PDA

View Full Version : Civil Rights hero Fred Phelps dies



Darth Executor
03-20-2014, 10:21 AM
http://ksn.com/2014/03/20/founder-of-westboro-baptist-church-rev-fred-phelps-sr-dies/


Throughout his life, Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church, a small congregation made up almost entirely of his extended family, tested the boundaries of free speech, violating accepted societal standards for decency in their unapologetic assault on gays and lesbians. In the process, some believe he even helped the cause of gay rights by serving as such a provocative symbol of intolerance.

I smell a conspiracy brewing up.

The article reviews his life but strangely ignores his role in the civil rights movement altogether.

Teallaura
03-20-2014, 10:25 AM
:candle:

DesertBerean
03-20-2014, 10:28 AM
Oooooh my. :candle:

KingsGambit
03-20-2014, 11:03 AM
Maybe because whatever role he played in the civil rights movement was insignificant compared to what else he was known for (and willingly sought publicity for, with an army of press releases and whatnot).

Darth Executor
03-20-2014, 11:11 AM
Maybe because whatever role he played in the civil rights movement was insignificant compared to what else he was known for (and willingly sought publicity for, with an army of press releases and whatnot).

He wasn't insignificant though. And protesting homosexuality is more significant than civil rights? His role in the latter was certainly more pivotal than in the former. If anything his role in the former was disastrous, hence my suspicion that he's a part-time progressive mole on top of being a tort troll. And the point is that they did a run-through of his life, and intentionally purged anything anyone might find good.

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02095/stalin_2095634i.jpg

^ not journalism

KingsGambit
03-20-2014, 11:14 AM
His protests were over more than homosexuality. He didn't become a national name until he started going after soldiers.

Darth Executor
03-20-2014, 11:19 AM
His protests were over more than homosexuality. He didn't become a national name until he started going after soldiers.

Yes, because they fought for a country that protects and enables homosexuals. It all ties back to homosexuality. Once he finished protecting America from racists he took on protecting America from homosexuals as his pet issue.

Wally
03-20-2014, 11:32 AM
I wasn't aware of the Civil rights work, but it kind of fits in with a generally "contrarian" personality.

Defending blacks in a "Jim Crow" era would have been just as provocative as protesting funerals later.

Seems like he just enjoyed ticking off as many people as he could, no mater what the cause.

TimelessTheist
03-20-2014, 11:33 AM
Yes, because they fought for a country that protects and enables homosexuals. It all ties back to homosexuality. Once he finished protecting America from racists he took on protecting America from homosexuals as his pet issue.

Yes, but there's a right, and wrong way to do things. Protesting people's funerals is just crossing the line.

Teallaura
03-20-2014, 12:54 PM
Yes, but there's a right, and wrong way to do things. Protesting people's funerals is just crossing the line.

But that isn't DE's point. Is it okay to rewrite a person's history to omit any good they did because of a later evil? Or should we let their history speak for itself?

myth
03-20-2014, 04:17 PM
But that isn't DE's point. Is it okay to rewrite a person's history to omit any good they did because of a later evil? Or should we let their history speak for itself?

I tend to favor representations of the truth that are as close to factual as possible. In the past, authority figures have repeatedly done the opposite (omitting bad things people have done and emphasizing the good, thus creating hero figures). I don't like either because it can skew people's perception of reality, if they aren't looking closely enough.

People are a mix of good and bad. I'm not sure why we resist coming to terms with that.

robrecht
03-20-2014, 04:27 PM
I smell a conspiracy brewing up. ...

... hence my suspicion that he's a part-time progressive mole on top of being a tort troll. ... Seriously?

KingsGambit
03-20-2014, 06:05 PM
But that isn't DE's point. Is it okay to rewrite a person's history to omit any good they did because of a later evil? Or should we let their history speak for itself?

Consider Martin Luther... most people acknowledge his later anti-Semitism/support of death penalty for Anabaptists but his legacy remains because he is overwhelmingly known for his role in the Reformation. Here Phelps is overwhelmingly known for his international campaign of making Christianity look stupid. I honestly think that anybody who is trying to portray Phelps as a genuine civil rights hero is more or less trolling.

