Difference between revisions of "Talk:Fred Phelps"

Latest revision as of 17:41, July 9, 2011

NPOV

Well, I think we have a good NPOV version finally. Thanks to all who contributed! Rob Smith 12:32, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

Um, there's a category:Liberalism still at the bottom. Not very NPOV if you ask me. BobJ 12:59, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

Also, not that it's a POV issue, but it seems about 75% of the sentences in this article (or the first few sections anyway) start with "Phelps..." which is sort of stilted writing. BobJ 13:02, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

The Liberalism Template automatically puts it in Category:Liberalism. This is presumably because of (1) Phelps activist tendencies; (2) Phelps longtime Democratic party membership and associations; (3) Phelps repetition of the violent and openly hostile rhetoric of critics of conservatives and the conservative movement; (4) Phelps association with the ACLU. There's probably other reasons as well.

Please Be Bold in making the changes you suggest. Rob Smith 13:15, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

To respond (1) since when is activism confined to liberals? Many in the Tea Party are activists, but hardly liberal. (2) His associations with the Democrats seem tied to mostly the substantially less liberal South, and have long since passed. Does Strom Thurmond get a liberal template as well? (3) his criticisms of liberals are as strong, or more so, than his criticism of conservatives. (4) The ACLU is more libertarian than liberal, and are merely defending his constitutional rights anyway (as they have done for guys like Limbaugh and Ollie North) and have made no statements defending what he says, only his right to say it. BobJ 13:22, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

Tea Party are activists? That would imply they have some legitimate complaint and are not just a racist mob of rabble rousers. I'm not sure I understand. Rob Smith 13:30, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

Ha ha. Here's a link, there are plenty more: [1]. BobJ 13:36, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

