Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Eagler on May 15, 2007, 12:57:48 PM
-
this should make your day for some of you
Television Evangelist Falwell Dies at 73 (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8P4V3T00&show_article=1)
-
My Momma always told me if I couldn't say anything nice about someone to say nothing at all.
I have nothing to say.
-
Originally posted by rpm
My Momma always told me if I couldn't say anything nice about someone to say nothing at all.
I have nothing to say.
:D
-
Now if we can lose about 5,000 more like him.....and twice that number in lawyers..... we'll be onto something.
-
Originally posted by rpm
My Momma always told me if I couldn't say anything nice about someone to say nothing at all.
Too bad Falwell didn't live by the same rule.
-
Originally posted by Mickey1992
Too bad Falwell didn't live by the same rule.
Nor RPM
Me? I don't live by rules other than Nature calls
-
* Supported segregation
* Supported Apartheid
* Stated that when the Apocalypse comes, the Anti-Christ will of course be a Jewish male
* Blamed 9/11 on feminists and other groups he didn't care for
Eagler, it didn't "make my day", but glossing over stuff like the above is disingenuous at best. Any public figure will attract criticism, and he certainly had his fair share.
-
I'm with rpm on this one.
-
My parents must have raised me wrong.
Falwell was a giant sweetheart.
Good riddance.
-
I was taught to say something good when someone dies...
To quote Moms Mabley..
He's dead. Good.
-
Wait three days. He'll be back.
-
I liked Falwell, always have. Sorry he is gone... My best to his friends and family.
-
Originally posted by Irwink!
Wait three days. He'll be back.
If he does... Tinky Winky will be waiting...
(http://www.worth1000.com/entries/274500/274694mRuQ_w.jpg)
EDIT
Pulled the second... but I still think the first is funny... If only because the idea of Tinky Winky fighting the devil cracks me up.
-
it comes as no surprise to this poster that the leftist on this board and probably everywhere else would express these bitter remarks regarding the passing of a fellow human being.
-
Wow.
Some of you guys still manage to surprise me.
Clearly "tact" wasnt something all were taught.
-
Originally posted by storch
it comes as no surprise to this poster that the leftist on this board and probably everywhere else would express these bitter remarks regarding the passing of a fellow human being.
As apposed to the bitter remarks he's made in regards to the passing of nearly 40 Million human beings? (estimated total AIDS deaths world wide, by the World Health Organization)
I'm sorry, but he was no model for love, charity, and forgiveness.
And I quote :
If you're not a born-again Christian, you're a failure as a human being.
God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve.
-- Rev Jerry Falwell, blaming civil libertarians, feminists, homosexuals, and abortion rights supporters for the terrorist attacks of Tuesday, September 11, 2001, to which Rev Pat Robertson agreed, quoted from John F Harris, "God Gave US 'What We Deserve,' Falwell Says," The Washington Post (September 14, 2001)
AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.
-- Jerry Falwell
The Jews are returning to their land of unbelief. They are spiritually blind and desperately in need of their Messiah and Savior.
-- Jerry Falwell, Listen, America!
AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals. To oppose it would be like an Israelite jumping in the Red Sea to save one of Pharoah's chariotters.
-- Rev Jerry Falwell
“Textbooks are Soviet propaganda”
-- Rev Jerry Falwell
***********************
Please forgive me if I don't miss him...
-
I'm conservative..... falwell wont be missed.
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Clearly "tact" wasnt something all were taught.
I will say nothing in regard to his death even though it is so tempting. I think that before you criticize these guys for not having any tact or not caring for the passing of a fellow human being then maybe you should realize the type of tactless comments the man was capable of spewing.
Jerry Falwell commented on the cause of 9-11 two days after it happened.
"I know that I'll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way -- all of them who have tried to secularize America -- I point the finger in their face and say you helped this happen".
Falwell's contempt for his fellow human beings will continue to trigger similar responses like the ones seen here.
Oh i can't help it.....So Falwell gave an interview with Christiane Amanpour a week ago. Go to the bottom of the page where it says Falwell wanted 20 more years then click on the video.
I Need 20 more years. (http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/05/15/jerry.falwell/index.html)
If there is a God, then he has an awesome sense of humor.
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Wow.
Some of you guys still manage to surprise me.
Clearly "tact" wasnt something all were taught.
Hey we are all just happy the **** got what he wanted, besides that the guy swindled more people than Enron. He was in the Jimmy and Tammy Fay Baker "Praise Jesus Club" whom managed to get millions upon millions out of suckers and then went bankrupt.
-
Good Riddance!
-
Originally posted by crockett
Hey we are all just happy the **** got what he wanted, besides that the guy swindled more people than Enron. He was in the Jimmy and Tammy Fay Baker "Praise Jesus Club" whom managed to get millions upon millions out of suckers and then went bankrupt.
there is no way you can truly be so mis-informed.
-
I aint saying I liked the guy, his comments certainly weren't nice
But jumping up and down celebrating his death is just a bit much.
That's all Im saying.
-
Originally posted by storch
there is no way you can truly be so mis-informed.
You very selectively quoted the last bit about the club, your thoughts on his pro-seggregation, pro-apartheid etc comments would be of interest.
-
Originally posted by indy007
My parents must have raised me wrong.
Falwell was a giant sweetheart.
Good riddance.
:rofl
-
personally I have a deep mistrust of all clergy intially and especially the media savvy ones. I didn't know falwell personally but a friend who attended liberty, played football there and as a senior was one of his "bodyguards" and knew him about as well as one man can know another felt that falwell walked the walk.
what does anyone's opinion of a person have to do with the callousness some of you exhibit at the time of a person's passing? I mean even if it's a trainwreck of life the person is no longer here why not just let it go irrespective of who or what the person was in life? statements of that nature display the deepest form pussillanimity, the person who does stuff like that is coward.
-
Since you're responding to me, I'd appreciate an example of my callousness and cowardice.
Thanks!
-
your response was not callous.
-
Falwell also did a lot of good things in the time he was given on this earth. To many times folk focus on the things they perceive to be bad about someone and forget all about the good things folks accomplish.
From the link in the original post.
The fundamentalist church that Falwell started in an abandoned bottling plant in 1956 grew into a religious empire that includes the 22,000-member Thomas Road Baptist Church, the "Old Time Gospel Hour" carried on television stations around the country and 7,700-student Liberty University. He built Christian elementary schools, homes for unwed mothers and a home for alcoholics.
He also founded Liberty University in Lynchburg, which began as Lynchburg Baptist College in 1971.
-
Originally posted by storch
there is no way you can truly be so mis-informed.
He raised 20 million for the defunt Jim and Tammy Fay Bakker's "Praise The Lord" (PTL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PTL) ) that was part of Jim Bakker's scams.
Jerry Falwell took it over after Jim Bakker's name became mud and ran it untill it went defunk.
PTL Victims to Receive $6.54 Each
Lawyers take $2.5 million of $3.7 million settlement.
The 165,000 people who gave $1,000 to Jim Bakker's planned Heritage U.S.A. resort in return for promised four-day vacation stays will receive just $6.54 each.
On Aug. 23, 1991, after the second and final day of his re-sentencing hearing, Bakker's original 45-year sentence was reduced to 18 years.
-
Originally posted by storch
there is no way you can truly be so mis-informed.
I don't know Storch. From reading the postings, it's pretty obvious they missed his 50+ years of dedication, and devotion to the Christian cause, only to land, as liberals do, on the bad, and misconceptions they were indoctrinated with in the first place...
and this PTL carp? Blame the lawyers, for the disbursment of funds... not Jim Falwell.
-
Originally posted by Odee
I don't know Storch. From reading the postings, it's pretty obvious they missed his 50+ years of dedication, and devotion to the Christian cause, only to land, as liberals do, on the bad, and misconceptions they were indoctrinated with in the first place...
and this PTL carp? Blame the lawyers, for the disbursment of funds... not Jim Falwell.
Dedication is all it takes for a WTG? I can think of plenty of people in history that were "dedicated" to their particular causes - and not all of them are remembered fondly.
Isn't it ironic that Falwell's dedication to the "Christian Cause" led him to make so many unchristian statements? It's sad actually.