KingsGambit
03-20-2014, 06:15 PM
The amount of damage he did to Christianity and the amount of support he provided for the gay marriage movement is not insignificant.

Catholicity
03-20-2014, 06:16 PM
Like it or not, Fred Phelps likely did not go into the civil rights movement for the right reasons. He more likely did it because he wanted to stir up controversy and create trouble. All of his life, Phelps did things that caused problems and attacked the majority in order to cause hatred. His life was centered on attracting attention and causing hatred. The man did not have any good cause in him. He lived to be hated, and lived to hate. Phelp's cause was to make hate and anger popular.
His entire life showed that.

Darth Executor
03-20-2014, 10:11 PM
Like it or not, Fred Phelps likely did not go into the civil rights movement for the right reasons.

It's likely that nobody did.

Darth Executor
03-20-2014, 10:11 PM
Seriously?

Sure, it makes sense to me.

Epoetker
03-20-2014, 11:17 PM
Like it or not, Fred Phelps likely did not go into the civil rights movement for the right reasons. He more likely did it because he wanted to stir up controversy and create trouble.

I figured it was more, like most lawyers, to increase his standing and exposure in the media, to increase the thickness of his wallet, and to establish himself as The Right Kind of White Person to those coming into power. Everybody's doing it, and you're the best at it, right?


All of his life, Phelps did things that caused problems and attacked the majority in order to cause hatred.

Homosexuals are a lot of things, but 'the majority' is not one of them.


His life was centered on attracting attention and causing hatred.

His life was centered on grabbing what money and power he could and making an impact, and attracting attention and hatred was merely something he was supremely talented at. They didn't seem to serve him all that well in his crusade against gay people, though.


The man did not have any good cause in him. He lived to be hated, and lived to hate. Phelp's cause was to make hate and anger popular.

Really? So the full-page news and magazine spreads on the guy were meant to make his brand of hate popular? Funny, it seems like Phelps was used more to make righteous anger at the depredations of gays unpopular. Those in both the media and the judiciary seemed to have a little alliance of convenience going on with the man. (http://isteve.blogspot.com/2014/03/fred-phelps-media-symbiote.html)

Regardless, I don't think his initial anger against, say, the gays who went after his son was either manufactured or unrighteous:


Shirley Phelps-Roper says that, in the late 1980s, Fred Phelps witnessed a homosexual attempting to lure her then five-year-old son Joshua into some shrubbery. After several complaints to the local government about the large amount of homosexual sex occurring in the park, with no resulting action, the Phelpses put up signs warning of homosexual activity. This resulted in much negative attention for the family. When the Phelpses called on local churches to speak against the activity in Gage Park, the churches also lashed out against the Phelps family, leading to the family protesting homosexuality on a regular basis.

Standing against open depravity is uncool in this media environment, people. We must be seeker-sensitive...


His entire life showed that.

It most certainly did not. Phelps was a fighter, a single-issue fanatic on whatever he was fighting for at the time. The leftists who once made use of him openly fought harder, though, to the point where the only people he could fight against publicly were conservative military members, who of all things do not have a single ounce of actual media or judicial leeway to do anything violent in retaliation as long as the national spotlight was on them.

The left, as it has in previous days, believed in the party power coalition, even if it included gays and pedophiles, far more than it believed in things like ordered neighborhoods, common decency, or paternal authority. Hey, if you get in power, you can afford extra-judicial measure against blacks and gays, or at least to insulate yourself in neighborhoods away from them! Consistency is for chumps! Only pasty nerds spend their free time doing things like tracking down pedophiles online! Live in the now! And so on till the kakistocracy rules. (http://kakistocracyblog.wordpress.com/2014/03/11/onward-conservative-soldiers/)

The sin of Fred Phelps is the sin of conservatives, to think they could fight for one aspect of morality while fighting against another, to think they can get the material rewards of unrighteousness while pursuing truth, and to think they can pursue peace, decency and safety while failing to repent completely of their liberal influence. There is no other way out of the mental jail other than repentance, and I would suggest this as a way forward (http://nickbsteves.wordpress.com/the-reactionary-oath/):


