Fred Phelps is only the tip of the religion iceberg!

Good old Valteron has taken on the reputation of local anti-Catholic bigot, it would seem. So just to make it clear, I am actually an equal-opportunity bigot. I have been on other sites in which I pointed out the revolting cruelty and sexism in the Koran, for example.

Many people have been horrified by Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church when they picket the funerals of dead American servicemen. They also picket the funerals of gays who die of AIDS with signs to remind the families of the deceased that their loved one is burning in Hell.

If you want to see more about Phelps and his Church, google Westboro Baptist Church. They have a lovely little section dedicated to Matthew Sheppard, (the gay kid who was beaten to death and left tied to a fence rail a few years ago), pointing out that he is in Hell for all eternity. You can actually see his face in the flames and hear his cries of anguish.

The funny thing is, people keep acting as if Phelps was some sort of strange and unusualo thing in religion. The only thing unusual about him is that he is so blunt about it.

The Pope and the Catholic Church, for example, firml believe that homosexuiality is an “intrinsic moral evil”, and a “grave moral disorder”. Quite simply, they believe gays who have sex and do not confess their “sin” are going to burn in Hell for all eternity. It is as much their doctrine as it is the doctrine of the Westboro Baptist Church. The only difference is that the Pope is too smart to walk around with a sign that says “Thank God for AIDS” or “Fags are going to burn in Hell.”

But the present Pope, as Cardinal Ratzinger, IS on record as saying that gays do not care whom they infect as long as they get their sex.

So Phelps is an anti-semite as well? Okay, then what do you think of this viewpoint? Who said it, Hitler or Himmler, perhaps?:

“Jews’ synagogues should be set on fire, prayerbooks destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, homes “smashed and destroyed,” property seized, money confiscated, and these poisonous envenomed worms should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time… . Jerusalem was destroyed (many centuries ago, and at that time we Christians were harassed and persecuted by the Jews throughout the world … So we are even at fault for not avenging all this innocent blood of our Lord and of the Christians …We are at fault in not slaying them.”

Surprise! It was Martin Luther, the founder of Lutheranism, in his pamphlet *Von den Juden und ihren Lügen * (On the Jews and their Lies), published in 1543.

Any Lutherans out there?

Care to discuss the sexism in Islam sometime? Try the Koran, Surah 4, verse 34, where it actually says that a man may beat his wife if he even “fears” rebellion from her. Or the terrorism like 9-11 that could not have existed without Islam?

When will we stop pretending that religion is really a force for good and that the untold evil and misery it perpetrates are just weird exceptions?

Personally, my favourite quote is by Nobel Prize Winner Steven Weinberg who said: “Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.”

Ask yourself this: Could you get several dozen atheists or agnostics to hijack planes and fly them into two tall buildings, murdering thousans of innocent people, by promising them 77 virgins in Paradise if they do so? Nope. It takes religion, folks!

Take it easy. One guy in a Pit thread mentioned you’ve bashed Catholics. That doesn’t mean you even have a reputation.

I think we get it already. Religion sucks. Other Dopers have already taken up that banner.

He’s convinced me!

Were you aware that bigotry against the religious is just as bad as bigotry *from *the religious?

You really don’t have anything original to offer. If you’d actually taken the time to learn anything about the religions you’re bashing, and not just relied on what you’ve heard from pop culture, you might have had potential. If you knew anything about other world religions (there are a lot of Hindus out there, you know), you might even be able to come up with something original to say. As is, everything you’ve written is embarassing to this atheist.

Fred Phelps isn’t an asshole because of religion-he’d still be an asshole if he were an atheist.

The man is literally batshit.

Don’t insult the bats that way :smiley:

Hell, don’t insult the guano that way!

When putting together your OP, with all its neat quotes & thought-provoking non-sequiturs, you probably assumed someone was going to compose a long rebuttal citing Stalin, Mao and perhaps Hitler. We still don’t know who’ll be the brave soul who opts to feed you what you so crave, due in large part to the fact generalizations in this forum go over like a fart in church.

