viridia Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 Hello, Just recently, a student and football player at my high school passed away very unexpectedly during practice. He was a very likable guy, and while I didn't know him, a lot of my friends did and loved him. I do not know the cause of his death but I'm pretty sure it was some sort of heart-failure. His funeral was yesterday, and nearly half the school attended. Now, this weekend I received word from a friend that Westboro Baptist Church ("godhatesfags.com", "godhatesamerica.com", etc) planned to picket at his funeral and later changed to picketting at the school for what happened. My first reaction was, what could those racist, judgmental people want to do at a sixteen-year-old's funeral, and why? WBC's websites unfortunately never load for me, and the excerpt from their website explaining the picket I read on a Facebook group to counterpicket (which has since been cancelled with the threat of the law), but from what I gathered, the reason for the original picketing was this: That, instead of worshipping God and being preachy and reading the Bible every day, John was playing football, thus "worshipping idols" and ignoring God. My mind was blown. I was incredibly amazed at the explanation and their wording that these people call themselves Christians, and that they think they're carrying out the works of God. My family and many of my friends are Christians and even they are ashamed that their faith is spoiled by these bastards. The purpose of Christianity, to most Christians I know (granted, I know very liberal Christians) is to bring God's love to all and to let Him be the judge, not for a stuck-up hate group to bash anyone who interprets the Bible differently than they do. I am on the fence with my spirituality, but I despise organized religions anyway and consider myself a Deist currently. But I am all for people choosing their religions (or lack thereof), their morals, and personal lifestyle, so long as it's within reason and not "in-your-face." I hate WBC and extreme Fundie beliefs for these reasons: because they believe they are the only ones who are right, and will do pretty much anything to get everyone to feel the same, even being rude and extremely disrespectful to a community of children, young adults, family, and friends who lost a dear part of their lives by picketing their unfounded beliefs at his funeral. The WBC picket is scheduled for tomorrow, March 3rd. Most of the school has heard about it, and while administrators assure us little to no protesters will show, many students are planning a counter-picket, while others may just ignore the WBC. However, my school has ~3000 students, and it would not shock me if the WBC's presence would provoke violence in some. In my opinion, they are just looking for trouble by planning such a disrespectful protest to a large yet tightly-knit community. When we cannot let a young, respectable person rest in peace simply because he played football, something is wrong. Westboro Baptist...Is this what the world is coming to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shyone Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 When we cannot let a young, respectable person rest in peace simply because he played football, something is wrong. Westboro Baptist...Is this what the world is coming to? WBC is over-the-top, but the idea that a strongly held belief warrants unrestrained action has been common to many religions. The idea that one should burn witches came from religion, as did the idea that heretics and atheists should be executed. Blaise Pascal: "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OpheliaGinger Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 WBC raises my ire. Literally, they have nothing else to do other than to picket; I'm surprised they even have money to continue to go around the country to picket funerals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hungrydingo Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Honestly, I think the best way to deal with their church is to ignore them. In every interview I see them in they say very incendiary things and the interviewer lashes out and gets angry with them, and the WBC member can barely contain them self from laughing. I am not sure what their true motivation is, but I suspect they are partially trolling people with their signs and their group. They really seem to enjoy getting a reaction out of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueGiant Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Yeah, they are trolling you. These parasites make their money by getting people pissed off, getting assaulted, and then turning around and suing the local municipal authorities/anyone they can to keep them in money. Phelps is an example of the worst kind of scum-sucking litigious lawyer out there, at least he is now. In other words, do not shank him, it ain't worth it. ETA: I'm also sorry to hear about your school's loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 May I ask...what does "shank" or "shanked" mean? I looked for it on answers.com and it is given only as a noun meaning a part of a leg or knife, etc. When used as a verb it means to be kicked or hit by the "shank" part of the leg or bowling club, etc. This is hardly what is meant in this thread. While WBC borders on the violent, I don't think anyone intends that kind of violence ahead of time though it might happen. I think I'm missing something here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shyone Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 May I ask...what does "shank" or "shanked" mean? I looked for it on answers.com and it is given only as a noun meaning a part of a leg or knife, etc. When used as a verb it means to be kicked or hit by the "shank" part of the leg or bowling club, etc. This is hardly what is meant in this thread. While WBC borders on the violent, I don't think anyone intends that kind of violence ahead of time though it might happen. I think I'm missing something here... Prison slang for "stab". A shank is a knife (usually a crude device with a sharp point made in prison), and therefore to "shank" would be to "stab." ETA: Knowledge of this on the part of BlueGiant or myself does not imply time spent in prison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skankboy Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Prison slang for "stab". A shank is a knife (usually a crude device with a sharp point made in prison), and therefore to "shank" would be to "stab." ETA: Knowledge of this on the part of BlueGiant or myself does not imply time spent in prison. Acutally I think a "shiv" is the knife where "shank" is the verb for using it. From what I've heard... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shyone Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Prison slang for "stab". A shank is a knife (usually a crude device with a sharp point made in prison), and therefore to "shank" would be to "stab." ETA: Knowledge of this on the part of BlueGiant or myself does not imply time spent in prison. Acutally I think a "shiv" is the knife where "shank" is the verb for using it. From what I've heard... You're probably right, Shankboy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueGiant Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 What has been said above: shank == stab. Usually with a violent and crude instrument like a prison shiv. It can also imply various other forms of violence and/or street justice that the target has a better chance of surviving than getting shot (i.e. a severe beating as opposed to kill). Do others agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNC Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Let me say that as a Christian I find the behavior of the WBC members unchristian and unconscionable. There is nothing in the Bible that would excuse or condone the behavior of these people. They are wolves in poorly fitting sheep's clothing. Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits. Matthew 7:15-20 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds. 