Also, here's a quote from him, from one of the sources used in this article: "Phelps said Gore 'was the icon of the conservative faction of the Democratic Party' when he came to Kansas in 1988' (emphasis mine). "'He was strong pro-life, and he said he wasn't going to accept any money from homosexual groups, and things of that nature,' Phelps said. 'But there's no question in my mind that approximately in the late 1980s or the early 1990s he made a conscious decision that he wanted to be a successful national candidate, and he sold out on some of those critical social issues, because that's what he had to do to succeed nationally in the Democratic Party.' Doesn't exactly sound liberal. BobJ 13:41, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-==Liberal Activist!???==
+[[Talk:Fred Phelps/Archive 1]]
-Last time I checked liberals support gay people and are secular. Calling Fred Phelps a liberal would be akin to calling Osama bin Laden a pacifist. Someone should change this --[[User:AllahuAkbarJihad|AllahuAkbarJihad]] 21:50, 12 October 2007 (EDT)
-Phelps is not a leftist, he is on the extreme fringes of the religious right, he's an embarrasment to conservatives so he is called a "liberal". I can't believe how biased this website is --[[User:AllahuAkbarJihad|AllahuAkbarJihad]] 21:53, 12 October 2007 (EDT)
+==NPOV==
+Well, I think we have a good NPOV version finally.  Thanks to all who contributed!  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 12:32, 9 July 2011 (EDT)
-<blockquote>
+:Um, there's a category:Liberalism still at the bottom. Not very NPOV if you ask me. [[User:BobJ|BobJ]] 12:59, 9 July 2011 (EDT)
-Phelps celebrated the 9/11 attacks and the more recent al-Qaeda strikes in London as the just recompense of Western decadence. He supported Saddam Hussein and has been appreciative to Fidel Castro. Phelps is probably more appropriately described in psychiatric than political terms. '''But his political roots are in the Democratic Party, having run for office in Kansas five times, and actively supported Al Gore in 1988 and 1992, whose campaign used Phelps’ family office space. Son Fred Phelps Jr., who had hosted a fund raiser for Gore, attended the 1993 Clinton-Gore inaugural.'''
+:Also, not that it's a POV issue, but it seems about 75% of the sentences in this article (or the first few sections anyway) start with "Phelps..." which is sort of stilted writing. [[User:BobJ|BobJ]] 13:02, 9 July 2011 (EDT)
+::The Liberalism Template automatically puts it in Category:Liberalism. This is presumably because of (1) Phelps activist tendencies; (2) Phelps longtime Democratic party membership and associations; (3) Phelps repetition of the violent and openly hostile rhetoric of critics of conservatives and the conservative movement; (4) Phelps association with the ACLU. There's probably other reasons as well.
-More careful media coverage acknowledges that Phelps’ ostensibly Baptist church is "unaffiliated" and comprised of only his family members, whose compound of houses is assembled around the church and its swimming pool used for baptisms.
+::Please Be Bold in making the changes you suggest.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:15, 9 July 2011 (EDT)
+:::To respond (1) since when is activism confined to liberals? Many in the Tea Party are activists, but hardly liberal. (2) His associations with the Democrats seem tied to mostly the substantially less liberal South, and have long since passed. Does Strom Thurmond get a liberal template as well? (3) his criticisms of liberals are as strong, or more so, than his criticism of conservatives. (4) The ACLU is more libertarian than liberal, and are merely defending his constitutional rights anyway (as they have done for guys like Limbaugh and Ollie North) and have made no statements defending what he says, only his right to say it. [[User:BobJ|BobJ]] 13:22, 9 July 2011 (EDT)
-Phelps, now age 76, has demonstrated outside the Bush Ranch in Crawford, Texas. He has demonstrated against conservative religious activists James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson. He has demonstrated against the Southern Baptist Convention.
+::::Tea Party are activists? That would imply they have some legitimate complaint and are not just a racist mob of rabble rousers. I'm not sure I understand.   [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:30, 9 July 2011 (EDT)
-</blockquote>
+:::::Ha ha. Here's a link, there are plenty more: [http://www.teapartyactivists.com/]. [[User:BobJ|BobJ]] 13:36, 9 July 2011 (EDT)
---<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]]</font></sup> 08:41, 13 October 2007 (EDT)
+:::::Also, here's a quote from him, from one of the sources used in this article:  "Phelps said Gore 'was the icon of the '''conservative''' faction of the Democratic Party' when he came to Kansas in 1988' (emphasis mine). "'He was strong pro-life, and he said he wasn't going to accept any money from homosexual groups, and things of that nature,' Phelps said. 'But there's no question in my mind that approximately in the late 1980s or the early 1990s he made a conscious decision that he wanted to be a successful national candidate, and he sold out on some of those critical social issues, because that's what he had to do to succeed nationally in the Democratic Party.' Doesn't exactly sound liberal. [[User:BobJ|BobJ]] 13:41, 9 July 2011 (EDT)