B: To recognize and honor those who outrank me; to look out for the long-term interests of, and serve faithfully, those who have been placed under my direction
C: To reserve the bulk of my loyalty for my kin, my thede, and those nearest to me; to identify leapfrogging loyalties as a psychological pathology, and to work to eliminate this disposition in myself
D: To bear no special malice or animosity to members of other thedes; to avoid, where possible, mutually interfering in the internal affairs of other thedes; and when mutual non-interference is not possible, to negotiate in good faith for peaceful separation.

Teallaura
03-21-2014, 09:49 AM
Consider Martin Luther... most people acknowledge his later anti-Semitism/support of death penalty for Anabaptists but his legacy remains because he is overwhelmingly known for his role in the Reformation. Here Phelps is overwhelmingly known for his international campaign of making Christianity look stupid. I honestly think that anybody who is trying to portray Phelps as a genuine civil rights hero is more or less trolling.

The trolling issue you can take up with DE. I concur that legacy has more to do with the bulk than the minutia. We shouldn't edit history to disguise either good or bad. Instead of omitting it, put it in context and let the thing speak for itself. Don't make people into demons or angels by deceptively editing history - it's unfair to the person and to students of history.

Catholicity
03-21-2014, 10:01 AM
The trolling issue you can take up with DE. I concur that legacy has more to do with the bulk than the minutia. We shouldn't edit history to disguise either good or bad. Instead of omitting it, put it in context and let the thing speak for itself. Don't make people into demons or angels by deceptively editing history - it's unfair to the person and to students of history.
Far from editing history, I'm pointing out that Phelp's history of abuses of the system, his children animals and persona speak for itself. Its less than deceptive to point out that Phelps was disbarred from law by attacking the system, prior to that he was well known for his on campus attacks of people for their "so called" sins legitimate or not. My point is that despite whatever good Phelps may have done, he likely did it out of pure hate, and the desire to attract abuse and attention. He had no good intent at any point in his life. Even his own public photo shoots of fitness magazines were done while he was single handedly on heavy doses of amphetamines and abusing his children. Something stated and affirmed by three of the children. One of which during this time developed bulimia to please Phelps. Phelps is no hero. A broken clock might be right twice a day, but that's about all you can say about it.

Teallaura
03-21-2014, 10:04 AM
Far from editing history, I'm pointing out that Phelp's history of abuses of the system, his children animals and persona speak for itself. Its less than deceptive to point out that Phelps was disbarred from law by attacking the system, prior to that he was well known for his on campus attacks of people for their "so called" sins legitimate or not. My point is that despite whatever good Phelps may have done, he likely did it out of pure hate, and the desire to attract abuse and attention. He had no good intent at any point in his life. Even his own public photo shoots of fitness magazines were done while he was single handedly on heavy doses of amphetamines and abusing his children. Something stated and affirmed by three of the children. One of which during this time developed bulimia to please Phelps. Phelps is no hero. A broken clock might be right twice a day, but that's about all you can say about it.

That would be 'context' - and I never took issue with addressing the evil he did - just with the OP's point that the good should not be completely omitted.

Darth Executor
03-21-2014, 10:18 AM
I honestly think that anybody who is trying to portray Phelps as a genuine civil rights hero is more or less trolling.

I think you're in denial. You support the Civil Rights movement and thus cannot imagine that anyone could be both a Civil Rights hero AND a scumbag (this description can fit Martin Luther King Jr too, I should add, given that he was a plagiarist and serial adulterer). The fact remains that Phelps fought hard for civil rights, spent a ton of money and effort on it, and got shot at in the process. Compared to, say, MLK jr, who is distinguished from Phelps by having assailants with a better aim, which he can hardly be credited for. In fact, Phelps risked his life and family to fight for others on an issue that didn't personally impact him, whereas MLK fought for an issue that DID impact him and his descendants. If anything, Phelps deserves the title of Civil Rights Hero more than MLK jr does.

phank
03-22-2014, 10:06 AM
I notice that the Gay Christian Network sounds pretty much like Christians are supposed to sound:


ďThe words and actions of Fred Phelps have hurt countless people. As a Christian, Iím angry about that, and Iím angry about how he tarnished the reputation of the faith I love so much,Ē Justin Lee, executive director of The Gay Christian Network, said in an e-mail message.

