NationStates Jolt Archive

But in this very limited case, I feel I have to. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19080064/)
OMAHA, Neb. - A member of the Kansas group that has drawn criticism for protesting at soldiers’ funerals has been arrested for letting her 10-year-old son stomp on a U.S. flag during a demonstration. She promised Wednesday to challenge the state’s flag desecration law in court.

Shirley Phelps-Roper, 49, will be charged with flag mutilation, disturbing the peace and contributing to the delinquency of a minor, Sarpy County Attorney Lee Polikov said Wednesday.

Phelps-Roper, a member of the Westboro Baptist Church, acknowledged that she allowed her son Jonah to stand on the flag Tuesday — something she says is protected by the U.S. Constitution.

And she's right, so far as I understand the concept of protected protest and free speech. I think she's a chickenshit for not standing on the flag herself instead of having her son do it, but the principle Larry Flynt so famously put forward is true: "If the First Amendment will protect a scumbag like me, then it will protect all of you."

Well, it shouldn't be. In an Australian context, you mess with the flag, back on the boat you go.

Fools :headbang: This is how the Phelps' make their money. They do something insanely offensive to someone but is protected under the Constitution, get arrested, and when they're released sue whomever they can for as much as they can.

Why do you think so many of them are lawyers?

My last name when I was born used to be "Phelps" before I was adopted...

My last name when I was born used to be "Phelps" before I was adopted...

You dodged a massive bullet. Like my friend Caitlyn, who was named Courtney Cox for about fifteen minutes before her dad got drunk and named her Caitlyn.

But in this very limited case, I feel I have to. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19080064/)


And she's right, so far as I understand the concept of protected protest and free speech. I think she's a chickenshit for not standing on the flag herself instead of having her son do it, but the principle Larry Flynt so famously put forward is true: "If the First Amendment will protect a scumbag like me, then it will protect all of you."

Yeah...Hard to disagree with this...

Still, I recommend dousing yourself with Holy Water just in case.

You dodged a massive bullet. Like my friend Caitlyn, who was named Courtney Cox for about fifteen minutes before her dad got drunk and named her Caitlyn.
Lol, what's wrong with "courtney cox"?

I dont think she is right however I do think she should be able to burn/mutilate the flag. Shows how much of a loony she is. I however fear for the child.

Lol, what's wrong with "courtney cox"?

Just that she'd share the name with an actress. That would be really annoying.

But in this very limited case, I feel I have to. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19080064/)


And she's right, so far as I understand the concept of protected protest and free speech. I think she's a chickenshit for not standing on the flag herself instead of having her son do it, but the principle Larry Flynt so famously put forward is true: "If the First Amendment will protect a scumbag like me, then it will protect all of you."

I'll take what I can get, really. I want her to go to jail and be raped by the biggest, butchest, most lesbian lesbian there is. Like a man with a vagina. A very hair man with a very hairy vagina. With a strapon.

Personally I was hoping for some vigilante justice to step in and wipe them out, but I'm up for some fucked up regular justice if that's all we get.

Just that she'd share the name with an actress. That would be really annoying.

I have a friend named Courtney Love, complete polar opposite of her famous counterpart, I think it's hilarious, she hates it.

Don't feel too bad, it's not like you'd stop wearing seatbelts just because he does. Even when he's colossally wrong on many, many, things he's bound to be right on something, broken clock and all...

I'll take what I can get, really. I want her to go to jail and be raped by the biggest, butchest, most lesbian lesbian there is. Like a man with a vagina. A very hair man with a very hairy vagina. With a strapon.

Personally I was hoping for some vigilante justice to step in and wipe them out, but I'm up for some fucked up regular justice if that's all we get.

Sorry, but I don't wish rape on anyone, not even someone as loathsome as Shirley Phelps-Roper.

Sorry, but I don't wish rape on anyone, not even someone as loathsome as Shirley Phelps-Roper.

OK fine, can the above-described cellmate at least kick Shirley in the shins a few times a day?

Seriously, though. There's no law against being a stupid, obnoxious asshole. There's not even a requirement that, when people do stupid shit like this, we make them get "I'm a Stupid Asshole" tattooed on their foreheads. One of two things would happen in that case - either stupid asshole behavior would go way down or sales of baseball caps would go way up temporarily.

Someone needs to take a shit in these Phelps bozos' shoes and film the ensuing reaction. "God Hates Shoes Filled with Shit" or something like that.

But in this very limited case, I feel I have to. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19080064/)


And she's right, so far as I understand the concept of protected protest and free speech. I think she's a chickenshit for not standing on the flag herself instead of having her son do it, but the principle Larry Flynt so famously put forward is true: "If the First Amendment will protect a scumbag like me, then it will protect all of you."
This is probably the biggest bone of contention that I have with the American Legion. I won't support any amendments or laws that ban flag burning, etc. But the bar is still on the way home, so I feel compelled to visit.