So much for loving the sinner and hating the sin... :rolleyes:
And to be clear... I'm not jumping up and down that the guy is dead... but I will own up and agree that my first post was pretty callous. I never cared for the man and how he went about fighting his battles. I said so when he was alive, and I see no reason to stop saying so now that he has passed away.
-
Okay... so I giggled... just a bit.
I'm a horrible human being.
-
I'm accountable for my acts as we all are individually and only the Lord knows the individual heart. I will tell you to your face or in print what I have to say while you are yet living. after you are gone I have nothing to say about you that would be considered bad by me.
the people who make derogatory statements about the dead are cowards. that perception applies to even osama bin ladin at the time of his passing. I might curse him now but I won't if he is dead, there is no point to it.
I was equally appalled at the commentary I read on this BBS concerning ana nicole smith at the time of her demise.
some of you guys need a good asswhipping it seems you have long been deprived of one.
-
There's nothing special about being dead.
-
there you have the classic cowardly response.
-
How's the view from that high horse?
-
Originally posted by storch
after you are gone I have nothing to say about you that would be considered bad by me.
that perception applies to even osama bin ladin at the time of his passing.
:huh
-
much better than the one some people have while scratching with the hens I suppose.
-
Interesting...
The Reverend Jerry Falwell and I were arch enemies for fifteen years. We became involved in a lawsuit concerning First Amendment rights and Hustler magazine. Without question, this was my most important battle - the l988 Hustler Magazine, Inc., v. Jerry Falwell case,where after millions of dollars and much deliberation, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in my favor.
My mother always told me that no matter how much you dislike a person, when you meet them face to face you will find characteristics about them that you like. Jerry Falwell was a perfect example of that. I hated everything he stood for, but after meeting him in person, years after the trial, Jerry Falwell and I became good friends. He would visit me in California and we would debate together on college campuses. I always appreciated his sincerity even though I knew what he was selling and he knew what I was selling.
The most important result of our relationship was the landmark decision from the Supreme Court that made parody protected speech, and the fact that much of what we see on television and hear on the radio today is a direct result of my having won that now famous case which Falwell played such an important role in.
- Larry Flynt
-
Every now and then there is an Ultimate Song to fit the occasion (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QL3C_eAtlS0)
-
<---SUPERJEW
-
Originally posted by rpm
Interesting...
wher'd you get that quote RPM?
:confused:
-
Things I was taught....
Never laugh at the dead.
Never kick a good man down, especially if he's dead.
You are NOT GOD, you have no right to judge others.
Treat others as you would want to be treated, in Life and in Death.
If you are without sin then pick up and cast the first stone, otherwise STFU.
Change shoes with the one you ridicule... How far can you walk?
No matter what you felt of Falwell or anyone else, who are you to Judge?
Get this, Soon someday you'll be where he is now... Passed over to the other side...Who Judges YOU then?
Mac
-
Originally posted by storch
I'm accountable for my acts as we all are individually and only the Lord knows the individual heart. I will tell you to your face or in print what I have to say while you are yet living. after you are gone I have nothing to say about you that would be considered bad by me.
the people who make derogatory statements about the dead are cowards. that perception applies to even osama bin ladin at the time of his passing. I might curse him now but I won't if he is dead, there is no point to it.
I was equally appalled at the commentary I read on this BBS concerning ana nicole smith at the time of her demise.
some of you guys need a good asswhipping it seems you have long been deprived of one.
Storch... you have some interesting takes on things. I'll give you that. But I have to disagree with your plan to cease all discussion of an individual after they've gone (but only if you mention the negative aspects of their lives)... that is pure folly.
The life of the Rev. Falwell should be remembered... the good, and the bad... if only for others to learn from him. This was a man that brought together hundreds of thousands of people... but to do so he alienated millions. Why? How? And to what end? In order to do that people need to evaluate who he was, warts and all. To do so is a normal reaction to any significant event, and no it is not cowardly.
If anything, clamming up and denying who you are and what you believe just because someone has passed is cowardly... because clearly such a person doesn't have the stones to stand up and be accounted for.
-
Hmmm, I wonder if there would be any nagative posts if one of the Clintons died...
nah!
-
"how dare you criticize hitler...he's dead!" - someone c. 1945
-
He lived badly.
-
Originally posted by JB88
wher'd you get that quote RPM?
:confused:
I Googled Falwell Flynt. It was in a Cali paper.
-
mucho gracias senior rpm.
-
por nada :)
-
maybe they can get the teli-tubbies to be the pole bearers:rofl
-
Originally posted by DYNAMITE
Storch... you have some interesting takes on things. I'll give you that. But I have to disagree with your plan to cease all discussion of an individual after they've gone (but only if you mention the negative aspects of their lives)... that is pure folly.
The life of the Rev. Falwell should be remembered... the good, and the bad... if only for others to learn from him. This was a man that brought together hundreds of thousands of people... but to do so he alienated millions. Why? How? And to what end? In order to do that people need to evaluate who he was, warts and all. To do so is a normal reaction to any significant event, and no it is not cowardly.
If anything, clamming up and denying who you are and what you believe just because someone has passed is cowardly... because clearly such a person doesn't have the stones to stand up and be accounted for.
I don't believe I made any mention to analyzing and even holding up scrutiny any and all of the man's body of work. what I find disturbing are the ad hominem leveled at a dead guy. I'm sure 90% of the posters on this board would not say face to face or if they could be held accountable in the slightest way type what they type. I'm one of the estimated 10% that will. therein lies the difference.
-
I'm going to pay as much attention to his passing as I did to him in life, which is none at all.
-
yep... never paid much attention to the guy while he was alive. Won't miss him at all now that he is gone.
lazs
-
Originally posted by storch
the people who make derogatory statements about the dead are cowards. that perception applies to even osama bin ladin at the time of his passing. I might curse him now but I won't if he is dead, there is no point to it.
I don't care if he's dead or alive. Whether or not there's an eletrical signal firing around in his brain holds no bearing to me. Pushing for religious based morality legislation makes you a sweetheartbag. Blaming terrorism on gays & abortion makes you a sweetheartbag. If you support seggregation, you're a sweetheartbag. If you think a "moral majority" knows what's best for everybody else, you're a sweetheartbag. Seagoon is a real Christian. This guy was a sweetheartbag televangelist.
If you're a sweetheartbag, and I get the opportunity, I'll tell you to your face. I'm a big boy. I'll take responsibility for anything I say.
some of you guys need a good asswhipping it seems you have long been deprived of one.
If you think I should be beat up for having an opinion and no tact... well... bring it. Next con. Plenty of gym's in Dallas. You can pick, mats, ring, or cage. I'll make the calls and set it up.
Loser buys the first round after the EMTs release us.
-
some of you guys need a good asswhipping it seems you have long been deprived of one.
The mark of healthy Christian:aok
-
Originally posted by storch
I don't believe I made any mention to analyzing and even holding up scrutiny any and all of the man's body of work. what I find disturbing are the ad hominem leveled at a dead guy. I'm sure 90% of the posters on this board would not say face to face or if they could be held accountable in the slightest way type what they type. I'm one of the estimated 10% that will. therein lies the difference.
Well maybe it should be 11% because I'll stand up and let you know what I think.
But you make a point Storch, not everyone is willing to own their words... but I bet there are more than you think.
-
Is this the bloke with the 'US Army = studmuffingots' and 'Thank God for IEDs' placcards?
If not, he sounds very similar.
-
Nope, that's a silly person named Fred Phelps.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Phelps
-
That's him. Although all these religious fanatics blur into one to be fair. Seems to be plenty around, these days.
-
Fanatics know no common uniform. They come from all walks of life. Christian, Muslim, Atheist, Republican, Democrat, etc etc etc.
That's why some of the broad-brushing around here ("the a-rabs hate our freedoms! nuke 'em! they're all just a bunch of ji-had-ists!") is so frustrating.
-
Rest in piece, one of the few who stood against the moral corruption destroying the fabric our democracy rests on.
-
Originally posted by storch
I'm sure 90% of the posters on this board would not say face to face or if they could be held accountable in the slightest way type what they type. I'm one of the estimated 10% that will. therein lies the difference.