-Even if Phelps did support the Democrats at one time, that doesn't make him a liberal. Guiliani is a Republican and he is certainly not a Conservative (pro gay marriage, pro abortion). I'd argue that Phelps is delusional rather than liberal or conservative but I think it is terribly biased and incorrect to state that he is a leftist and a liberal. Liberals tend to be secular and pro gay marriage, Phelps does not embrace liberal values --[[User:Fredphelpsisamoron|Fredphelpsisamoron]] 16:17, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
-I would argue that Phelps is actually a conservative. He is against gay marriage and is very religious, these are two traits of conservatives. --[[User:MichaelM|MichaelM]] 16:44, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
-:There is more to conservatism than ONE ISSUE. Economics, etc.
-Also, there are religious liberals out there. Ever heard of Jimmy Carter? [[User:DanH|DanH]] 16:45, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
-True, but Jimmy Carter is only moderatly oppposed to homosexuality and believes in evolution, he is not the same hate filled bigot that Phelps is. Maybe Phelps isn't conservative, but he certainly isn't liberal either. I think saying Phelps is a leftist is POV pushing. It should be taken out. --[[User:MichaelM|MichaelM]] 16:47, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
-::Wait, wait, wait. What does evolution have to do with it? We've had a lot of liberals tell us that we should not be politicizing science. I actually agree with that. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 16:51, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
-Phelps doesn't believe in evolution and he believes in creationism. Creationism, particularly YEC is associated with conservatism. I agree that science shouldn't be politicized but creationists, especially YEC, tend to be conservative while evolutionists tend to be moderate or liberal. --[[User:MichaelM|MichaelM]] 16:53, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
-:::OK. So we have evidence liberals may be open minded and tolerant of other views.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:14, 16 October 2007 (EDT)
-::*There is no such thing, outside of perhaps Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi as 100% Liberals. Guiliani, I might chime in, isn't taking a "liberal" stance on some issues, but a old line conservative POV, pre-neoconservative, more Libertarian stance. Many of Phelps' idealogical pronouncements most certainly do fit more within the secular-progressive tent than the conservative one.  And one must note there wasn't any repudiation on the part of Citizen Gore when he was happily taking Phelps & Company money and office space, was there? End of argument there.  Point is, Phelps is almost certainly a Demon from Hell. He certainly isn't worthy of anyone's defense, or the attention he is getting.  --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]]</font></sup> 18:47, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
-I don't think any of Phelps stances fit liberalism at all. The use of liberal and leftist is misleading and biased --[[User:JimmyR|JimmyR]] 20:29, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
-Just because he opposes Bush and conservatives doesn't mean that he isn't one of them. Conservatives, like Liberals can have disagreements among one another and are not one monolithic block. Besides Ronald Reagan supported Saddam in the 80s, does that make him a liberal? I think you should take out "leftist" and "liberal activist" it is terribly biased and misleading and just makes Conservapedia look bad --[[User:BillCasey|BillCasey]] 10:19, 16 October 2007 (EDT)
-:I agree.  Phelps is no more a liberal activist than the KKK is a conservative action group. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 11:54, 16 October 2007 (EDT)
-Exactly, Phelps has been criticized across the political spectrum from leftist gay rights groups to conservative Christians, he is neither liberal or conservative, he is just plain nuts --[[User:BillCasey|BillCasey]] 17:55, 16 October 2007 (EDT)
-:ok, we know the 'ol "he's a bad guy so he must be a religious conservative" argument is the basis of many Wikipedia articles, and thousands of other websites.  But this is CP, we're basically (1) concerned with facts.
-:So, Phelps, a creationist, is an example of a broadminded [[leftist]].  What's wrong with that?  Although some of his views are extraordinarily repugnant, Al & Tipper, in keeping with thier one time advocacy of censoring [[music]] content and pro-[[big tabacco]], once courted a constituency there.  Gore only dropped these views when the Clintons put him on the ticket.  Perhaps the [[Nobel Prize]] Committee made the award to guy.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:15, 16 October 2007 (EDT)
-==No linking to Phelps's web sites==
-They are not family appropriate, and Conservapedia is not a repository of hate speech. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 17:04, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
-: Would it be reasonable to add the prohibition of making and linking to hate speech one of the commandments? --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 17:21, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
-:: I think that's an excellent idea. I suggest bringing it up either on Aschlafly's Talk Page or Talk:Conservapedia Commandments. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 17:22, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