Sorry, but I don't wish rape on anyone, not even someone as loathsome as Shirley Phelps-Roper.

I not only wish rape on Shirley, I wish some sort of obscure and severe torture that'll have her really confused and in pain at the same time.

Eventually, hopefully sooner rather than later, I wish her to die. Really, I do.

... I really, really, really do.

Here's the interesting conundrum:

Is it protected free speech? Is it contributing to the delinquency of a minor?

Well, that depends on why they are doing it. And yes, it can be both at the same time.

Is the child stomping on the flag as part of a political statement? Or is he stomping on the flag because mommy said so? That's a huge difference. Being used as mommy's political statement is a subtle difference from making it yourself.

Is she having her son stomp on the flag as part of her public political statement, or teaching her son to hate? Again, there's a difference.

Not that it's easy to measure motive. Fortunately, ten year old children can be brutally honest. ;)

-snip-

Congrats, then. You've sunk to her level. Nice company you keep.

Here's the interesting conundrum:

Is it protected free speech? Is it contributing to the delinquency of a minor?

Well, that depends on why they are doing it. And yes, it can be both at the same time.

Is the child stomping on the flag as part of a political statement? Or is he stomping on the flag because mommy said so? That's a huge difference. Being used as mommy's political statement is a subtle difference from making it yourself.

Is she having her son stomp on the flag as part of her public political statement, or teaching her son to hate? Again, there's a difference.

Not that it's easy to measure motive. Fortunately, ten year old children can be brutally honest. ;)Legally speaking--and I'm not a lawyer, so I could easily be wrong here--since it's all related to the flag-stomping, it's all protected. If the flag-stomping law is unconstitutional, then there's no crime, and telling her son to stomp it can not be reasonably be called contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Same with bringing the kid to the protest--if the protest is legal and peaceful, there's no endangerment charge.

But it still turns my stomach to say she's in the right on this.

I think people are missing the point here, which is that the Phelps muppets need to be given a taste of their own medicine. Legal action and/or prison violence will probably only encourage them. What we need is a team of volunteers to rock up at one of their dumb protests, armed with megaphones, and start screaming: "Fag!", "Fag enabler!", "God hates you!" and other such incisive and well-considered remarks. That would both annoy them, drown out their nonsense, and provide entertainment for passers-by.

I think people are missing the point here, which is that the Phelps muppets need to be given a taste of their own medicine. Legal action and/or prison violence will probably only encourage them. What we need is a team of volunteers to rock up at one of their dumb protests, armed with megaphones, and start screaming: "Fag!", "Fag enabler!", "God hates you!" and other such incisive and well-considered remarks. That would both annoy them, drown out their nonsense, and provide entertainment for passers-by.


'God Hates the Westboro Babtist Church. But he absolutely loves fags. Especially the flamboyant ones.'

I think people are missing the point here, which is that the Phelps muppets need to be given a taste of their own medicine. Legal action and/or prison violence will probably only encourage them. What we need is a team of volunteers to rock up at one of their dumb protests, armed with megaphones, and start screaming: "Fag!", "Fag enabler!", "God hates you!" and other such incisive and well-considered remarks. That would both annoy them, drown out their nonsense, and provide entertainment for passers-by.

I'm thinking a gay pride celebration outside their "church" in Topeka. A 12-month long celebration. With hookers. And blackjack.

'God Hates the Westboro Babtist Church. But he absolutely loves fags. Especially the flamboyant ones.'

Actually, theoretically, the Westboro Baptists are promoting a gay agenda by making those that protest it look stupid and vile. They are 'fag enablers'. :)

I'm thinking a gay pride celebration outside their "church" in Topeka. A 12-month long celebration. With hookers. And blackjack.

And free copies of Harry Potter for all

Well, it shouldn't be. In an Australian context, you mess with the flag, back on the boat you go.

No, that is a load of shit. Nobody, as far as I know, has ever been charged with flag desecration; you cannot be deported for desecrating the flag.

I not only wish rape on Shirley, I wish some sort of obscure and severe torture that'll have her really confused and in pain at the same time.

Eventually, hopefully sooner rather than later, I wish her to die. Really, I do.

... I really, really, really do.

Wow, well thats... disturbing.

Wow, well thats... disturbing.

it's the class of person Szanth is. He doesn't like it when people mention God because it's rude, however he can apparently wish rape on people and be righteous.

it's the class of person Szanth is. He doesn't like it when people mention God because it's rude, however he can apparently wish rape on people and be righteous.

He seems to be very fundamentalist on that issue there I see. But I thought he hated fundamentalism? Or is it ok when he does it?

I'm thinking a gay pride celebration outside their "church" in Topeka. A 12-month long celebration. With hookers. And blackjack.

In fact, forget the gay pride celebration!

He seems to be very fundamentalist on that issue there I see. But I thought he hated fundamentalism? Or is it ok when he does it?

I am still trying to figure out double standard or hypocrisies.....

Congrats, then. You've sunk to her level. Nice company you keep.