I'm pretty sure you'd be surprised at how wrong you are about this. It is apparent to me that most of the posters here are very passionate about the subjects they post about here and I'd bet that most discuss IRL just as they post here.
Thinking that you are among a small percentage of posters who believe and live by their tone and content of their posts is at most speculative. Since you obviously don't know this as fact it's nothing more than an attack meant to prop up your own position in this argument and a weak one at that.
Saying people need an asswhipping for expressing their opinions in a forum designed for just that is another attack that's most often used from a position of weakness, as in this case.
-
yes well you are wrong about lots of other stuff too.
-
The fire is dieing down a little. Shouldn't we throw on a little J Vernon Mcgee. Throw on a little Rev Ike. Throw on a few dead Popes. Just throw everyone who lived by their convictions and weren't mainstream liberal on the fire. Lets get this grave ritual smoking. Dance.
In the thousands of hours of sermons Falwell delivered, if you can't find anything positive to take, you are indeed an idiot. You are the definition of an idiot. No one preaches for thousands of hours, decades, without saying stupid things. No one preaches for thousands of hours, decades, without saying great things. Where's the list of the good stuff? Hidden? Why?
-
Shouldn't we throw on a little J Vernon Mcgee.
Christopher Hitchens (esteemed atheist) said of Falwell and his death, "If they gave him an enema he could be buried in a matchbox."
How's that?
-
Originally posted by Dadano
Christopher Hitchens (esteemed atheist) said of Falwell and his death, "If they gave him an enema he could be buried in a matchbox."
How's that?
?
Can you think of two things worth reading by Karl Marx?
Can you think of two things worth reading by L Ron Hubbard?
Can you think of two things worth reading by Hunter S. Thompson (hey DoKa Gonzo :))?
Can you think of two things worth reading by Jerry Falwell?
A bonafide idiot can't find substance in a life of writing. That's just a fact.
-
I KNOW what a steamed lobster is; they're really good.
I'm wondering what the heck an "esteemed atheist" is.
Who esteems an atheist? Only other steaming atheists, as far as I can tell.
Not much to build esteem upon.
-
There's nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge.
-
I think the message here is that Evangelical preachers, fire and brimstone preachers have been declared politically incorrect and should be vilified upon death.
-
Originally posted by mandingo
There's nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge.
And I knew we'd get into that rotten stuff pretty soon.
-
One toke over the line, Sweet Jesus, one toke over the line........
WOOOOOOOOOOO WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!
-
Originally posted by BTW
?
Can you think of two things worth reading by L Ron Hubbard?
Battlefield Earth was pretty good when I read it 15 yrs ago.
-
Did abit of reading up on him just now as i had only really heard his name before but had no deeper knowledge of him.
From what i have read i think ill just say.... Better late then never.
LONG LIVE THE TELETUBBIES :lol
-
A man's legacy is made of many things, but how he treats others is a decent part of it.
For a man who's life SHOULD have been filled with understanding and deeper thought....he sure failed on a national stage on that.
Sadly, he lost the moral respect of many Americans by saying and doing things that embarassed himself.
68ROX
-
Originally posted by 68ROX
A man's legacy is made of many things, but how he treats others is a decent part of it.
For a man who's life SHOULD have been filled with understanding and deeper thought....he sure failed on a national stage on that.
Sadly, he lost the moral respect of many Americans by saying and doing things that embarassed himself.
68ROX
*sighs* If you look at his life time... You'll see he didn't start losing this "respect" until he was in his 60s ...pre 9-11
I still say if you can't find something good to say about his lifetime's achievements, then IMO you are blind, deaf, illiterate and anti-social.
How much good have the self ordained Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton done for their people, let alone anyone else? zip... nada... zilch. Wonder what the boards will look like after those two spinmeisters kick off?
-
Originally posted by Odee
How much good have the self ordained Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton done for their people, let alone anyone else? zip... nada... zilch. Wonder what the boards will look like after those two spinmeisters kick off?
From me? The same contempt i have towards Falwell. Moreso Jackson than Sharpton however. They are both self-indulgent, but i give sharpton some credit for coming out and having controversial views(most of which i disagree) and having the balls to stand by them. Jackson, well what can i say about jackson? He needs to volunteer himself to go to some conflict in the world to try and fix it for our government. One of these days he is gonna volunteer himself to fix the wrong conflict and we're gonna let him go. Hey, you think maybe he can fix Iraq? Shall we send him? :aok
Im surprised noone has thrown this name around.....Pat Robertson anyone?
-
Originally posted by Odee
How much good have the self ordained Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton done for their people, let alone anyone else?
lol, you just compared him to Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, he just flipped in his grave
-
mission earth was a good series by l ron hubbard.. I thought it was pretty funny and engrossing.
falwell did one thing.. he changed the idea of "religious person" for a lot of protestants who hated catholics and jews with a passion. He was a uniter in that respect. He made christians a much more formidable political entity.. That is one of the reasons the lefties hated him so much.
as for me... I won't miss him much in any case. Real fanatical religious types are just as dangerous to my individualism as are real fanatic lefties or any people who think that they need to "join" some group or movement and then make everyone do what they think is the right thing.
I don't want to be told what I can do in my bedroom with another adult and I don't want to have to wear seatbelts or helmets and I don't want to be told what words are banned or what kind of guns I can own.
lazs
-
Falwell used to regularly sit in on security breifings with Pres Reagan...should make u think.
I guess someone else is going to have to hand out "A Christian Guide To Politics" at sermons come next election..
-
falwell did one thing.. he changed the idea of "religious person" for a lot of protestants who hated catholics and jews with a passion. He was a uniter in that respect. He made christians a much more formidable political entity.. That is one of the reasons the lefties hated him so much.
Yea, that's respectable. Organize the hate and give it a voice politically. Good stuff:aok
-
Originally posted by Odee
I still say if you can't find something good to say about his lifetime's achievements, then IMO you are blind, deaf, illiterate and anti-social.
Say something good about Adolf Hitler. ;)
-
In the thousands of hours of sermons Falwell delivered, if you can't find anything positive to take, you are indeed an idiot. You are the definition of an idiot. No one preaches for thousands of hours, decades, without saying stupid things. No one preaches for thousands of hours, decades, without saying great things. Where's the list of the good stuff? Hidden? Why?
Well said imo.
Yea, that's respectable. Organize the hate and give it a voice politically. Good stuff
If you actually believe that Falwell hated people, then you don't understand Christianity at all. Falwell was a deeply religious man that stood by his convictions no matter how much criticism he endured. He believed that sin, including things like homosexuality and abortion are reasons why God is no longer blessing our country.
Did Falwell make mistakes during his lifetime? Sure he did, just like I have, just like you have, just like everyone else. Being a Christian doesn't make one perfect. The only perfect man to ever walk this earth was crucified outside Jerusalem over 2000 years ago.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Say something good about Adolf Hitler. ;)
He had a nice drughabit and the mustache to prove it.
-
I admired him for much of what he did, some of what he said, and wish he had left somethings unsaid.
He was a better man than I.
All the Best,
hap
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Say something good about Adolf Hitler. ;)
Although started before he came to power, Hitler supported buildling about 1/4 of the present autobahn system.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Say something good about Adolf Hitler. ;)
(http://www.dvbcaraudio.co.uk/images/vw_logo.jpg)
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Wow.
Some of you guys still manage to surprise me.
Clearly "tact" wasnt something all were taught.
When you say 'tact', are you referring to something like this?
“I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say ‘you helped this happen.’”
-Jerry Falwell after 9/11
He was a bad man in the worst way, he filched gullible people for millions, he used fear to hold on to his power, he perverted Christianity in the worst ways to glorify himself and his posse of freaks. He polluted faith by dragging it kicking and screaming into American politics. He was a deluded, overbearing, self-righteous, stiff-necked and vainly proud hypocrite who preached hatred and intolerance and misused his power in pretty much every way possible. He was a false prophet who claimed to speak for God.
Now... do you want to know what I really think?
I think there's a special place in hell for him.