ďBut as a Christian, I also believe in showing love to my enemies and treating people with grace even when they donít deserve it,Ē he said. ďI pray for his soul and his family just as I pray for those he harmed. Itís easy for me to love someone who treats me kindly. Itís hard for me to love Fred Phelps. To me, thatís the whole point of grace.Ē

That Phelps is gone isnít cause for joy for Jim Smith, either.

ďThere is a sadness as deep as the Grand Canyon over the harm that he has unleashed in our country, a sadness that canít be quantified. But that still doesnít mean I delight in his death,Ē said Smith, the associate director of Dignity USA, an organization that advocates for LGBTQ Catholics. ďIíd delight in the end of the Westboro [Baptist Church] mission.Ē


Granted they don't mention his civil rights efforts. Hopefully when OJ Simpson dies, people will remember that he was once a good football player.

Epoetker
03-22-2014, 11:03 AM
I notice that the Gay Christian Network sounds pretty much like Christians are supposed to sound:

According to whom? The Christian Boilerplate Response Network?


Granted they don't mention his civil rights efforts. Hopefully when OJ Simpson dies, people will remember that he was once a good football player.

Football player, nothing, he was pretty funny in The Naked Gun series.


There is a sadness as deep as the Grand Canyon over the harm that he has unleashed in our country, a sadness that canít be quantified. But that still doesnít mean I delight in his death,

Of course not, without Fred Phelps to kick around, who's going to be your major Worst Hate Figure boogeyman to indoctrinate college students now? Paul Ryan?

KingsGambit
03-22-2014, 11:08 AM
I think you're in denial. You support the Civil Rights movement and thus cannot imagine that anyone could be both a Civil Rights hero AND a scumbag (this description can fit Martin Luther King Jr too, I should add, given that he was a plagiarist and serial adulterer). The fact remains that Phelps fought hard for civil rights, spent a ton of money and effort on it, and got shot at in the process. Compared to, say, MLK jr, who is distinguished from Phelps by having assailants with a better aim, which he can hardly be credited for. In fact, Phelps risked his life and family to fight for others on an issue that didn't personally impact him, whereas MLK fought for an issue that DID impact him and his descendants. If anything, Phelps deserves the title of Civil Rights Hero more than MLK jr does.

I've readily acknowledged MLK's adultery/plagiarism elsewhere on this board; I'm not sure where you get the idea that I'm in denial about that (and it's why I've long been uncomfortable with him being idolized as he is). Phelps was one of many lawyers, indistinguishable from many others, who took on such laws whereas MLK took on a more singular role in organizing boycotts/speeches/etc. so it is rather understandable that he gets more attention.

Epoetker
03-22-2014, 11:32 AM
I've readily acknowledged MLK's adultery/plagiarism elsewhere on this board; I'm not sure where you get the idea that I'm in denial about that (and it's why I've long been uncomfortable with him being idolized as he is). Phelps was one of many lawyers, indistinguishable from many others, who took on such laws whereas MLK took on a more singular role in organizing boycotts/speeches/etc. so it is rather understandable that he gets more attention.

I've seen this argument elsewhere:


Nonetheless, Fred Phelps has always held that all the bad things happened in his law career because he was a tireless Christian soldier, battling for black civil rights. A careful examination of his more salient cases, however, reveals once again how, with such odd regularity, some men of the cloth seem to confuse community service with lip and self-service. The hallmark of a devoted civil rights reformer who is also a lawyer ought to be a record of court decisions that, taken together, create legal precedents influencing future cases and, therefore, future society. Sadly, close inspection of Phelps' civil rights record shows he followed the same greedy star he did in the rest of his cases. Lawsuits were filed, but rarely went to trial-and even more rarely reached a decision. Instead, Phelps practiced what he always had: 'take-the-money-and run'. A settlement out-of-court has zero impact on legal precedent. Both sides continue to maintain they were right, only one party pays the other a little money to shut up and go away. In what are probably Fred Phelps' three most famous civil rights cases, he did exactly that each time. In the multi-million dollar Kansas Power and Light case, Phelps filed a class-action on behalf of 2,000 blacks who had accused the utility of discrimination in their hiring and promotion practices.