I'll take the bullet and sink to her level for everyone if it means she'll finally get what she deserves.

Wow, well thats... disturbing.

Acknowledged.

it's the class of person Szanth is. He doesn't like it when people mention God because it's rude, however he can apparently wish rape on people and be righteous.

Yes, because that's all she's ever really done. She just mentions god every so often. Such a good christian woman, she is.


Gimme a fucking break. I'm getting tired of your bullshit today, Smunk.

He seems to be very fundamentalist on that issue there I see. But I thought he hated fundamentalism? Or is it ok when he does it?

*nod* It's okay when I do it. Obviously. I'm not just being patronizing, it really is okay. It's clear that you were making an actual point, rather than whacking yourself off in your smug technicalities. I respect that.

It's cute when people who campaign vocally against upholding the Constitution then try and use it in their own favor. If it would only affect her, I'd love to see her lose the case. But it wouldn't, so I won't wish for that. She's just as protected by the Constitution as the rest of us.

I'll take the bullet and sink to her level for everyone if it means she'll finally get what she deserves.


Does that mean you are prepared to rape her yourself?

Does that mean you are prepared to rape her yourself?

I'd need a level 9 biohazard suit, but if that's what it takes...

I'd need a level 9 biohazard suit, but if that's what it takes...

But, shes pretty ugly. I mean, shes really ugly! I really can't believe anyone would go to those lengths, even if it meant saving the world.

America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You've got to want it bad, because it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say, "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil who is standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the 'land of the free'? Then the symbol of your country cannot just be a flag. The symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest.

That's pretty much all I have to say about that.

Shirley Phelps is always right. <.<

:) that is one of my all time favorite movie quotes ever.

pretty much that entire movie is my favorite quote ever. Best line ever:

How'd you finally do it?

Do what?

Give a woman flowers and be President at the same time?

Well, it turns out I have a rose garden.

That's pretty much all I have to say about that.

:) that is one of my all time favorite movie quotes ever.

Shirley Phelps is always right. <.<

Fass would agree with you there, at least in that he agrees with her interpretation of the bible.

But, shes pretty ugly. I mean, shes really ugly! I really can't believe anyone would go to those lengths, even if it meant saving the world.

I know! But damnit if I wouldn't do it, knowing I'm doing good in the world.

Fass would agree with you there, at least in that he agrees with her interpretation of the bible.
And I agree with Fass! :eek:

I'll take what I can get, really. I want her to go to jail and be raped by the biggest, butchest, most lesbian lesbian there is. Like a man with a vagina. A very hair man with a very hairy vagina. With a strapon.

Personally I was hoping for some vigilante justice to step in and wipe them out, but I'm up for some fucked up regular justice if that's all we get.

I not only wish rape on Shirley, I wish some sort of obscure and severe torture that'll have her really confused and in pain at the same time.

Eventually, hopefully sooner rather than later, I wish her to die. Really, I do.

... I really, really, really do.

I know! But damnit if I wouldn't do it, knowing I'm doing good in the world.

Gimme a fucking break. I'm getting tired of your bullshit today, Smunk.


you sit here, not only advocating rape, but volunteering to do it.........and you are tired of my bullshit?

oh, yeah, you totally have the high ground here. :rolleyes:

you sit here, not only advocating rape, but volunteering to do it.........and you are tired of my bullshit?

oh, yeah, you totally have the high ground here. :rolleyes:

Yes, I do. While I advocate punishment, you ignore the crime, and berate me for something I'm not doing.

I know! But damnit if I wouldn't do it, knowing I'm doing good in the world.

I see, so forget all this freedom and justice shit, rape is the only solution?

Yes, I do. While I advocate punishment, you ignore the crime, and berate me for something I'm not doing.

you think punishing women for saying things you don't agree with by raping them is right? good?

you make me sick.

Yes, I do. While I advocate punishment, you ignore the crime, and berate me for something I'm not doing.

Dude--you would commit a crime to avenge something that isn't even a crime. You would rape someone because she desecrates a flag. You don't see how ridiculous that is?

Dude--you would commit a crime to avenge something that isn't even a crime. You would rape someone because she desecrates a flag. You don't see how ridiculous that is?

of course he doesn't.

I see, so forget all this freedom and justice shit, rape is the only solution?

Not the ONLY solution, just one of the ones I would like to see happen to her. Considering she and the rest of the WBCies use the law to their advantage while still maintaining absolute dick and bastard status, something's not right. The law has failed.

you think punishing women for saying things you don't agree with by raping them is right? good?

you make me sick.

Please, show me where I said this was appropriate for ALL women? In fact, show me anywhere where I've ever said this about anyone EXCEPT this one particular woman.

It's not even because she's a woman! I wish the exact same thing upon Fred Phelps!

And you make me sick for fooling yourself into believing that "saying things I don't agree with" is all she's done.