No one’s taken the bait yet - I have a hunch it will stay that way.

OK, I’m a bit confused. Are we supposed to be condeming Lutherans for NOT persecuting Jews, or what?

Sorry, I never seem to be able to follow these threads properly.

That’s an exaggeration. Phelps’ views on gays are not unique; there are many prejudices against gays that are supported by religion. But those views also not shared by everybody who says “gay sex is a sin.” Those people are bigoted, but they’re not in his league. A great percentage of bigots, even if they hold loathsome views, are willing to live and let live. Phelps thinks that even that is a crime deserving punishment by death. To pretend all prejudices are equally virulent is to gloss over what makes Phelps so repugnant.

Luther’s views are not necessarily shared by all Lutherans, and all Muslims don’t have to believe that particular Surah. I think you know that you’re oversimplifying a lot here.

-Marley, infidel atheist since 1995.

I’d be more concerned about groups like Focus on the Family, which takes Phelps-style insanity and wraps it up in prettier words so it seems reasonable.

Pssst, Valteron this board is already well aware of Fred Phelps, he has been decried many times. Wikipedia has articles on WBC and Fred Phelps, and the site Addicted to Hate (which is a biorgraphy of Fred Phelps and details the horrors his children and wife go through) gets linked here regularly. In other words, you are preaching at the choir. I think you should have left it at the defense you made on your own behalf in the thread that has gotten your riled up. Maybe you should also re-evaluate how you come across to others here, and try not to give that impression anymore?

No, I did not make a mistake when I said “at” the choir either. That is what I wanted to convey. You have gone beyond preaching to the choir.

I agree, and I’m hardly an apologist for religion. Phelps is disgusting, but he’s not really all that dangerous to anyone out of his immediate reach. People like Focus on the Family ( and trust the Right to make the word “family” into something that makes my skin crawl ) are capable of getting bad laws passed and promoting bigotry, Phelps isn’t.

I mean, if I were to design the perfect propaganda tool for atheism and tolerance of gays, Phelps would be pretty much it. About the only improvement would be if he ate live kittens between tirades.

I still don’t understand why it’s not OK to criticize somebody’s religious beliefs. You can take any other subject, history, medicine, science, etc. You can certainly tell somebody they are completely wrong about any of those, but religion is off limits?

Perhaps I’ve been reading too much Sam Harris, but I really believe we’ll never survive our religious differences. :frowning:

Because religion can’t survive criticism, as it’s simply nonsense.

Agreed, and I’ve said so before.

Are you saying “terrorism, like 9-11 (which could not have existed without Islam)” or "terrorism (like 9-11) which could not have existed without Islam? If it’s closer to the second, i’m going to have to disagree; terrorism can and does exist quite seperately from Islamic influences, as history shows.

I think it depends on what you mean by criticize. You won’t get very far criticizing large groups of people with “that’s a bunch of ridiculous bullshit” or painting all the “religious” with then same brush. {which btw is ridiculous bullshit} I agree with Sam Harris that we must try to change the taboo about talking about religion. It takes smarts and tact. We have every right to challenge ideals that effect our lives. I think we even have an obligation to do so, but we must also challenge ourselves to figure out how to do it with a little respect.

There are lots of wonderful religious people out there who make a daily contribution to this country. Is their any reason to say “thanks for being a good person but your religion is bullshit”? If someone is a homophobic bigot and happens to use a passage out of the Bible to support their bigotry then they should be challenged. When someone passes off their opinion as the “truth” they deserve to be challenged. I do think we must try to do it while maintaining a modicum of respect for their right to choose their own beliefs and their own path while asserting our own right to the same.

When dealing with the establishment clause and freedom of speech and freedom of religion then finding the proper balance requires some real thought and continued effort.