-: I did not know that I shouldn't have linked to his websites.  However, could you please put into the opening paragraph that Fred Phelps' mission is against homosexuality?  As it is, this important fact is not mentioned until halfway down the page.  [[User:CEinhorn|CEinhorn]] 19:33, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
-:Will do. In fact, I'm going to unprotect this. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 22:55, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
-Surely the main authority on Phelps's teachings in Phelps himself? His sites should be linked to. I suggest doing so as plain text, not a clickable link, and alongside a warning notice.
-*Posts not signed are ignored. --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]</sup> 01:02, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
-==Discussion of subject==
-I'm going to tentatively leave this in place, although it was intended to make Christians look bad by the original creator, he is a major news figure because of his funeral protests, and his actions have prompted major legislation regarding these (and he is also a major embarrassment to my home state, as well as a DEMOCRAT who actually campaigned for Al Gore in 1988 before he went on his anti-homosexual crusade).
-Also, I drove by his "church" once and I got a physical chill once I got within two blocks of it. I felt like I was in a place of true evil. Interestingly, the ZIP codes in Topeka, where he lives, all start with 666.  [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 03:26, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
-I just moved it because it was under "Fred phelps," and the lack of proper capitalization was bothering me. I like to copy edit. :-p [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 03:29, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
-If you looked at the original article as it was written, it contained some crude language. But thanks for working on the capitalization. It bothers me as well when articles are started like that.  [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 03:30, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
-I agree with you completely. I didn't want to bother with the article at the time, and I'm glad someone else did. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 03:32, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
-On a more humorous note, [http://www.barzelay.net/files/images/other/phelps.jpg this] was taken outside of Vandy when Phelps came to visit. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 03:52, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
-I saw that picture for sale in a liberal store downtown once. It's so funny.
-One of Phelps's lackeys told my friend that his hair was too long once. (I live about 25 miles from Topeka, so we get a lot of him.) [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 03:51, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
-:But everyone knows, Jesus doesn't like long hair... [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 03:52, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
-::::This man makes me question the First Amendment, he is just that much of a evil being.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:54, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
-I know. His speech is beyond reasonable and just disgusting. I would guess that a majority of Kansans would support his execution.
-And Colin, you may be thinking of Paul :) [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 03:55, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
-I know the feeling. I'm a huge believer in the importance of the First Amendment, especially free speech, but what he says is just so ridiculous it's hard to believe it's technically allowed. And MD, I was mostly referring to the fact that most men of Jesus' time had "longer" hair. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 04:03, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
-That's what I thought. I don't like to judge other Christians' salvation, but I have to make an exception here for old Freddie. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 04:05, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
-: OK, I saw you reverted the article back after I added content about the extent of his hate speach.  There needs away for this to be stated, especially if you are going to allow the b.s. about militant homosexuals on the page.  Otherwise this article makes him come across as less insane than he is.--[[User:Jack|Jack]] 18:04, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
-::I agree. I just don't think that the word "fag" is appropriate for an article on this site. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 20:05, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
-::: The hate crimes against Fred Phelps section is uncited b.s. and I think it should be deleted unless someone can give any evidence beyond Phelps' own paranoia and delusional rantings.  I'm doing you a favor--Fred Phelps is not your friend. --[[User:Jack|Jack]] 11:02, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
-:::: I'm also taking out the Al Gore contributions part since that isn't cited either. --[[User:Jack|Jack]] 11:04, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
-== Liberal Edits by Jack ==
-please push your liberal views in an article about yourself.  This article is about Fred Phelps views, not yours. [[User:RightWolf2|RightWolf2]] 13:01, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