Dude--you would commit a crime to avenge something that isn't even a crime. You would rape someone because she desecrates a flag. You don't see how ridiculous that is?

Not because she desecrates the flag. Clearly you miss the point, or you don't know who she is. I don't give a flying shit about the flag, in all honesty. In my nationstate you could burn it all you wanted to until I considered the fire hazard risks of doing so, and that wasn't influenced by any kind of love for the flag itself.

of course he doesn't.

He wasn't asking you.

Yes, I do. While I advocate punishment, you ignore the crime, and berate me for something I'm not doing.

punishment being.....rape?

WTF is wrong with you?

Not the ONLY solution, just one of the ones I would like to see happen to her. Considering she and the rest of the WBCies use the law to their advantage while still maintaining absolute dick and bastard status, something's not right. The law has failed.


So you wan't to rape them for being a bunch of bastards? Isn't the fact that they have a right to free speach shown that the law has succeeded?


And you make me sick for fooling yourself into believing that "saying things I don't agree with" is all she's done.


What else has she done? Is it about her protesting at funerals or her corrupting her kids (at least temporarilly?)

Please, show me where I said this was appropriate for ALL women? In fact, show me anywhere where I've ever said this about anyone EXCEPT this one particular woman.

It's not even because she's a woman! I wish the exact same thing upon Fred Phelps!

And you make me sick for fooling yourself into believing that "saying things I don't agree with" is all she's done.

I think the fact that you think it's okay to rape anyone is sick.

what has she done exactly except practice her first amendment right to free speech?

hmm?

I don't like a thing she says, not a single thing. I am smart enough to know though that she has a right to say it, and that any attempt by me to censor her is hypocrisy.

So you wan't to rape them for being a bunch of bastards? Isn't the fact that they have a right to free speach shown that the law has succeeded?

Nope. You can disagree all you want.


What else has she done? Is it about her protesting at funerals or her corrupting her kids (at least temporarilly?)

Both, and neither are any small transgression.

I think the fact that you think it's okay to rape anyone is sick.

*shrugs* I'd prefer for someone else to do it if that makes you feel better.

what has she done exactly except practice her first amendment right to free speech?

hmm?

With a mindset like that, I'm not even going to try. Why bother?

I don't like a thing she says, not a single thing. I am smart enough to know though that she has a right to say it, and that any attempt by me to censor her is hypocrisy.

That'll be the... fourth or fifth time within the last hour or so you've called me a hipocrite. Congrats on being redundant.

She has every right in the world to say it. Doesn't mean she doesn't deserve bad things to happen to her because of what she says.

Nope. You can disagree all you want.


Nope to what? I'm guessing it's the law thing. Ok, so if freedom of speech is not a success, what is a success?


Both, and neither are any small transgression.


They are both legal. They are small transgressions anyway, compared to what other people have done. Very small.

*shrugs* I'd prefer for someone else to do it if that makes you feel better.
but if they aren't around you would do it yourself?



That'll be the... fourth or fifth time within the last hour or so you've called me a hipocrite. Congrats on being redundant.
not redundant, right.

She has every right in the world to say it. Doesn't mean she doesn't deserve bad things to happen to her because of what she says.
like getting raped? You can pretend to be enlightened all you want, but at your core you are one of those men that everyone hates, the kind who thinks that a woman's body is her own until she says or does something you don't like, then it's fair game to rape them. I mean, really, she thinks she can just have opininons and not face the consequences?

Nope to what? I'm guessing it's the law thing. Ok, so if freedom of speech is not a success, what is a success?


Freedom of speech is great. For what it was meant to do, I suppose, it's succeeded, but... I dunno what you'd call it. God? God has failed. I suppose that's what I'm getting at.


They are both legal. They are small transgressions anyway, compared to what other people have done. Very small.

I'm not a lawyer - the law means very little to me. I think I'm just cynical to the point where I doubt even a direct line in a law won't be misinterpreted and misused.

but if they aren't around you would do it yourself?


Hypothetically speaking, yes, as I said, with a level 9 biohazard suit.



not redundant, right.

Can't it be both?


like getting raped? You can pretend to be enlightened all you want, but at your core you are one of those men that everyone hates, the kind who thinks that a woman's body is her own until she says or does something you don't like, then it's fair game to rape them. I mean, really, she thinks she can just have opininons and not face the consequences?

Oh, so that's where this is coming from. You're generalizing and judging me based on a stereotype you have stuck in your head that anyone who suggests anything positive about rape in any situation to anyone at all is automatically this type of person.

That's not idiotic at all.

I especially like how you dodged the fact that I'm not even centering on this specific stupid bitch. I'm clearly just as pissed off at the rest of the WBC, yet you choose to believe that I have this opinion ONLY on the women. Great use of logic - if you keep it up you might be just as good as Fred himself one day.

Nope to what? I'm guessing it's the law thing. Ok, so if freedom of speech is not a success, what is a success.
Unwavering adherence to any opinions Szanth likes. ;)

I'll take what I can get, really. I want her to go to jail and be raped by the biggest, butchest, most lesbian lesbian there is. Like a man with a vagina. A very hair man with a very hairy vagina. With a strapon.