-
I'm somewhat loathe to comment on Pastor Falwell's death in this forum and at this time, especially because I'm suffering from a wretched head cold and don't feel much like writing or talking at present. But I feel compelled to write something. I apologize for the fact it's bound to be substandard, and also bound to irritate everyone.
I hope you will forgive me if I start with something of a disclaimer lest I be misunderstood. It would take a book length treatment to list and explain all the things that I disagreed with Jerry Falwell over. Perhaps the most central of these issues was over the spirituality of the church. Falwell believed that the church of Jesus Christ had a duty to entangle itself in partisan political issues, and spent much of his life preaching a conservative social gospel and taking high profile stands as a gospel minister in the political arena. I have explained in the past why I do not believe this is what Christ commanded his ministers to do and mistakes the nature of the kingdom (for a more full treatment of this subject, please see: Preachers and Politics (http://www.sermonaudio.com/mediapdf/111406141924.pdf) - the appendix should suffice as an executive summary if you don't have time to read the whole.) Caesar has his sphere and the minister has his, and just as I would object to Caesar meddling in the affairs of the church, so to he has a right to object to my meddling in the matters of the state. While we are both evangelicals committed to the fundamentals, we also differed on several theological issues, and to tell the truth I have never thought that the "mega-church" was the right approach to pastoral ministry which should be personal and relational (Falwell's church, Thomas Road, has 24,000 members - how can a shepherd know his sheep in a church that size?) That said, while our differences were not minor, we theologically agreed on more things than we differed, particularly in regards to Person and Saving Work of Jesus Christ, the nature and role of Scripture, and the vital importance of the Gospel.
To simply dismiss Falwell as a "televangelist" does him a great disservice. Even his enemies were forced to admit that he was a man of personal integrity, that he was always kind and patient in his demeanor towards others (Larry King who agreed with him about nearly nothing noted "you couldn't help liking him because he was so friendly") and that he steered clear of the personal scandals that have characterized the ministries of shameless hucksters like Swaggart and Bakker. When he was raising money, it was almost always for causes rather than himself, and indeed his salary was consistently lower than that of other mega-church pastors and miles under the highly questionable incomes of televangelists like Benny Hinn. People hated him for his political stands and the movements he got involved in, but found little fodder for criticism in his personal life. Additionally, many of the things that he was rightly criticized for, such as his initial support of segregation (and here he is joined by a host of Southern Democrats such as Senator Byrd) are things he later repudiated. A black friend of mine who worked for his university once told me that whatever Falwell was, in his personal experience he was no racist (and yes, he did run into a few examples of that species in Lynchburg).
Regardless of what you thought of his politics, in his non-political preaching and writing, Falwell's love for Christ and desire to make him known shone through. When he preached the gospel, he did so without hesitation or apology in a way that showed that he agreed with Paul's declaration: "I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes." Literally millions have testified that Falwell was the means that God used to bring them to faith in Christ, and If I could wish for anything to have been changed about his life, it is that he might have stuck to preaching and eschewed politics. Had he done so, he might have been remembered in a manner more reminiscent of Billy Graham. As it was, in the public eye, his political activism so overshadowed his preaching that long after he is gone he will be associated with the Moral Majority rather than the preaching of the word, which to my mind at least is a shame.
I know few here will agree with me about him, but regardless of his gaffes, his misplaced emphasis, his sins (and who can confess he has none of those?), and how he is remembered here and elsewhere, Falwell always spoke of himself humbly as a "sinner saved by grace alone" and consequently I have no doubt of his salvation, because while he called men to personal righteousness, he never trusted in his own for salvation, but depended solely upon the atoning blood of Christ and his meritorious work. We may have disagreed, but I can still eulogize him simply with these words: "Precious in the sight of the LORD Is the death of His saints."
-
I think you did very well Seagoon . I wasn't a great fan of Falwell, but for the wacko left to write him off as some tyrant or crook, is absolutely wrong. If I was broke down on the side of the road, he is exactly the type of person I'd wish to happen by. I think a lot of these moral judges vilifying him would pass me up as they made great decisions on their cell phone.
-
I always enjoy your posts Sea.
-
scottydawg
He polluted faith by dragging it kicking and screaming into American politics.
John Kennedy was attacked for being too Catholic. Lincoln was attacked for being an infidel. On July 4, 1798, Timoty Dwight delivered a speech urging the voters to defeat the Jeffersonians—“the illuminati, the philosophers, the atheists, and the deists.” in the 1928 election, claims were made that if Alfred Smith (D NY) were elected President he would make Catholicism the national religion.
Since when was religion out of politics so Falwell had to drag it back in?
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Since when was religion out of politics so Falwell had to drag it back in?
dunno...but that broad in your avatar sure has a nice caboose.
oops. (our father, who art in heaven....)
-
That's Betty Grable... with a little Keyra Augustina photoshopped in.
-
(and lead us not into temptation....)
dang!
(our father, who art in heaven...)
:D
-
Seagoon is spot-on as usual in these matters. As I said above I always liked Falwell and met him once in the early 80s when i was still a pup. I think though that people who say that Christians don't belong in politics are wrong. We pay the same taxes, send our kids to the same schools and just like anyone else our votes count too. He encouraged activism at the polls because of the apathy that had set in the Christian community at the time. After 40+ years of a liberal, approching socialist Congress, the country was unraveling because the attitude at the time was "If it feels good, do it." He united people and told them that together, they made a difference. (See 1980 Election)
Did he make some controversial statements - you bet. Do I agree with all of them? Nope. Since the 80s, we have had an instant publication media. That simply means that anything you say off the cuff is instantly immortalized. We have become a National Enquirer, Springer Show news audience... Always looking for the bizarre, most sensational stories around and drumming those as long as the news cycle lasts. Unfortunately the great things he did will be overlooked by a largely leftist media we have worldwide. They have been harder on him - in death - than they ever were on Saddam Hussein in life or death.
Falwell did lead his life without the personal scandals that plagued many others and he lost face when he stepped in to help the PTL organization after Jim and Tammy Bakker had to relinquish control. PTL organization had many theological differences with those of Mr Falwell. He was there basically to restore moral credibility to a shamed organization.
Even his fierce political opponents who met him liked him as a person and commented favorably on his personal character. I think that should speak volumes in and of itself. I never sent the man a nickel, wrote a letter of support or anything of the sort but I have deep respect for anyone who is willing to stand by his personal convictions, take the fire when necessary and keep going.
Again, my very best to his family and friends and may he Rest In Peace.
-
Originally posted by rpm
por nada :)
De nada :-).
-
I never said that Christians don't belong in politics. I think that religion doesn't belong in politics. Ever hear of 'separation of church and state'? Great idea, IMHO.
Some may bash me for being what they perceive as unduly harsh in my previous post, however, in my opinion it's one thing to be the kind of person I described if you are just a 'regular joe'. It's another thing entirely when you are a public figure who claims to represent millions of Christians and has the kind of influence that Mr. Falwell did. There's a huge amount of responsibility there, something I have never claimed to have, but then again, I'm not a public figure. Nor am I without sin, but I have never preached to another about sin.
-
Originally posted by scottydawg
I never said that Christians don't belong in politics. I think that religion doesn't belong in politics. Ever hear of 'separation of church and state'? Great idea, IMHO.
The wall of seperation was brought up in letters of Jefferson to a church congregation (In VA I think) and was meant to explain the 1st amendments meaning that the government would not require you to confrom to any official religious dogma.
Religion has always been in American politics, and will remain so as long as there is a large portion of America that considers itself religious.
You said Falwell dragged it "kicking and screaming" back to where is has always been anyway.
-
Originally posted by indy007
My parents must have raised me wrong.
Falwell was a giant sweetheart.
Good riddance.
*urd sandwich!
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
*urd sandwich!
I've been called worse. My opinion of him hasn't changed.
It's not even left vs right or athiest vs christian. Make ridiculous comments, I'll call you a sweetheartbag. I don't care what your belief system is. If he was the Dhali Llama or Pope, and said 9/11 was because we have gays and feminists in our society... I'd call them a sweetheartbag too.
edit: Man, that's the first time in awhile I've missed a South Park reference. Giant sweetheart vs **** Sandwitch.... I must have been thrown off by the recent episode with the Biggest sweetheart in the Universe award. :( I'll also say Falwell doesn't even come close to qualifying for this award. He'd have to have been in on the Bakker schemes for that.
