skippy the bush kangaroo: god hates phelps

Wednesday, October 31, 2007

god hates phelps

or at least a federal jury does. they have awarded several million to a family whose son's funeral was interrupted by the infamous fred "god hates fags" phelps and his gang. cnn:

the family of lance cpl. matthew snyder -- who was killed in a vehicle accident in iraq's anbar province in 2006 -- sued the westboro baptist church in topeka, kansas, and its leaders for defamation, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

church members showed up at snyder's funeral chanting derogatory slogans and holding picket signs with messages including "god hates fags."

on an unrelated yet typographically tangential subject, we were rather put off by the obviously theme-pertinent google ads found on the cnn page about the funeral; they include bereavement air fares, infant loss remembrance items, and memorial website creations.

we're glad phelps didn't protest someone's colonscopy.

Labels: judicial, religion, right hypocrisy

posted by skippy at 8:41 PM |

5 Comments:

I don't understand... don't they have a first amendment right to walk around with whatever signs they want?

I don't like these guys one bit, but don't they have every right to do what they did?

commented by

Anonymous, 9:37 AM PDT

Back in the late 80 or early 90s I saw Fred Phelps on a talk show. At that time he opined that HIV and AIDS were manifestations of God's disapproval of homosexuals. At that point in history, HIV and AIDS were non-existant among lesbians. The host informed Phelps of that fact and asked if that meant that God approved of lesbians. That left Phelps, for perhaps the only time in his life, speechless.

commented by

Anonymous, 9:57 AM PDT

Presumably members of a Baptist churh identify themselves as followers of Jesus. Well, he is not recorded as saying anything about the subject of homosexuality. The small number of Biblical passages on which fundamentalists such as this base their jihad against homosexuals are from the Old Testament or the letters of Paul. Even if you accept that those passages express Jesus' attitude on the subject (and I personally believe that there is room to question the fundamentalist interpretation of those passages) the fact that Jesus himself did not emphasize the subject makes it hard to argue that this is the issue he wanted his people to be identified with. On the other hand, Jesus constantly spoke about treating each other as brothers and sisters or neighbors...and helping those in need. I think that those who try to claim his name and authority had better get their priorities straight!

commented by

Anonymous, 10:09 AM PDT

Re the first post: The First Amendment does NOT protect them from the consequences of their speech. If it did, there would be no law against slander. But if they had announced their plan and the family had gone to court to try to stop them, the judge would have said "Sorry, it's not a matter of vital national security so they have the right to say what they want."

Re the previous post, I read an evangelical's claim that St. Paul's tirade against "homosexuality" actually used a more specific term, referring to the Greek practice of men having sex with boy prostitutes. I don't know about that, but I also find it very significant that Jesus isn't recorded as having said anything about it. Charity, yes, "judge not" yes, hate gays -- no.

Aranfell

commented by

Aranfell, 11:28 AM PDT

You may have missed in the story, but the judge was quoted (might have even been in his bench announcement) that the award exceeded the net worth of Phelps et al.

He purposely put them out of business. Good on you, Judge and jury!

commented by