Mmm, good old sexual violence, used to terrorize uppity bitches. And you managed to throw in some quality homophobia and heterosexism, too!

Because what could be worse than a BUTCH LESBIAN!!! EEEWWW! And a HAIRY VAGINA!!! Those are super-gross!

Congratulations, Szanth, you just scored a win for Phelps and company. You've demonstrated exactly the fucked up ideology they are advocating. Advocating sexual violence? Check. Contempt for those who don't adhere to the heterosexist norms? Check. Gleeful fantasies about the brutal torture of your enemies? Check.

Freedom of speech is great. For what it was meant to do, I suppose, it's succeeded, but... I dunno what you'd call it. God? God has failed. I suppose that's what I'm getting at.


I see. But you're an atheist, so that doesn't really make much sense.


I'm not a lawyer - the law means very little to me. I think I'm just cynical to the point where I doubt even a direct line in a law won't be misinterpreted and misused.


So you don't care about the law, gotcha. What about the other part of my post, about it being a very small transgression compared to other things people have done.

I hope that if there is a hell, one of the events is Hitler getting raped by a pineapple like in "Little Nicky."

Sometimes, I look at Fred Phelps and think, it would be good if he went to prison and got gang raped.

If I seriously stopped though and considered it, I wouldn't wish rape on anyone. Because rape is bad. If Fred Phelps got raped and I managed to calm down from my first instinct of laughter, I would say, "Yes, the person who raped Fred Phelps should be severely punished" and then I'd feel bad for Fred Phelps. Then I'd feel bad for laughing. I think that is what would happen but maybe now, if it does happen, I'll remember this post and not get all gleeful over one of the worst crimes one person can do to another.

Oh, so that's where this is coming from. You're generalizing and judging me based on a stereotype you have stuck in your head that anyone who suggests anything positive about rape in any situation to anyone at all is automatically this type of person.

That's not idiotic at all.

Not at all. Anyone who suggests that there is anything positive about rape in any situation ever, in any circumstances is sick.

Mmm, good old sexual violence, used to terrorize uppity bitches. And you managed to throw in some quality homophobia and heterosexism, too!

Because what could be worse than a BUTCH LESBIAN!!! EEEWWW! And a HAIRY VAGINA!!! Those are super-gross!

Congratulations, Szanth, you just scored a win for Phelps and company. You've demonstrated exactly the fucked up ideology they are advocating. Advocating sexual violence? Check. Contempt for those who don't adhere to the heterosexist norms? Check. Gleeful fantasies about the brutal torture of your enemies? Check.

Grats, Bottle, on missing my point entirely. What could be a worse punishment for a vehemently anti-homosexual irritant like her but to be forced into sexual intercourse with a living stereotype of something she fears so much?

I'm rather disappointed you would disregard everything I've ever said before now to assume I'm a homophobe.

I see. But you're an atheist, so that doesn't really make much sense.


I never said I was an athiest. I'm an indignant agnostic deist.



So you don't care about the law, gotcha. What about the other part of my post, about it being a very small transgression compared to other things people have done.

Difference in opinion, maybe? What do you consider to be worse than what WBC has done?

Not at all. Anyone who suggests that there is anything positive about rape in any situation ever, in any circumstances is sick.

Then I'm sick. Get over it. God damn.

I hope that if there is a hell, one of the events is Hitler getting raped by a pineapple like in "Little Nicky."

Sometimes, I look at Fred Phelps and think, it would be good if he went to prison and got gang raped.

If I seriously stopped though and considered it, I wouldn't wish rape on anyone. Because rape is bad. If Fred Phelps got raped and I managed to calm down from my first instinct of laughter, I would say, "Yes, the person who raped Fred Phelps should be severely punished" and then I'd feel bad for Fred Phelps. Then I'd feel bad for laughing. I think that is what would happen but maybe now, if it does happen, I'll remember this post and not get all gleeful over one of the worst crimes one person can do to another.

Which is exactly why I would wish it upon Phelps. It's one of the worst possible things I can imagine happening to her. The difference is that I'm not as merciful or forgiving as you, so I really do wish it on her.


EDIT: Though I feel I should clarify. I do wish it upon her, but my current mood is possibly encouraging me to feel that way. Maybe tomorrow I'll feel more forgiving and will wish her peace instead, but right now I'm, as Nazz earlier stated, vengeful.

I never said I was an athiest. I'm an indignant agnostic deist.


I see.


Difference in opinion, maybe? What do you consider to be worse than what WBC has done?

Rape? Murder? Torture? Genocide? I could go on...

I see.



Rape? Murder? Torture? Genocide? I could go on...

Genocide, yes.

Everything else targets just one person at a time, and to that person and the people it affects it is the most horrible thing it could happen to, but I'm considering the larger picture and I believe that they've damaged society as a whole. Perhaps I'm taking the slight possibility of intellectual osmosis a bit farther than I mean to, but I feel a little more stupid every time I see one of them speak or hold up a sign.

I really, really, really do not like these people. I can not stress that enough.

I've had to consciously remind myself not to Godwin out in this thread.

Oh, so that's where this is coming from. You're generalizing and judging me based on a stereotype you have stuck in your head that anyone who suggests anything positive about rape in any situation to anyone at all is automatically this type of person.

anyone who thinks there is anything positive about rape is a sicko in my book.

anyone who thinks rape is a "fair punishment" for anything is deserving of my contempt.

Then I'm sick. Get over it. God damn.

yes, you are. And fortunatly for all of us your influence over the body politic is limited to pseudo masturbatory rape fantasies on an internet forum.

But in this very limited case, I feel I have to. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19080064/)


And she's right, so far as I understand the concept of protected protest and free speech. I think she's a chickenshit for not standing on the flag herself instead of having her son do it, but the principle Larry Flynt so famously put forward is true: "If the First Amendment will protect a scumbag like me, then it will protect all of you."

Damn it Nazz.....I already took a shower.....:p

anyone who thinks there is anything positive about rape is a sicko in my book.

anyone who thinks rape is a "fair punishment" for anything is deserving of my contempt.

Well, you're a christian. You believe non-christians are going to hell, where they will be beaten and tortured, and yes, possibly raped for all eternity.

So tell me again, what's deserving of that?

yes, you are. And fortunatly for all of us your influence over the body politic is limited to pseudo masturbatory rape fantasies on an internet forum.
Masturbatory rape fantasies and Shirley Phelps are two sentences that should never cross paths.

yes, you are. And fortunatly for all of us your influence over the body politic is limited to pseudo masturbatory rape fantasies on an internet forum.

Methinks you're a sicko as well, considering you would believe that I fantasize about this happening.

Welcome to the club.

Fass would agree with you there, at least in that he agrees with her interpretation of the bible.

Of course I agree with her interpretation of the Bible. Hers is honest to what is written in it, which is far more than can be said about these "Christians" who read the Bible to ignore things in it.

Genocide, yes.

Everything else targets just one person at a time, and to that person and the people it affects it is the most horrible thing it could happen to, but I'm considering the larger picture and I believe that they've damaged society as a whole.

hah! What a load of bullshit. They've actually made it better, by making that viewpoint look so damn stupid.


Perhaps I'm taking the slight possibility of intellectual osmosis a bit farther than I mean to, but I feel a little more stupid every time I see one of them speak or hold up a sign.

Yeah, you'd be taking it to far there.


I really, really, really do not like these people. I can not stress that enough.


But theres a difference between that, and wanting to rape them.

Well, you're a christian. You believe non-christians are going to hell, where they will be beaten and tortured, and yes, possibly raped for all eternity.

So tell me again, what's deserving of that?

:rolleyes:

Well, you're a christian. You believe non-christians are going to hell, where they will be beaten and tortured, and yes, possibly raped for all eternity.

So tell me again, what's deserving of that?

I have to commend you on your point. Fortunately, I don't agree with Christians or you, but you do make a good point against them.

Of course I agree with her interpretation of the Bible. Hers is honest to what is written in it, which is far more than can be said about these "Christians" who read the Bible to ignore things in it.

'Ere we go again.

I'll say this, why must you believe in the alleged infallibility of the Bible to be a christian? Even though such infallibility is not supported by the Bible itself, at least not by Jesus.

Well, you're a christian. You believe non-christians are going to hell, where they will be beaten and tortured, and yes, possibly raped for all eternity.

So tell me again, what's deserving of that?

I don't think shes the fire and brimstone torture type of Christian.

Methinks you're a sicko as well, considering you would believe that I fantasize about this happening.

I believe you already have (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12743289&postcount=10)

Fools :headbang: This is how the Phelps' make their money. They do something insanely offensive to someone but is protected under the Constitution, get arrested, and when they're released sue whomever they can for as much as they can.

Why do you think so many of them are lawyers?
Indeed, which is despite all my objections I hope they lose.

Well, you're a christian. You believe non-christians are going to hell, where they will be beaten and tortured, and yes, possibly raped for all eternity.

So tell me again, what's deserving of that?

I believe many people will die horribly and painfully in car accidents every year. I do not believe that they all deserve it.

Believing that something WILL occur is not the same as believing that those who have it occur to them deserve it.

I have to commend you on your point. Fortunately, I don't agree with Christians or you, but you do make a good point against them.

ehh, as I said, believing that something will happen does not mean the same as believing that they deserve it. In fact, the whole missionary movement could be attributed to the belief in that people do NOT deserve it, and an effort to spare them from it.

'Ere we go again.

You brought me into this, so...

I'll say this, why must you believe in the alleged infallibility of the Bible to be a christian?