-
Bill of rights:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
Separation of church and state simply means Congress cannot establish an official religion. It does not mean that people cannot bring their beliefs into politics. If an idea is a good one, regardless of the source and is voted in by a majority of the voters then nothing should prohibit it from becoming a law.
Should we lift criminal penalties for murder simply because there is a corresponding commandment in the Bible?
-
Hi Holden,
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
The wall of seperation was brought up in letters of Jefferson to a church congregation (In VA I think) and was meant to explain the 1st amendments meaning that the government would not require you to confrom to any official religious dogma.
The Letter was sent to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut, in response to a letter of concern sent by them to Jefferson shortly after his inauguration (a copy of their letter is available here (http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/baptist.htm) ). Jefferson's letter reads:
Gentlemen
The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.
Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.
A little background will help to understand their concern and Jefferson's reply.
The Baptists in America were at this time still a religious minority, and in the past they had suffered considerable persecution both in New England from the Congregationalists who were zealous to maintain one form of Reformed Protestant religion in those colonies, and prior to the revolution at the hands of the state governments which supported the established church, namely the Church of England, with tax revenues and which did all that the could to discourage the spread of "dissenting churches" throughout the colonies.
Following the Revolution, the general opinion in the state of Conecticut was that the rights of the Baptists to freedom of religion were conferred by the state, and thus alienable. Alienable rights can be revoked, and the fear of the Baptists was that at some point an act of the legislature might do just that. Jefferson wrote to assure them that the rights of all Americans to freedom of religion (note "of" not "from") were guaranteed and thus inalienable.
In context, therefore, Jeffersons phrase seldom has much to do with the use it is put to in the modern era.
- SEAGOON
(Man I feel sick, apologies for any typos)
-
Connecticut.... Virginia.... all these places are pretty much interchangable to somebody west of the continental divide...
-
Originally posted by Odee
*sighs* If you look at his life time... You'll see he didn't start losing this "respect" until he was in his 60s ...pre 9-11
I still say if you can't find something good to say about his lifetime's achievements, then IMO you are blind, deaf, illiterate and anti-social.
Hmmm....
Thanks for the kind words, ODEE!
Please take a poll on this thread of people who agree with YOU about my post.
Thanks!
68ROX
-
indy
You're not the sandwich :aok
Hes better characterized as the sandwich than a giant sweetheart.
No name, you bring a logical fallacy.
If its ok by general logic then obviously its just ok, but the problem lies when people think things are ok just because of the bible. Doesn't matter who said it first, but if it doesn't have any other 'justification' than an old book then its not logically a good idea.
-
Ms. Coulter has posted an interesting Eulogy:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20753
-
Doesn't matter who said it first, but if it doesn't have any other 'justification' than an old book then its not logically a good idea
That would depend on your own personal belief system wouldn't it? :)
-
For those that bashed Falwell about his Teletubies comments, I guess you have some more bashing to do on some other folks.
Beginning in early 1998, the news was bristling with stories about a children's cartoon PBS was importing from Britain that featured a gay cartoon character, Tinky Winky, the purple Teletubbie with a male voice and a red handbag.
People magazine gleefully reported that Teletubbies was "aimed at Telebabies as young as one year. But teenage club kids love the products' kitsch value, and gay men have made the purse-toting Tinky Winky a camp icon."
In the Nexis archives for 1998 alone, there are dozens and dozens of mentions of Tinky Winky being gay -- in periodicals such as Newsweek, The Toronto Star, The Washington Post (twice!), The New York Times and Time magazine (also twice).
In its Jan. 8, 1999, issue, USA Today accused The Washington Post of "outing" Tinky Winky, with a "recent Washington Post In/Out list putting T.W. opposite Ellen DeGeneres and Anne Heche, essentially 'outing' the kids' show character."
Michael Musto of The Village Voice boasted that Tinky Winky was "out and proud," noting that it was "a great message to kids -- not only that it's OK to be gay, but the importance of being well accessorized."
All this appeared before Falwell made his first mention of Tinky Winky.
After one year of the mainstream media laughing at having put one over on stupid bourgeois Americans by promoting a gay cartoon character in a TV show for children, when Falwell criticized the cartoon in February 1999, that same mainstream media howled with derision that Falwell thought a cartoon character could be gay.
This from Chairboy's link.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
That would depend on your own personal belief system wouldn't it? :)
No, because it doesn't matter what book one tries to cite, if that book itself has no logical point then the justification is mute.
One could say, "you shouldn't kill", and we can find a number of practical reasons why this is so. It is so for those practical reasons, not because a deity said not to. If the only justification is the words of a deity, then there's a problem. If there is a good, logical reason for something to be made a law and a deity -or more accurately religious doctrine- says its not a good idea because of a book, well maybe that religious doctrine needs to be questioned. Question also when they tell you a law is needed that makes no other sense, besides in their book.
Such is the principle of a secular society.
-
Chairboy,
Looks like you've found the real Giant sweetheart!
Good eyes, you can fly my wing any day! :D
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
No, because it doesn't matter what book one tries to cite, if that book itself has no logical point then the justification is mute.
One could say, "you shouldn't kill", and we can find a number of practical reasons why this is so. It is so for those practical reasons, not because a deity said not to. If the only justification is the words of a deity, then there's a problem. If there is a good, logical reason for something to be made a law and a deity -or more accurately religious doctrine- says its not a good idea because of a book, well maybe that religious doctrine needs to be questioned. Question also when they tell you a law is needed that makes no other sense, besides in their book.
Such is the principle of a secular society.
Your belief system is completely the opposite of mine. In my belief system the old book you refer to, is actually the Word of God, so logically according to my beliefs I would need to follow what is written there.
It really does depend on what your own personal belief system is. :)
-
Well it's been three days now since his death. Shouldn't he be back up and walking around?
-
Originally posted by RELIC
Well it's been three days now since his death. Shouldn't he be back up and walking around?
No, I think you'll have to wait to November of 08 for that. There is no way the nutty left is going to get this savage hate back in the box. There wasn't this much glee after the execution of Saddam or the murder of Jeffrey Dahmer. All this hate directed at a man who was never accused of any crimes and by most objective standards, simply seemed to be following his convictions.
For people so worried about speech offending people, they are definitely NOT worried about offending people who followed Falwell. The disgusting things being said about Falwell cant hurt Falwell. The hate is directed at his followers. This unbridled hate will follow the extremist left well past the 08 election. Congratulations. No one could have convinced middle America how hateful the Democrats are, except the Democrats.
-
Awesome week!
Blair resigns, wolfie resigns, and I'll be damned if -- ding dong -- the wicked witch isn't dead (no relation).
-
Originally posted by -dead-
Awesome week!
Blair resigns, wolfie resigns, and I'll be damned if -- ding dong -- the wicked witch isn't dead (no relation).
Blair will still be PM for more than a month... and has been mentioned as a sucessor to Wolfowitz.
Looks like you may have to delay your celebration.
-
Elfie,
You can believe whatever you want, and I'll defend to the death your right to do so, but if you want to start passing laws you've got to have better reasons. We all have to live with the laws that are passed, and not everyone believes in that book.
If you want to pass laws solely because of a religious text then you are arguing for a theocratic government, and can have it over my dead body. Or you can move to Iran where they go in for that sort of thing. China operates in much the same way, though I doubt you would see their doctrinal orthodoxy as anything religious. An Atheocracy is just as dangerous.
Secularism means we can all try to live together, respect each others beliefs, and have enough respect for our fellow citizens that we can amply justify any new legal measure that is thought to be needed. You may base your personal beliefs on anything you want, but if you want to legislate them there should be something else you can point to as a reason.
Jesus told us to do things for reasons, supposedly good reasons. Just because God or Jesus said so doesn't necessarily make it right. We should look at their reasoning, or God wouldn't have bestowed that ability.
The planet is approaching population levels beyond its capacity to sustain. Is it right that the Pope insists on preaching against condoms and telling Catholics to have as many babies as they can? No it isn't. He's not thinking with reason, he's reverting to an old book. Would God want his children to overpopulate and starve themselves out?
