Southern Poverty Law Center - Irresponsible Lying Scumbags?

[Arthur Brain]

Actually ok doser, here's a prime opportunity for you to explain just why the SPLC are irresponsible, lying scumbags in relation to Fred Phelps. You venerate the guy as with your own words here in response to aCW:

"God hates liars (like you)

God hates fags (like those you spend day after day dreaming about, writing about, looking for pictures of, etc)

fred phelps was a man of God that perverts like you hate, because he spoke God's Truth

phelps will be honored by God for speaking His Word

while you will be cast down for being a liar"

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-5&p=5295572&viewfull=1#post5295572

So, a different tack and absolutely in keeping with your thread. Instead of a "yes or no answer" as obviously you think so highly of Phelps, his "techniques" where it came to orchestrating the picketing of soldiers funerals and sentiments in regards to 9/11 etc, how about you explain just how irresponsible the SPLC are in regarding such a "Godly man" as an extremist?

The floor is yours.

:thumb:

 

[ok doser]

Like the consequences for families that have the funerals of their beloved picketed by nutjobs because they glee in the death of American soldiers? That have held placards stating their joy at 9/11?

Did the SPLC rightfully identify Westboro as a hate group, yes or no?

It's a really easy question dude.

should a group be labelled as a "hate group" based on hurt feelings?

because that's what you're doing here:

... I empathize with those who disagree with (Murray's) conclusions.

you've identified some people who have hurt feelings over something they've been told Murray said, you're giving credence to their irrational feelings and expressing solidarity with them, even though neither they or you have any idea what Murray actually said

 

[Arthur Brain]

should a group be labelled as a "hate group" based on hurt feelings?

because that's what you're doing here:

No, because of their actions. Picketing the funerals of soldiers is despicable as is the gleeful placards celebrating the dead of 9/11/cancer etc.

is that going to result in hurt and anger for those affected and who are exposed to such filth? Obviously. Big difference between that and your position.

you've identified some people who have hurt feelings over something they've been told Murray said, you're giving credence to their irrational feelings and expressing solidarity with them, even though neither they or you have any idea what Murray actually said

Nope. I've stated already that Murray doesn't deserve to be a "hate figure" and I've not given any solidarity to anyone who acts irrationally either. Not interested in your Murray deflection after this.

 

[ok doser]

I've not given any solidarity to anyone who acts irrationally either.

so you're distancing yourself from this statement?

... I empathize with those who disagree with (Murray's) conclusions.

 

[ok doser]

Big difference between that and your position.

ya lost me - what do you think my position is?

 

[ok doser]

should a group be labelled as a "hate group" based on hurt feelings?

No, because of their (WBC) actions.

the result of their actions is hurt feelings, right?

has anybody been physically harmed by their actions?

Picketing the funerals of soldiers is despicable...

"despicable" is an emotional term, rooted in feelings

... as is the gleeful placards celebrating the dead of 9/11/cancer etc.

"gleeful" is an emotional term, rooted in feelings

... is that going to result in hurt and anger for those affected ...

feelings

... and who are exposed to such filth?

"filth" is an emotional term rooted in feelings




and so, to return to the question at hand, should WBC be labelled as a "hate group" based on hurt feelings?

 

[ok doser]

What's a SLPC? :idunno:

:think:

Scumbag Lawyers Pocketing Contributions?

 

[ok doser]

... they glee in the ...

don't believe i've ever seen glee verbed before :think:

 

[Stripe]

don't believe i've ever seen glee verbed before :think:

In Limburgish languages, it is a noun meaning something that is wet because it has been pasted. :idunno:

 

[Arthur Brain]

the result of their actions is hurt feelings, right?

has anybody been physically harmed by their actions?

Do you consider the only form of harm to be physical? If so, then your downplaying of distress to be "hurt feelings" says enough in itself. A group doesn't need to use physical violence to promote hate and nobody is accusing Westboro of that.

"despicable" is an emotional term, rooted in feelings

It's an apt descriptor. For example, the actions of the third reich and their persecution and murder of Jews in WWII were despicable. From a moral standpoint they most certainly were unless you disagree?

"gleeful" is an emotional term, rooted in feelings

Sure, many in Westboro have admitted to being happy when people die and celebrate it.

feelings

Yes, and? What would you expect a grieving parent of a child that went to war and had the funeral picketed by religious cranks that celebrated his death to feel? Or the families of those killed in 9/11?