Smunkee says so with her "inerrancy of the Bible", so ask her.

Even though such infallibility is not supported by the Bible itself, at least not by Jesus.

Nothing in the Bible is "supported by Jesus", except of course for the OT.

Not because she desecrates the flag. Clearly you miss the point, or you don't know who she is. I don't give a flying shit about the flag, in all honesty. In my nationstate you could burn it all you wanted to until I considered the fire hazard risks of doing so, and that wasn't influenced by any kind of love for the flag itself.
Oh, I know who she is, but it's flag desecration that she's been charged with, and since you were talking about her being raped in prison... I don't make up what you or others around here say. I just respond to it.

And let me add--no matter how loathsome she or her rhetoric is, rape is never an applicable punishment in my eyes. Not even for a rapist.

Smunkee says so with her "inerrancy of the Bible", so ask her.


She does?


Nothing in the Bible is "supported by Jesus", except of course for the OT.

Not the OT, the commandments. There was no "old testament" during Jesus' time.

She does?

I recall in that very thread where we discussed this that she used it as one of her criteria for who's a Christian.

Not the OT, the commandments. There was no "old testament" during Jesus' time.

Torah, Neviim, Kethuvim = Tanakh = The OT. Guess what? The Tanakh did exist in Jesus' time, all of the books in it predate him by centuries, and he supported them. "Not one dot from the law shall perish..." and according to Luke 24:44–49: Jesus used "the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms ... the scriptures". So, the only thing in the Bible "supported" by Jesus is the OT, and the Phelpses sure do love their OT. They're more Christ-like than most other Christians, that way.

I recall in that very thread where we discussed this that she used it as one of her criteria for who's a Christian.
no, of who is a fundamentalist.

and innerrancy has nothing to do with whether or not everything in the Bible is taken literally.

hah! What a load of bullshit. They've actually made it better, by making that viewpoint look so damn stupid.



Yeah, you'd be taking it to far there.



But theres a difference between that, and wanting to rape them.

I could make a murderer's viewpoint look REAL stupid, but that wouldn't make me any less of an asshole murderer.

I don't WANT to rape them - I want them to be punished. In some form or another, I want the pain and suffering they've inflicted upon others to come back and haunt them. That was just one example. Your fault if you get hung up on it.

:rolleyes:

No answer, I see.

I believe you already have (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12743289&postcount=10)

So by describing a situation I think would adequately serve an equilibrium of pain and suffering upon her as she's done unto others, I fantasize about it. Right.

I don't think shes the fire and brimstone torture type of Christian.

*shrugs* Surely hell is worse than anything on earth, correct? It doesn't matter what form that takes.

I have to commend you on your point. Fortunately, I don't agree with Christians or you, but you do make a good point against them.

Hai.

I believe many people will die horribly and painfully in car accidents every year. I do not believe that they all deserve it.

Believing that something WILL occur is not the same as believing that those who have it occur to them deserve it.

Missing the point entirely. It doesn't matter if they deserve it - it happens. And whatever happens to them on earth is, apparently, not anything compared to what can happen to someone in hell under the judgement of god.

She does?



Not the OT, the commandments. There was no "old testament" during Jesus' time.

Uh, the torah?

No answer, I see.
you wish I address your ridiculous strawman?

you wish I address your ridiculous strawman?

Well, I'm apparently a horrible, sick, twisted person for wishing this upon someone that I feel deserves it.

So do you feel the same about god?

Well, I'm apparently a horrible, sick, twisted person for wishing this upon someone that I feel deserves it.
yes, you are.

So do you feel the same about god?
no, because God isn't as sick and twisted as you are.

Torah, Neviim, Kethuvim = Tanakh = The OT. Guess what? The Tanakh did exist in Jesus' time, all of the books in it predate him by centuries, and he supported them. "Not one dot from the law shall perish..."

Not all the books were seen as infallible at the time, the Torah was really the only source that you should be compelled to obey, rather then other books written by other prophets which are in the old testament. When Jesus refers to "the law" he is refering to the commandments.


and according to Luke 24:44–49: Jesus used "the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms ... the scriptures". So, the only thing in the Bible "supported" by Jesus is the OT, and the Phelpses sure do love their OT. They're more Christ-like than most other Christians, that way.

Jesus said unto them, "These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me." Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures, And said unto them, "Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

As you can see, this is concerning the prophecies of him in scripture, rather than anything else to do with what you should obey or historically believe.

no, because God isn't as sick and twisted as you are.

No, he'll just send me to hell because I deserve it, and we all know how much worse I am than the Phelps woman.

yes, you are.


no, because God isn't as sick and twisted as you are.

Well, if he does the same or worse to people who've done much less than the WBC has...


Is this, maybe, possibly, a double-standard I'm seeing? Maybe a sign of a hipocrite?

Maybe you're seeing how shitty it is to call someone that?

Not all the books were seen as infallible at the time, the Torah was really the only source that you should be compelled to obey, rather then other books written by other prophets which are in the old testament. When Jesus refers to "the law" he is refering to the commandments.