Falwell was ignorant of the principles of secularism, and thus he was a T**D Sandwich.
Good Riddance, the world is now a more beautiful place.
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
Elfie,
You can believe whatever you want, and I'll defend to the death your right to do so, but if you want to start passing laws you've got to have better reasons. We all have to live with the laws that are passed, and not everyone believes in that book.
If you want to pass laws solely because of a religious text then you are arguing for a theocratic government, and can have it over my dead body. Or you can move to Iran where they go in for that sort of thing. China operates in much the same way, though I doubt you would see their doctrinal orthodoxy as anything religious. An Atheocracy is just as dangerous.
Secularism means we can all try to live together, respect each others beliefs, and have enough respect for our fellow citizens that we can amply justify any new legal measure that is thought to be needed. You may base your personal beliefs on anything you want, but if you want to legislate them there should be something else you can point to as a reason.
Jesus told us to do things for reasons, supposedly good reasons. Just because God or Jesus said so doesn't necessarily make it right. We should look at their reasoning, or God wouldn't have bestowed that ability.
The planet is approaching population levels beyond its capacity to sustain. Is it right that the Pope insists on preaching against condoms and telling Catholics to have as many babies as they can? No it isn't. He's not thinking with reason, he's reverting to an old book. Would God want his children to overpopulate and starve themselves out?
Falwell was ignorant of the principles of secularism, and thus he was a T**D Sandwich.
Good Riddance, the world is now a more beautiful place.
oh lord. do you live in the NE or california?
-
Originally posted by storch
oh lord. do you live in the NE or california?
Considering the level of care that went into his post, your reply seems to be a bit lacking. I'd like to hear a serious rebuttal to his points, if you can offer it.
-
Considering my thingy to the left says Denver, CO, its just a stupid question.
Or a lame crack, either way its nothing new.
To answer directly:
No my son, I live in Colorado!
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
Considering my thingy to the left says Denver, CO, its just a stupid question.
Or a lame crack, either way its nothing new.
To answer directly:
No my son, I live in Colorado!
I guess the "Denver, CO" really SHOULD give you away :lol :D
-
If you want to pass laws solely because of a religious text then you are arguing for a theocratic government, and can have it over my dead body
When I do vote, I vote according to my conscience and my beliefs, religious and otherwise. Are you saying that by my act of voting, that I am arguing for a theocratic government and therefore shouldn't vote?
Falwell was ignorant of the principles of secularism, and thus he was a T**D Sandwich.
Falwell stood up for what he believed in, regardless of the criticism and hate that was directed his way. That's something the vast majority of people in this world don't have the courage to do. Falwell didn't just talk the talk when it came to his Christian beliefs, he also walked the walk. Like Seagoon, I don't personally agree with him getting involved in politics but Seagoon and I won't have to answer for Jerry's actions, only Jerry will.
I seriously doubt that a man with Jerry Falwell's knowledge of not only biblical teachings, but also about the world itself was hardly ignorant of the prinicipals of secularism. He just didn't believe in secularism like you do, but I guess that makes him a **** Sandwich eh?
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
I guess the "Denver, CO" really SHOULD give you away :lol :D
Not everyone lists their *real* location. ;)
Maybe he does live in Denver...maybe he doesn't..... :noid
:D
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Are you saying that by my act of voting, that I am arguing for a theocratic government and therefore shouldn't vote?
Falwell stood up for what he believed in, regardless of the criticism and hate that was directed his way.
I seriously doubt that a man with Jerry Falwell's knowledge of not only biblical teachings, but also about the world itself was hardly ignorant of the prinicipals of secularism. He just didn't believe in secularism like you do, but I guess that makes him a **** Sandwich eh?
First off, if you want to vote for something because the bible says so, it is your right, even though that methodology disgusts me. I never said anything about precluding you from voting, and if you think I did you should read more carefully.
I was speaking more about proposing and arguing for a law than the individual citizen's decision making process in the vote, but you know it really does go together. If we were to vote on a new law making murder illegal (again) then we should ask ourselves not what the bible says but whether Jesus would agree with our reasoning. I've got to believe that Jesus was wiser than to resort to the argument of, 'because I said so".
On the 'benevolence' of Falwell:
First let me say that I respect strength of conviction. Still, his strength of conviction led him to argue that others should not have the same rights and privileges as himself because they did not share his ideology. Hitler had a strong conviction in his ideology, should we respect and exalt him for it? Absolutely not, because his ideology was dangerous to others around him, and disrespectful (to say the least) of the rights of his fellow human beings. Falwell was really no different animal, though there is an obvious difference of degree/ferocity. Stalin and Mao come to mind too as champions of ideological convictions at the expense of society.
If he truly did understand secularism and how it helps us coexist, and decided to work against it because of his ideological convictions, then his legacy becomes all the more heinous. I really don't care what he decided to preach on Sundays from his pulpit at his self created 'institution of higher learning', but he has no right to directly inject HIS ideology into OUR government. For him to argue, 'Jesus would agree with us because this makes good, logical sense' would have been entirely appropriate. He chose instead to argue that the law and everyone else should follow his ideological beliefs because he cannot himself play well with others.
The sooner we as a world get over these clowns, the sooner we can all, maybe, live in peace. Falwell=Hitler=Stalin=Mao=Osama bin Laden in terms of benevolence. None should be respected. All were/are nothing but attention grabbing potatos throwing tantrums, and they all condemned the world to take a giant bite out of a T**D sandwich.
Luckily in this country enough people knew Falwell was a joke and he never amassed more political power than he did.
Lucky for us all.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Considering the level of care that went into his post, your reply seems to be a bit lacking. I'd like to hear a serious rebuttal to his points, if you can offer it.
my response is sufficiently adequate for that level of tripe.
-
I never said anything about precluding you from voting, and if you think I did you should read more carefully.
It was simply a question, nothing more.
First off, if you want to vote for something because the bible says so, it is your right, even though that methodology disgusts me.
I vote according to my beliefs, those beliefs are in fact based on biblical teachings. You also vote according to your beliefs, which seem to be based on secularism, would that not also be *disgusting*, or is it only disgusting when someone votes according to their religious beliefs? :)
I was speaking more about proposing and arguing for a law than the individual citizen's decision making process in the vote, but you know it really does go together. If we were to vote on a new law making murder illegal (again) then we should ask ourselves not what the bible says but whether Jesus would agree with our reasoning. I've got to believe that Jesus was wiser than to resort to the argument of, 'because I said so".
According to biblical teachings, Jesus was the Son of God. In His teachings he repeatedly references His Father's laws for us. The Bible says, thou shalt not kill. It doesn't really give us a reason for not killing, other than obedience to Him.
First let me say that I respect strength of conviction.
In Falwell's case, you obviously don't respect the strength of conviction evidenced by the rest of what you wrote in that paragraph.
Falwell=Hitler=Stalin=Mao=Osama bin Laden in terms of benevolence.
That is just rediculous. The last 4 killed many people for their convictions, name one that Falwell killed.
Apparently, it's ok for secularists to force their views on the rest of us, the very thing you appear to despise Falwell for.
I'm done defending a man that did far more good than any of us here will ever do. I also refuse to judge the man for his mistakes. The Bible tells us, judge not lest ye be judged. Why would the Bible tell us that? Maybe because each and everyone of us has made mistakes?
-
I don't vote for something because secularism tells me to. Secularism is not dogmatic as a lot of people continually insist. I vote for things because I think they make sense. Obviously we all have grounding for our beliefs. Sure you're belief system is based in Christian theology, but that doesn't mean you need to rely on Christian theology as the justification for how you vote. I wouldn't ever ask you to disregard your principles, but I only ask that you justify them with more than religious doctrine.
Ok, so the collected and somehow immutable work of two thousand years claims the 'because I said so' argument trumps. Sure, I honestly don't really care. If thats really how the historical figure of Jesus felt, he needed a little bit of a logic check too. Take that as you will. It just cracks me up when grown adults subscribe to such paternalism.