Again, do you consider that only physical abuse constitutes significant harm? If so, then you clearly haven't seen just how devastating emotional/psychological abuse can have on the victim.

"filth" is an emotional term rooted in feelings

Ones that you can hardly downplay yourself given the very title of this thread.

and so, to return to the question at hand, should WBC be labelled as a "hate group" based on hurt feelings?

No, because of what they do. I've never had any direct dealings with them and don't need to to see and call them for what they are. Neither do most people although that obviously doesn't include you as you see Phelps as a "Godly man"...

 

[Arthur Brain]

so you're distancing yourself from this statement?

Nope, why would I? Not visiting that tired ground again. In the meantime maybe you missed this:

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ing-Scumbags&p=5295886&viewfull=1#post5295886

Actually ok doser, here's a prime opportunity for you to explain just why the SPLC are irresponsible, lying scumbags in relation to Fred Phelps. You venerate the guy as with your own words here in response to aCW:

"God hates liars (like you)

God hates fags (like those you spend day after day dreaming about, writing about, looking for pictures of, etc)

fred phelps was a man of God that perverts like you hate, because he spoke God's Truth

phelps will be honored by God for speaking His Word

while you will be cast down for being a liar"

So, a different tack and absolutely in keeping with your thread. Instead of a "yes or no answer" as obviously you think so highly of Phelps, his "techniques" where it came to orchestrating the picketing of soldiers funerals and sentiments in regards to 9/11 etc, how about you explain just how irresponsible the SPLC are in regarding such a "Godly man" as an extremist?

The floor is yours.

:thumb:

 

[ok doser]

... distress .. emotional/psychological abuse ...

ok, so not "feelings", but "distress" and "emotional/psychological abuse"

should a group be labelled as a "hate group" based on "distress" and "emotional/psychological abuse" ?

No, because of what they do. .

and apparently, what they do is they cause "distress" and inflict "emotional/psychological abuse"

is that it?

 

[Arthur Brain]

ok, so not "feelings", but "distress" and "emotional/psychological abuse"

should a group be labelled as a "hate group" based on "distress" and "emotional/psychological abuse" ?



and apparently, what they do is they cause "distress" and inflict "emotional/psychological abuse"

is that it?

My reply was clear enough. Maybe if you quoted me in full instead of snipping it you wouldn't be confused on the point. It's all there and each "point" addressed in full.

 

[ok doser]

My reply was clear enough. Maybe if you quoted me in full instead of snipping it you wouldn't be confused on the point. It's all there and each "point" addressed in full.

ok, looked at all your "points" and that leads me to this question, that I put to you:

should a group be labelled as a "hate group" based on "distress" and "emotional/psychological abuse" ?

 

[ok doser]

I've not given any solidarity to anyone who acts irrationally either.

so you're distancing yourself from this statement?

... I empathize with those who disagree with (Murray's) conclusions.

Nope, why would I?

sorry, i thought that was obvious - those who disagree with Murray's conclusions without being able to cite a single one are acting irrationally

 

[ok doser]

don't believe i've ever seen glee verbed before :think:

btw, i was going with "verbed" just for fun, then thought i'd check - sure enough, it's really a word - oxford sez so :chuckle:

 

[ok doser]

My reply was clear enough. Maybe if you quoted me in full instead of snipping it you wouldn't be confused on the point. It's all there and each "point" addressed in full.

ok, looked at all your "points" and that leads me to this question, that I put to you:

should a group be labelled as a "hate group" based on "distress" and "emotional/psychological abuse" ?

additionally, should WBC be labelled as a "hate group" for any other reason?

 

[Arthur Brain]

ok, looked at all your "points" and that leads me to this question, that I put to you:

should a group be labelled as a "hate group" based on "distress" and "emotional/psychological abuse" ?

Again, my answer to that was clearly given in the reply that you snipped and where you avoided questions put to you in turn. How you've missed it is anyone's guess. Else see the definition of "hate group" under law. They wouldn't necessarily have to be causing intentional harm of any sort to fall under the category. The fact that the Westboro clan think nothing of causing undue distress to the families of dead soldiers with pathetic "protests" isn't the sole thing that marks them out as a hate group, one you advocate.

 

[Arthur Brain]

sorry, i thought that was obvious - those who disagree with Murray's conclusions without being able to cite a single one are acting irrationally

It wasn't and this deflective sidebar has been addressed as it is. Go fish if you want but not interested. How about you answer the questions put to you instead of flogging this dead horse?

 

[ok doser]

It wasn't ...

it wasn't obvious?

is it clear now?