As you can see, this is concerning the prophecies of him in scripture, rather than anything else to do with what you should obey or historically believe.

Didn't Jesus technically not fit the prophecies of the messiah, not being from the bloodline of David? This is just something I heard a while ago on this forum, was never confirmed or denied as far as I know.

Well, if he does the same or worse to people who've done much less than the WBC has...


Is this, maybe, possibly, a double-standard I'm seeing? Maybe a sign of a hipocrite?

Maybe you're seeing how shitty it is to call someone that?

you are being irrational. You are also being illogical.

you set up the worst possible situation of hell to attack so that you can feel good about advocating rape.

it's a strawman.

you misrepresent my position so that you can attack it.

I am not being a hypocrite, I don't have a double standard, and I don't wish rape on people I disagree with.

you are being irrational. You are also being illogical.

you set up the worst possible situation of hell to attack so that you can feel good about advocating rape.

it's a strawman.

you misrepresent my position so that you can attack it.

I am not being a hypocrite, I don't have a double standard, and I don't wish rape on people I disagree with.

No, but you condone the punishment of it on those that god deems to be worthy of such a punishment, correct?

Again, it doesn't matter if it's rape or torture or whatever, because whatever's in hell is always considered worse than the worst thing you can feel on earth. For eternity.

I'm not misrepresenting anything. There is no "worst possible situation of hell" - it's HELL. God damn. Pun intended.

No, but you condone the punishment of it on those that god deems to be worthy of such a punishment, correct?
condone? that would imply I had some sort of choice in the matter.

Again, it doesn't matter if it's rape or torture or whatever, because whatever's in hell is always considered worse than the worst thing you can feel on earth. For eternity.
not necessarily. it's not punishment anyway, it's a choice you make.

I'm not misrepresenting anything. There is no "worst possible situation of hell" - it's HELL. God damn. Pun intended.
only if you pick the simplest theological standing.

condone? that would imply I had some sort of choice in the matter.

Well, you choose to be a christian. You choose to follow a god that would exact such punishment upon people.


not necessarily. it's not punishment anyway, it's a choice you make.

Riiight.


only if you pick the simplest theological standing.

So there's a christian theological standing in which being in hell is, in any way, NOT as bad as being on earth? Please, enlighten me.

Hey Nazz,
Think of it as Shirley agreeing with you so you don't feel so dirty.

Hey Nazz,
Think of it as Shirley agreeing with you so you don't feel so dirty.

Eh, still... that's like (GODWIN!) Hitler sending you a postcard with Good Job written on it.

When Jesus refers to "the law" he is refering to the commandments.

Only because you can't stomach them and would like to believe so.

As you can see, this is concerning the prophecies of him in scripture, rather than anything else to do with what you should obey or historically believe.

It must be nice to be able to read things you wish were written instead of what actually is.

Eh, still... that's like (GODWIN!) Hitler sending you a postcard with Good Job written on it.

but its better to receive a postcard from Hitler saying "good job on your grades" than you sending a postcard to Hitler saying "good job on those concentration camps"

but its better to receive a postcard from Hitler saying good job on your grades than you sending a poastcard to Hitler saying "good job on those concentration camps"

Sig'd.

Only because you can't stomach them and would like to believe so.


I don't wish anything. I'm indifferent, I can only assume that when Jesus is refering to the law he is refering to the law of the commandments. Because all his other teachings about the law are refuting the law made by the pharisees, so you must conclude that he is refering to the commandments.


It must be nice to be able to read things you wish were written instead of what actually is.

How is that wrong?: "that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me"

YAY!

but fix my spelling mistake please :p

Corrected. :3

Sig'd.

YAY!

but fix my spelling mistake please :p

I don't wish anything. I'm indifferent, I can only assume that when Jesus is refering to the law he is refering to the law of the commandments. Because all his other teachings about the law are refuting the law made by the pharisees, so you must conclude that he is refering to the commandments.

Must? Have you met Jack Shitt's niece? Noe Shitt Sherlock? No? It’s probably because you don’t know Jack Shitt. (http://jack.zunino.net/knowjack.htm)

How is that wrong?: "that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me"

Look, ma'! I can use boldies, too!

Must? Have you met Jack Shitt's niece? Noe Shitt Sherlock? No? It’s probably because you don’t know Jack Shitt. (http://jack.zunino.net/knowjack.htm)


Well, I have mixed responses. That of being insulted and that of hilarity :p I do know Jack Shitt now anyway.


Look, ma'! I can use boldies, too!

But the part I bolded shows that the things that must be fullfilled must be concerning him.

But the part I bolded shows that the things that must be fullfilled must be concerning him.

And the parts that deal with him are, in his own subsequent words even, not about him reversing the law. I know, I know, you like to pretend "the law" just means "oh, certain parts of the law I agree with and make Christianity come across as somehow cosier".