I respect strength of conviction, but not how most people manifest it. It can be argued that overzealous conviction is only a bad thing. We cannot be so sure of ourselves that we are not open to others arguments. You accuse me of doing that, but you are missing what I'm saying. And I am listening, but you're just not brining an argument that doesn't fall back on dogmatic evidence.
I've never seen anyone able to link Hitler to an actual murder, nor for that matter to an order for the Holocaust. Others acted in his name, but he was equally guilty for inciting them. I'm glad that Falwell didn't get to power so that you can mistake the historical comparison. What would have happened if his theology had differed from yours and he forced it on you? Would you be defending him and speaking so highly of his love and compassion? I doubt it.
I stand between our constitution and all who would try to bring down its spirit of tolerance (admittedly not always manifest in the American psyche). Please note that I also stand between you and those who would force their religions on you. You may claim that righteous government is your religion, but there is a point where we all must realize we begin to impinge on others. You don't have the right to take your religion past that point. Neither do I, and I wouldn't want to. I wouldn't want to pass a law that says you can't practice your religion in the privacy of your church any way you like it. Don't try to tell me that I can't sit around in the privacy of my own living room with a lady friend and watch a porn if I like it.
Falwell couldn't see that there is more to the world that himself and his god. He got a bunch of Christians worked up, convinced that they were somehow better than the rest of society (dissenting Christians included in that rest) and he cobbled them into a dangerous political force that answered his call. We're lucky he didn't have more followers than he did.
You say judge not, but what of accountability? We all make mistakes, for sure, but we must also be held accountable for our mistakes. Falwell died a rich, fat old man, with people talking about how much he loved people. Its a very convenient and easy way to look at him, just as it is easy to only see Hitler as a lunatic. History will hold him accountable.
I'd wish for him to rot in Hell, but I don't want him screwing it up before I get there.
-
I think its pretty clear what the goal here is, and I hope people remember it in 2008. It's not to give the Bible its appropriate place, its to assure its considered as an unimportant metaphor. The hatred in this thread is only a glimpse of the vileness of those that smile sweetly and covet darkness (IMO).
-
Don't throw it out, just back it up with something more concrete, more applicable to the rest of us.
-
I'd wish for him to rot in Hell, but I don't want him screwing it up before I get there.
I think it's a pretty safe bet that Jerry Falwell isn't in Hell waiting for you, or that Hell is a fun place to be.
The hatred in this thread is only a glimpse of the vileness of those that smile sweetly and covet darkness
You are correct, there is a lot of hatred in this thread, mostly by folks that think religion is somehow inherently bad. There is no hatred being spewed by any of the folks in this thread that are religious.
-
I think its a pretty safe bet that I don't believe in the concept of hell, or of prime evil for that matter either.
Organized religion of the type Falwell sought to promote is inherently bad. No real good can come of it, save a few small trifles that are heavily negated by the very dangerous aspects of organized and politicized religion.
So anyone who says something you deem to be hateful is not religious? I'd bet there are some on this thread that would take exception to that. You seem to show that dangerous good-evil fallacy that made Falwell so constrained in his world view. I admonish you in only a friendly way to take a peek out of your box from time to time.
-
So anyone who says something you deem to be hateful is not religious?
Read again what I said. ;)
You seem to show that dangerous good-evil fallacy that made Falwell so constrained in his world view.
Oh yeah....I'm real dangerous alright. :rolleyes:
I admonish you in only a friendly way to take a peek out of your box from time to time.
Maybe we should all practice what we preach. :aok
-
Originally posted by Elfie
There is no hatred being spewed by any of the folks in this thread that are religious.
I read it again, whats your point?
Remember that danger does not always come in the form of physical violence.
You're right, we should all practice what we preach. I jump my head in and out of many different boxes. I have friends who are retired. I have friends who are 18. I have friends of all religions and some of which who come from across the planet. I have friends who are in the military. I have people I know who are crackheads. I have one friend working with a company consulting on Spiderman 4. I have friends who haven't done anything with their lives since high school. I have friends who are computer geniuses whose setup put my command center to shame. I have friends who own trebuchets (hes got two). I have long hair, yet I hang out with gun toting rednecks. (I kinda are one).
Still, we ALL have our boxes that form around our heads. We must all remember this. If Falwell could have been capable of at least acknowledging the validity of other's boxes, he would have gotten some credit from me.
Whatever happened to reverends like MLK? We always have to shoot the good ones, damn shame.
-
If Falwell could have been capable of at least acknowledging the validity of other's boxes, he would have gotten some credit from me.
There are some beliefs that all of us have (they vary according to each of our belief systems), that are NOT debatable.
For example, for me, abortion is wrong. The Bible tells us that God knows us from the moment of conception. God knows us even then and loves us. Killing a fetus is killing one of God's children. I can't even acknowledge the pro-choice side of this issue because the *choice* doesn't start when the woman is already pregnant. The choice starts when 2 people first choose to have sex, then again when they choose to have unprotected sex. All abortion does is allow people to be irresponsible.
I read it again, whats your point?
In this thread at least, the folks spouting hatred towards Falwell are those that do not have religious beliefs. (Is that clearer?) :)
Yes, I know there are some folks that call themselves Christians that also spout hate. The folks from Westboro Baptist Church (? I think that's the name of the church) in Kansas come to mind.
-
Yeah I think you're right about the name. I cheered the veterans as I watched the video of them chasing those freaks away from Walter Reed.
A perfect example of the potential danger of uncompromising 'truths'.
I wouldn't ever force anyone to have an abortion, so why should someone else be able to force me not to have one? I actually believe the soul of that child would just wait for another host, and would not be wasted. Would it be right to prevent a crack potato from aborting that child and giving it a chance at a family that would see it well educated and cared for?
In this thread at least, the folks spouting hatred towards Falwell are those that do not have religious beliefs. (Is that clearer?)
I understand what you are saying, but I'm saying many of the people you are labeling might consider themselves religious. I'm not, so I really don't care, but that might offend their beliefs to declare them devoid of religion. I could find many examples of Falwell spreading 'hatred' as defined from something other than his perspective, but I wouldn't say that makes him un-religious.
One could claim that uncompromising intolerance itself is un-Christian.
Someone else could claim that uncompromising intolerance is the essence of Christianity itself (as practiced in doctrine, not talking about the actual teachings).
Some could say that the Westborogh freaks are the truest Christians because they refuse to compromise with the rest of society about anything. I don't agree with this at all, but the argument could be made.
We all have to live together, so we all have to respect each other and each other's beliefs. We should only be intolerant of intolerance itself.
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
I wouldn't ever force anyone to have an abortion, so why should someone else be able to force me not to have one? I actually believe the soul of that child would just wait for another host, and would not be wasted. Would it be right to prevent a crack potato from aborting that child and giving it a chance at a family that would see it well educated and cared for?
While I like your perspective on the larger picture of life I think you may be missing the impact on those who make the decision to end a life for their own convenience.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
While I like your perspective on the larger picture of life I think you may be missing the impact on those who make the decision to end a life for their own convenience.
It seems you're suggesting that your interest in abortion prohibition is designed around punishing the aborter-of-convenience, and has no regard for the 'pregnant by rape' and crack-potato situations.
-
Lets not get this into abortion too deeply. I was only responding to a specific example. We all know it wouldn't get us anywhere to take it further.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
It seems you're suggesting that your interest in abortion prohibition is designed around punishing the aborter-of-convenience, and has no regard for the 'pregnant by rape' and crack-potato situations.
Punishing? I have no interest in punishment. I do believe that the deliberate ending of a human life, even at the fetal stage, has consequences for all of us, especially those who make the choice to do so.
-
I do believe that the deliberate ending of a human life, even at the fetal stage, has consequences for all of us, especially those who make the choice to do so.
My wife made that choice just before we started dating. That choice still effects her every year on that baby's due date. That was 15+ years ago.
-
68...MLK was one of the good ones? LOL... if your defenition of a bad preacher is one that is politicized.. MLK was the devil... he was an avowed socialist who would condemn us all to a socialist hell on earth if he could. He was far more of a threat to my way of life than any falwell.
I think that secularism (a belief in nothing) is fine so long as it extends to the political but.. so many secularists have also been commies... secularists often have political agendas.