Fred settled out of court for the following: *Two black employees received $12,000 each. *$100,000 was paid out to the other plaintiffs. If one counts the original 2,000, that made for 50 bucks each.

*Phelps scooped $85,000 in attorney's fees and expenses. *KP&L admitted no wrongdoing and suffered no coercion to alter its allegedly racist policies. KP&L officials claimed they'd settled to avoid an expensive legal battle. "It's unprecedented what we just did," the pastor crowed. "

And my answer to both is: There are way more fronts in the culture war than the Supreme Court. If the environment created by the Civil Rights movement allows anyone with sufficient motivation to bully any organization out of tens of thousands of dollars at a time, is that not an impact? Because Fred Phelps was not a general, was he not an excellent foot soldier and local terrorist in the Great Struggle? Do bullies care more about the money or the power and marking of territory as their own? Gay people don't HAVE to hold exhibitionist spectacles every year, but the celebration marks a city as their own, and their people as in control, the same as Black History month, Affirmative action, and the various other whitewashes on black achievement and the lack thereof are used as bludgeons against the majority population, especially the youngest and most innocent and impressionable.

It is not enough to believe the truth, one must stand up for it. If you cannot do so alone, do so together. If you believe, as I do, that the current rulers are destroyers at war with you, the first thing to do is stop paying the tributes they demand.

KingsGambit
03-22-2014, 11:44 AM
And Epo has ably demonstrated why Phelps was no civil rights hero.

Epoetker
03-22-2014, 12:30 PM
And Epo has ably demonstrated why Phelps was no civil rights hero.

The Civil Rights Movement was glad to make use of him, and while eventually disavowing him, most certainly did not disavow his tactics for their own use. The civil rights movement was in no sense heroic, and its fruits and beneficiaries are become rotten sooner or later without repentance. Phelps was just ahead of the curve.

Darth Executor
03-22-2014, 01:41 PM
I've readily acknowledged MLK's adultery/plagiarism elsewhere on this board; I'm not sure where you get the idea that I'm in denial about that (and it's why I've long been uncomfortable with him being idolized as he is).

Err, that was in regards to Phelps, not MLK. I mentioned MLK to show a general double standard.


Phelps was one of many lawyers, indistinguishable from many others, who took on such laws whereas MLK took on a more singular role in organizing boycotts/speeches/etc. so it is rather understandable that he gets more attention.

I wasn't talking about who gets more attention, I was talking about who deserves the title more. Fame is not really a good barometer for that.

Darth Executor
03-22-2014, 01:50 PM
And Epo has ably demonstrated why Phelps was no civil rights hero.

Actually Epo is claiming that making discrimination costly does have an effect, even if it doesn't affect legal precedent (which it does). Plus, MLK also benefited from civil rights, being black himself, as did every black civil rights activist and probably most of the white ones. Do keep in mind that I don't actually think Phelps is a hero, seeing how he's been a pivotal cog in the infernal machine of Progress. I just don't think he's all that different from the rest of them.

Darth Executor
03-22-2014, 02:01 PM
I notice that the Gay Christian Network sounds pretty much like Christians are supposed to sound:

I think there's a rule in there about not bearing false witness:


There is a sadness as deep as the Grand Canyon over the harm that he has unleashed in our country

What harm did he unleash for a gay rights activist? Phelps was like manna from heaven. A more cynical man might even suggest his career of a progressive crusader never really ended.


Granted they don't mention his civil rights efforts. Hopefully when OJ Simpson dies, people will remember that he was once a good football player.

I'd rather OJ Simpson be remembered for his pivotal role in nurturing spousal faithfulness.