-:: Ummmm, liberal views? You say that as if it was a bad thing.  One of the commandments here is that claims need to be properly sourced.  This article is certainly making a lot of excuses regarding one of the most abhorrant men in America today.  He goes to military funerals with signs that say "God Hates F*gs".  That is an objective, well documented fact.  However, the sysops delete it from the main page.  However, completely unsubstantiated claims by Phelps that HE is the victim of hate crimes is allowed to be left up.  --[[User:Jack|Jack]] 22:05, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
-::The subject of an article and their public statements are reliable sources for an article.   Phelps is preaching the literal statements of the Bible.  In fact, he is at the most extreme end of the spectrum with the limits of free speech I have ever seen.   The article is about his views and him.   And he is certainly notable. [[User:RightWolf2|RightWolf2]] 22:16, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
-:::RightWolf2, please stop editing the article to claim that Phelps is "literally following the Bible", and please stop attacking Jack.  [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 02:36, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
-:::1.  Not an attack, but a statement of my views.  2. When admins and their buddies start forming cabals to reinforce each other, free editing goes out the window.  3.  I am over 60 years old, I am a competent attorney, and I am not here to rain on anyones parade.  Just to add God's word.  4.  Your views of Phelps are "your views".  Articles about subjects as controversial as phelps should enshrine "his views", not everyone elses opinions. [[User:RightWolf2|RightWolf2]] 11:44, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
-==Landover Baptist==
-Is Fred Phelps' church the inspiration for the Landover Baptist Church website that mocks Christian Extremism?--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 15:57, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
-Yes. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 17:53, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
-==?==
-"Phelps, although outspoken and outlandish, is far less of a hypocrite than other Christian organizations who claim to be able to determine which verses from the Bible are literal from those that are allegorical."
-Wow. QED. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 02:19, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
-With all respect to the fact that it shouldn't be stated on an encyclopedia, Phelps probably is going to Hell. -'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 00:42, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
-==Phelps is PRO-FAMILY, not anti-homosexual==
-There's a reason Dr. Dobson called his institution "Focus on the Family" and not "We Hate Gays".  There's a reason that it's called the "Family Research Council".  The people who oppose the homosexual agenda are PRO-FAMILY, not anti-anything.  Even the mainstream media generally recognizes this fact and ignore the moonbats (just like they ignore the moonbats when the moonbats try to label "PRO-lifers" as "ANTI-choicers").  Even the mainstream media (which has been proven to be overwhelmingly liberal, remember) doesn't call Dr. Dobson a bigot or a homophobe.  So why shouldn't Conservapedia, which was created to espouse the CONSERVATIVE point of view, reflect what even liberals acknowledge?--[[User:Ashens|Ashens]] 02:38, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
-Phelps isn't a true conservative. He says Bush is going to burn in hell. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 02:39, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
-:Jeeze, conservatives aren't brainless clones who can't disagree!  I strongly disagree with Phelps on this matter, but that doesn't make him a non-conservative!  Besides, the issue isn't whether or not he's conservative, the issue is his PRO-FAMILY "bias"!--[[User:Ashens|Ashens]] 02:46, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
-*My reading of scripture, perhaps not as advanced as some, tells me if we keep judging, which God has said is his alone to do, we will all be burning. --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]</sup> 04:37, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
-:I agree with Terry, but as I've learned from much debating with christians, the argument doesn't work. They've chosen to ignore one thing the bible says in order to use another thing the bible says to achieve their goals or to justify their hate.[[User:Nsmyth|NSmyth]] 04:47, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
-*Well, really, in the Grand Scheme of things, it isn't important.  All of us, eventually, will face the harshest, yet most loving Judge in the Universe.  Justifications, and legal arguments won't be allowed, lol. ;-) --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]</sup> 04:50, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
-:You can be anti homosexual without being pro-family. The cult Phelps has developed targets and belittles families, he is truely a Bad person in every sense of the word, if he has gotten anything right it has been by way of accident [[User:Opcn|Opcn]] 01:44, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
-Being anti-homosexual is not being pro-family.  It is being pro-YOUR-idea-of-family, and forcing that idea on the rest of the world.  There's a big difference.-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 01:47, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