It is not the religious or the secular that I fear... it is the ones who feel that they have the right to rule me.
lazs
-
Lazs, again you are confusing terms.
You're looking for the term atheism, which means having no beliefs, or more directly having a lack of a deity in one's religious beliefs. High Buddhism can be considered an atheistic religion.
Secularism is not a religion, and does not actually comment on any religious beliefs. It is a political philosophy of acceptance. Communists are not secularists. Thats even worse than your liberal-socialist conflation.
How so was MLK more dangerous to your way of life than Falwell, unless that danger is to your own intolerance?
MLK argued for civil rights not so much as a minister but as a public figure. Sure he used Christian principles to back that up, but he had better reasons than just to claim the bible said so. He never argued to take the rights of any individuals, and if he did I'd love to see a quote.
I never said ministers can't do good in this world, and that even MLK isn't a debatable figure in some ways, but to compare him on the level of tulips like Falwell insults those who actually use their Christian teachings for good, love and justice.
WWJD to Falwells show? I bet he'd turn the channel.
-
Elfie, I'm truly sorry to hear that your wife regrets a decision she made once, but that does not mean that the same circumstances or sentiment will carry true for other individuals.
Just because she regrets does not mean that right of choice can be stripped from others.
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
Elfie, I'm truly sorry to hear that your wife regrets a decision she made once, but that does not mean that the same circumstances or sentiment will carry true for other individuals.
Just because she regrets does not mean that right of choice can be stripped from others.
Actually, from what I understand, her reactions are very similar to what most women experience after having an abortion. It's just not something that is talked about by those who advocate abortion. And it's not something that happens once or twice either, it's an ongoing thing.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Actually, from what I understand, her reactions are very similar to what most women experience after having an abortion. It's just not something that is talked about by those who advocate abortion. And it's not something that happens once or twice either, it's an ongoing thing.
Elfie... you're right in noting that her reaction is not uncommon... but the vast majority of women who undergo this procedure are confident that it was the right choice for them and their families...
I'm attaching a link from The American Association of Pro Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists...
http://www.aaplog.org/postabortion.htm
It notes a rate of about 1.4% of women who experience a syndrome known as PAS (post abortion syndrome)... which happens to be less than the average number of women who experience postpartum depression... It notes that 20% of women who have an abortion experience depression... But that's on par with the national average for depression...
The most compelling stat they list though is that 31% were unsure if they would do it again, I feel that is significant... but then again... that also means 69% would make that same choice - and that it's reasonable to assume that some of that 31% would ultimately chose to repeat it again.
An unplanned pregnancy is an amazingly stressful event that will effect many people in many different ways...
All I can say for sure is that I am sorry for any pain your wife is experiencing. In all sincerity... I mean that.
<> Elfie for your thoughtful posts.
-
I'm wondering how many of you who seem to despise Jerry Falwell so much actually listened to more than a sound bite or two or read about something he said without even considering whether it was taken out of context. You needn't answer me, just something consider.
-
A good something to consider Iron. Still, even in context he is very good at putting his foot in his mouth.
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
A good something to consider Iron. Still, even in context he is very good at putting his foot in his mouth.
In thousands of hours of sermons? Think about talking to or at people for THOUSANDS of hours. You would have to be reasonably stable and interesting. Thousands of hours of sermons. Thats something hard to dismiss.
-
BTW... I agree with you, he is just determined to have nasty things to say.
-
If you think this is taken out of context, your damn wrong. I've seen the wider video too, which used to be more readily available.
-edit-
The video won't link right (damn CNN). Follow this link to the news story and click the 'watch Falwell blame pagans' link in the text near the bottom.
link (http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/15/falwell.politics/index.html)
-edit-
Anyone who blames 9/11 on such a wide swath of Americans just because they disagree with their 'lifestyles' is certainly a fool, probably an idiot and possibly just plain feeding you a line of crap to get you pissed off.
What a joke of a human being.
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
If you think this is taken out of context, your damn wrong. I've seen the wider video too, which used to be more readily available.
-edit-
The video won't link right (damn CNN). Follow this link to the news story and click the 'watch Falwell blame pagans' link in the text near the bottom.
link (http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/15/falwell.politics/index.html)
-edit-
Anyone who blames 9/11 on such a wide swath of Americans just because they disagree with their 'lifestyles' is certainly a fool, probably an idiot and possibly just plain feeding you a line of crap to get you pissed off.
What a joke of a human being.
Americans have been blamed by many for the 9/11 attack for reasons as diverse as killing and oppressing muslims to our tolerance in not killing gays in this country and many perceived crimes in between. The fact is that those who attacked the United States of America on September 11, 2001 did so for a reason and they blamed it on us. We are not a disinterested party in world affairs. If our influence embitters some we should not remain ignorant of that fact.
I think Jerry Falwell believed that America is a land of the indulgent and he believed that God did not put us here to indulge ourselves. 9/11 was a dramatic and significant event. What person who devotes himself to be an instrument of God would not consider such an event to be worthy of examination?
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
If you think this is taken out of context, your damn wrong. I've seen the wider video too, which used to be more readily available.
-edit-
The video won't link right (damn CNN). Follow this link to the news story and click the 'watch Falwell blame pagans' link in the text near the bottom.
link (http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/15/falwell.politics/index.html)
-edit-
Anyone who blames 9/11 on such a wide swath of Americans just because they disagree with their 'lifestyles' is certainly a fool, probably an idiot and possibly just plain feeding you a line of crap to get you pissed off.
What a joke of a human being.
You are really quick to call a life a joke. There are so many different ways you could have put your philosophical and religious differences. To dismiss a life of honestly looking for an answer as a joke pretty much rebukes you. There are so many other ways to disagree with someone without invalidating them. Maybe in a few years you'll learn a few. Maybe not. But at this point, you are not clever.
-
I'm not quick to call him a joke. That comes after many years of his own statements.
Of course terrorists attacked us because they don't like the American way of life, largely because of our country's actions in the world. That does not excuse, or even blend analysis with, Falwell's statement that gays, pagans and the ACLU are at fault and that God is punishing us for them. That's really no different from the Westborogh freaks, only more temperate. One could easily say that those fools are only "honestly looking for an answer". That doesn't mean their views are worthy of my respect.
This also doesn't mean I would ever advocate that they be forced to change their beliefs. I would, however, have glady joined the veterans in driving them away from Walter Reed. That's just plain defending the veterans.
If you want to support statements like this I feel sorry for you. If you want to imply that I am juvenile for taking such a strong stand against hatred, a mass categorization of 'others' in American society, and a frankly shoddy analysis of international affairs I really don't care. Falwell was a joke, and only because he put the egg on his own face.
-
I haven't listened to or follow Falwell in decades but I've yet to see a direct quote in which he said God punished the US for the acts of the ACLU or anyone. Perhaps he did but I think it more likely he said or insinuated that the ACLU is responsible for the attack. That's a lot different.
Ok, I looked it up. Here's what he said:
"I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America," he said. "I point the finger in their face and say 'You helped this happen.' "
-
Yeah Iron, he said that anyone who wasn't a Christian in America helped 9/11 to happen.
and before that other statement they're warning of far worse attacks, and Falwell says, "The ACLU's got to take a lot of blame for this."
The sad part is that they're not joking.
-
Originally posted by 68Hawk
Yeah Iron, he said that anyone who wasn't a Christian in America helped 9/11 to happen.
and before that other statement they're warning of far worse attacks, and Falwell says, "The ACLU's got to take a lot of blame for this."
The sad part is that they're not joking.
Why is it sad? Would you rather their beliefs to be rhetoric? Jerry Falwell was an Evangelical Christian. Are YOU prepared to outlaw that or just make fun of it? Are you going to make fun of Harri Kristina's next? Muslims next week? Falwell was an Evangelical Christian that operated well within the laws of the United States. Why do you fell the need to affect he was some type of criminal? He was doing exactly what this country was established for ( at least in the press package).
-
Please quote me if I have ever claimed that Christianity should be illegal or that Falwell should be silenced in any way.
I believe I've been very clear in this thread that I would defend everyone's right to believe what they want, even if what they believe is as hateful as Falwell's. Am I vilifying him? Yes. Am I criminalizing him? No.