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 LNC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The-Captain Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 "Our men have the sins of men--wine and wenching. Yours have the sins of devils--spiritual pride and rebellion." - Anonymous Royalist Cavalier to a denouncing Puritan. The WBC are despicable, as are all who think as they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shyone Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Let me say that as a Christian I find the behavior of the WBC members unchristian and unconscionable. There is nothing in the Bible that would excuse or condone the behavior of these people. They are wolves in poorly fitting sheep's clothing. LNC Well, they are Christians, acting in the way that they deem best for the world based on their interpretation of scriptures. It is illogical to say that Christians are unchristian. Violation of the Law of Identity. How selective you must be to determine who in history is Christian and who isn't. Popes, Kings, queens, preachers, priests, parishoners, all along the line who have ever behaved in an "unchristian" manner. What to make of them? Who is a real Christian (besides yourself, of course)? Be careful - He or she may wind up on the front pages and you may have to revise your selection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skankboy Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Let me say that as a Christian I find the behavior of the WBC members unchristian and unconscionable. There is nothing in the Bible that would excuse or condone the behavior of these people. They are wolves in poorly fitting sheep's clothing. They follow the parts of the bible that fit their beliefs, you follow the parts of the bible that fit your beliefs. Isn't it awesome that 2 groups can get something so completely different from a "divinely inspired" manuscript? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skankboy Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 PS - Fuck the WBC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godlessgrrl Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Let me say that as a Christian I find the behavior of the WBC members unchristian and unconscionable. There is nothing in the Bible that would excuse or condone the behavior of these people. They are wolves in poorly fitting sheep's clothing. You're half right. Unconscionable? Indeed. WBC is disgusting, and I'm glad to see you recognize this. But unChristian? Hardly. WBC are essentially extreme Calvinists; and last time I checked, Calvinism could still be supported Biblically. Calvinists certainly seem to think so, anyway. They're as Christian as you are, they're just a different kind of Christian. And they're also batshit insane. Your desire to distance yourself from them is understandable, but somewhat dishonest. You'd do better to say "WBC are not the kind of Christians we should be" rather than "WBC are not Christian". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lunaticheathen Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 WBC are the worst kinds of scum alive, and Fred Phelps should be beaten with a shovel grave-side at the funerals he harasses. But sadly, it is true that they feed off negativity from others, somehow seeing it as "persecution" that makes them holy, according to their babble. They're sick, stupid, hateful people, and I honestly can't think of anything more disgusting to do to a family than picket their child's funeral (non-violent, anyway). They do this to fallen soldiers too. I may not agree with the war, but WBC's reasons for not are insane, and there is NO JUSTIFICATION for disrupting a funeral! That's just low, petty, and cruel to those who loved the person - not the solider, football player, whatever the hell those morons are protesting. I hope Mr Phelps dies of a cardiac event on the toilet. Someone killing him would just make room for martyrdom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vomit Comet Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 Acutally I think a "shiv" is the knife where "shank" is the verb for using it. From what I've heard... "Shiv" and "shank" are interchangeable. I think "shiv" is more of an archaic term, though, like in old gangster movies. At least in the California system, "shank" was what it was usually called. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vomit Comet Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 It can also imply various other forms of violence and/or street justice that the target has a better chance of surviving than getting shot (i.e. a severe beating as opposed to kill). Do others agree? "Shanking" has specifically to do with stabbing, though it could be with an icepick or a pencil or anything that'll penetrate. I don't remember any one word term for that kind of beatdown. Just "we fucked him up bad" or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qec Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 http://www.amazon.com/review/R2X2TB3S4O5I60?cdPage=3 Epic and totally funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hungrydingo Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 You can shank with a shank and shank with a shiv but you can't shiv with a shank or shiv with a shiv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNC Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 Well, they are Christians, acting in the way that they deem best for the world based on their interpretation of scriptures. It is illogical to say that Christians are unchristian. Violation of the Law of Identity. How selective you must be to determine who in history is Christian and who isn't. Popes, Kings, queens, preachers, priests, parishoners, all along the line who have ever behaved in an "unchristian" manner. What to make of them? Who is a real Christian (besides yourself, of course)? Be careful - He or she may wind up on the front pages and you may have to revise your selection. I wonder how you know that they are Christians. Do you have some special insight into their hearts and minds? I find it ironic that you accuse me of selectively determining who in history is Christian and yet you determine that these people are Christians, that seems to be hypocritical on your part. One is not allowed to interpret the Scriptures in whatever way they deem best and still be a faithful Christian. Those types of people are generally called apostate. I didn't say that Christians are unchristian, if you will reread my post you will learn that I said that their behavior is unchristian and there is nothing illogical about that, nor is there a violation of the law of identity. Again, you post is based upon a faulty reading and understanding of what I actually wrote in my post as well as a faulty understanding of Christianity. LNC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentLoner Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 PS - Fuck the WBC. And whatever they rode in on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNC Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 They follow the parts of the bible that fit their beliefs, you follow the parts of the bible that fit your beliefs. Isn't it awesome that 2 groups can get something so completely different from a "divinely inspired" manuscript? We are not allowed as Christians to treat the Bible as some sort of buffet line, picking and choosing the parts we like, taking them out of context and applying them in whatever manner we deem best. That is relativism and that is not being true to the Bible. It is not unusual that people interpret and apply ideas incorrectly, it has been done throughout history. In fact, I am reading Nietzsche right now and that is a classic example of a philosopher whose writings were interpreted in many different ways and applied incorrectly - unless you believe that Hitler did apply them correctly...what do you think? The problem with your last statement is that it is the manuscript that is inspired, not the interpreter. So, I don't find that idea to be problematic at all. LNC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The-Captain Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 It is not unusual that people interpret and apply ideas incorrectly, it has been done throughout history. Are you a Protestant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts