickening thought. Finding out Westboro gets something right by accident rather than intent.



Originally posted by nenothtuPrimitive Baptists are for the most part stand-offish and isolationist, and would not be caught dead at a protest rally, and their doctrine specifically prohibits litigation, which absoultely cannot be said of WBC's money-making scams.

Primitive Baptists are so "conservative" in their doctrine that they don't even allow music in church services - everything is sung acapella, and all the song's I've heard in their services seem to carry the exact same "tune", regardless of which song it is.
Their preachers tend to preach in a nearly incomprehensible sing-song chant that gets worse as it progresses, reminiscent of an auctioneer getting "wound up", and it used to scare the hell outta me when I was a kid.
Sounds like you're talking Church of Christ to me. I grew up that and still am nominally labeled that. Sadly our roots were in the Reformation Movement, which was the most modern thinking of the "Protestant movements". Our "forefathers" would revolt against much of what we now are.

But then, I enjoy Sacred Harp singing--and that does tend to make everything sound alike.

Originally posted by CryHavoc
It does. It's one passage in Deuteronomy or Leviticus (can't remember which). It says that Homosexuality is an Abomination.
Nah, it goes even further. The land is trying to vomit them out (a scriptural reference in Leviticus). But then the land tries to revolt against human sacrifice as well.
I wince with this one because I can't deny that it's there, and it tends to end debate and make everything into a "you backwards Christian!" moment. It's never been about the particular sin, it's always about rebellion.

As for the slave thing: under the OT, you can sell yourself into slavery over debt. Once the debt is paid for, you're no longer a slave. You can then choose, as a slave, to remain a slave or become free. This is not near the same as what we called slavery in America. This was indentured servitude with the choice of becoming a permanent slave in the indentured servant's hand.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sphota
reply to post by CynicalDrivel
 


True, but there's also:

1. Hate the sin, not the sinner.
2. Nobody's perfect.
3. He without sin cast the first stone.

And my favorite...
4. There's a certain spirit of individuality in sin, that gives you your character when it's not to excess.
I disagree with # 4, only because the "individuality" is only viable when to follow God, you MUST march in lock-step, and only the really conservative (I mean even beyond me) have such a rigid Pharisaical outlook.There is a lot of room for individuality without resorting to sin, written into the book. From the Pauline position that everyone likes to throw out for being soooooooooo rigid.



The idea that somehow homosexuality, assuming it is a sin in God's eyes, is beyond par with any other sin (ie, it's exceptional and stands to the forefront of the most heinous of sins such as killing or raping or stealing) is a major stretch. At the very least, the only sin regarding sexuality from my point of view is sexual abuse, sexual violence and to a more inwardly focused angle, sexual addiction.
The reason sexual sins are blown out of proportion is that certain sexual sins are listed, Biblically, in lists like the Abomination lists (but then, so is being divisive liar--look at the original 7 deadly sins for that :lol
and that Sexual Sins are the only sins listed as being sins against yourself as well as the other person. But at the same time, 1 sin, the tiniest white lie, the theft of a single penny is as wrong (contextually--takes a lot of explanation, and I really think this is for another thread) as being the next Ted Bundy, as far as how it separates you from God.

But the shame of it is that people are letting their fears and indignation rule when they are dealing with sexual perversions of any sort. Christians are supposed to be compassionate folks, and they are an abomination to god as well (something that is vomitable from God's mouth--the visualization is more akin to vomiting up a lung than what you ate. It's deliberately gross.). You should see the in-church backlash against divorced and remarried couples in a lot of congregations--forget those that are Gay. They know they're going to get worse. Believe me, I find it sickening.


Originally posted by Maluhia
reply to post by CryHavoc
 



It does. It's one passage in Deuteronomy or Leviticus (can't remember which). It says that Homosexuality is an Abomination. The Old Testament also says that Shellfish are an Abomination so I guess I'm going to hell for every time I've eaten at Red Lobster. And it also says you can have 2 slaves. Make sure you get yours today!

This info (and many other examples like it) deserves a thread of its own. Just make sure you wear all your sparring gear if you go for it.
I absolutely agree that this deserves another thread.

1. The people who NEED this debate aren't going to go into a thread labeled this.
2. The job of a Christian is intellectual seduction. We're persuading people to our line of reasoning. To do that, you've got to stay away from miring yourself in the negative to outline the far more important. (Yes, there's far more important messages than what being Gay is to God.) You're supposed to be all things to all people, take people from where they are at, and show them why a change in direction is needed. This is far more than the right and wrong of a stance, but more about the rightness of how you treat your neighbors.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by CynicalDrivel
 


Im not going to argue the abortion thing, Because If I do, my whole post will be off topic.
Besides that, I don't see why you ASSUMED If I went down there that violence would insue.... I have the right to peaceful protests as do they, so If I went down there I would counter protest. Assuming things is bad for all of us.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Oh gosh, LOL. That explains most of it. I was wondering how they got so many people to join that church! But If most of them are family, the mystery is gone (: thanks for the source!



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by NerdGoddess
 



Besides that, I don't see why you ASSUMED If I went down there that violence would insue...

I think the point he was trying to make is that this group is very tricky and they might "accidentally" trip over your sign, or your foot, or their own foot, and then claim you assaulted them and your protest wasn't so "peaceful" - so they can sue someone and make money. That seems to be their MO - how they fund their operation.
edit on 19-9-2011 by Maluhia because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Maluhia
 


no WAY! Would they really do something like that? Pretty dishonorable.
Though given the way I have seen them act in the videos I have watched, I guess I wouldn't really be surprised.
:/ Oh well, just another extremist group we'll have to deal with untill they fiz out.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by NerdGoddess
Im not going to argue the abortion thing, Because If I do, my whole post will be off topic.
I wasn't arguing about whether abortion was right, wrong, or fuzzy green nurples. My WHOLE AND OLNY point was that the groups have different agendas and mindsets. So, if you had started arguing about the right and wrong of Abortion, I'd have had to back you off.



Besides that, I don't see why you ASSUMED If I went down there that violence would insue....
My comment, had nothing to do with YOUR intent. These people are looking for excuses to financially own businesses and people through the court system. I was giving you a bad scenario, and someone else with bad intent causes you to be put in a position of assumed violence. BIG difference.


I have the right to peaceful protests as do they, so If I went down there I would counter protest.
Peaceful usually isn't an in-your-face thing. If you catch too much attitude about it, people will assume your next step is violent. The underhanded will occasionally make sure you get the blame when things go wrong. All I'd request of you is restraint in order to be the better person. If you were planning on going to meet them and use restraint while giving them a piece of your mind, then I applaud you.


Assuming things is bad for all of us.
Read my response again, and see why I'm trying NOT to to taunt you for this statement.
edit on 20-9-2011 by CynicalDrivel because: forgot NOT lmbo





new topics
top topics
 
59
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join