-Phelps is not pro-family, he's pro-hate. There's a difference. His websites are not family-friendly, his sermons are not, nor are his "hymns", and neither are his images. --[[User:Linus M.|Liπus the Turbogeek]]<sup>([[User talk:Linus M.|contact me]])</sup> 11:54, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
-What does Phelps stand for, _besides_ hating gays?  That seems to be his one schtick. And by all accounts, he psychologically and physically abused his OWN family, which doesn't sound too 'pro-family' to me.  [http://blank.org/addict/] (Court evidence--not for the weak of stomach.)  --[[User:Gulik3|Gulik3]] 07:56, 21 May 2007 (EDT)
-If what you say is true, then "pro-family" must oppose homosexuals becasue they asume that homosexuals are "anti-family". That is not true, it's not the desire of homosexual people to wreck family, they just want personal freedom to have the kind of living arangement they choose. The only reason they have gathered together is because it's their common cause to get that freedom for themselves. I'm pretty certain that if they had those rights, they would leave everyone else alone.
-Homosexuals don't suggest that everyone should be homosexual, that would be stupid, they just want the right to live their lives as they want to, not bothering anyone, and not being bothered by anyone. If God (if he exists) dislikes it it's solely up to him to judge, none of us are entitled to do that. --[[User:Atkins|Atkins]] 23:45, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
-It seems that whoever said that in the first place was being a parodist. We definitely don't stand for Phelps's hate here in Kansas, or here at Conservapedia. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 23:50, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
-== What the #$@% ==
-This page mention nothing about the sick twisted and evil nature of Fred Phelps and his family cult. I don't know how this site can call itself conservative and not utterly denounce someone who celebrates the deaths of our fighting men and women and taunts the families of our brave departed soldiers. I am disgusted that he gets off with one line of criticism. [[User:Opcn|Opcn]] 01:41, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
-:Opcn, I believe the principle at work here is "The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend."  Which is a very long way from "Love thine enemies" but that was just some liberal claptrap from about 33 AD or so.  [[User:Teresita|Banned User Teresita]] 01:50, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
-== Phelps and Religion ==
-"It's hard to be religious when certain people aren't incinerated by bolts of lightning." -- Calvin.
---[[User:Gulik3|Gulik3]] 07:46, 21 May 2007 (EDT)
-== disgusting liberal bias  ==
-this article is terribly condemning of this man. this is the same kind of p.c. bias crap that made me sick of wikipedia. mr. phelps believes in the same things we all do, so why is this article against hihm? he only believes in the things that jesus taught1!1[[User:Manifestdestiny|Manifestdestiny]] 18:42, 2 June 2007 (EDT)
-:Wrong.  At no time did Jesus ever condemn a soldier, unlike this man.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 18:49, 2 June 2007 (EDT)
-::but jesus did condemn homosexuals. [[User:Cryingeagles39|Cryingeagles39]] 12:51, 5 June 2007 (EDT)
-:::Jesus told everyone in plain terms that if they continued to sin, they would not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven.  His message in the Gospels was that everyone should repent.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:06, 5 June 2007 (EDT)
-Exactly. Jesus never specifically mentioned homosexuality in the gospels, but he did do what Karajou mentioned, which would encompass all types of sin, including homosexuality.  [[User:DanH|DanH]] 15:20, 5 June 2007 (EDT)
-*I do know Jesus commanded that we not judge, or we would be.  --[[User:TK|<small>Sysop-</small>TK]] <sub>[[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]]</sub> 01:12, 25 June 2007 (EDT)
-== God Hates Canada ==
-Didn't Phelps also light a flag on fire in the middle of an airport, thus causing his arrest? [[User:Kazumaru|Kazumaru]] 18:44, 13 August 2007 (EDT)
-I haven't heard about this! Do you have a link? [[User:DanH|DanH]] 18:44, 13 August 2007 (EDT)
-[http://www.holysmoke.org/hs02/phelps3.htm] is the best I can find. I was wrong, I guess. Seems he didn't actually get around to torching the flag. [[User:Kazumaru|Kazumaru]] 19:03, 13 August 2007 (EDT)
-:Nevermind... "When WBC members did in fact actually burn the Canadian flag in religious protest to Canada's approval of same-sex marriage, the so-called Christians of Canada were the loudest in denouncing WBC and "widely reviling" her Gospel message." That's from his God Hates Canada page. Appears I was mistaken about the airport thing, though. [[User:Kazumaru|Kazumaru]] 19:09, 13 August 2007 (EDT)
-== Phelps And The Democratic Party ==
-Can someone please get rid of this header at the bottom of the page? Seems a bit of a stretch to me. --[[User:Ouzo|Ouzo]] 14:35, 11 October 2007 (EDT)
-:I think we've addressed your concerns. [http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={91058469-F6DE-4615-8B2A-73CDF3E8FCAC} The "God Hates Fags" Left].  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 16:06, 11 October 2007 (EDT)

Difference between revisions of "Talk:Fred Phelps"

Latest revision as of 17:41, July 9, 2011

NPOV

Navigation menu

Search