Talk:Jerry Falwell

!

Due to the controversial nature of this article, it has been locked by the Administrators to prevent edit wars or vandalism. Sysops, please do not unlock it without first consulting the protecting sysop.

This page needs improvement to do justice to Rev. Falwell.

I rolled back the liberal gossip about Falwell and Rev. Moon. It's nothing more than a smear effort of the sort we don't allow under our rules. Falwell is not an adherent of Rev. Moon's church and Falwell is entitled to do business just like everyone else. The smear was unsupported by a credible resource.

Be fair to Christians and everyone else here.--Aschlafly 22:16, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

Also I'm not sure that rotten.com is a "reliable" source. Cracker_talk 22:18, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

My addition to this article is based on fact, not opinion. Critics do indeed attack Falwell's connection the Unification Church. This is not an attack or "smear" on Christians in general but a verifiable fact about the controversy surrounding a public figure. Opposing viewpoints supported by citations are welcome, but this is tantamount to censorhip. Rotten has an admitted liberal bias but all their info in this instance is credible and independently verifiable.

--Hektor 22:22, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

I'm going to edit this article over the next couple days. Falwell has been a tremendous educator, and his efforts deserve more than this. Stay tuned! --Thammersmith 21:12, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

I'm not sure why my changes were reverted. Jerry Falwell has ties to Republican causes and the Moral Majority is a part of the Religious Right, not the Religious right. For instance the Christian Coalition is part of the Religious Right as well. Learn together 01:58, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

(Belated question) How is it a "smear" to link Falwell and Moon? Has Rev. Moon done something wrong? (Apart from not accepting Young Earth creationism, I mean ;-) --Ed Poor 16:30, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Just passed away

CCN just reported his death today.--TimS 13:39, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Someone commented out his support for apartheid. Not sure why as it's factual and documented. I removed the comment block around it...apologies for the double edit.

Jerry Falwell was frequently misquoted and misinterpreted by anti-Christian enemies. Don't expect any unsourced, biased and misleading information, motivated by anti-Christian animus, to be allowed here.--Aschlafly 16:20, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

My Civil Procedure professor represented Larry Flynt in his successful defense of Falwell's suit before the Supreme Court. He also played Falwell's attorney (switching sides) in the film version of the trial. Fun stuff. -Speaker 16:38, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

South Africa and apartheid

Time magazine, Monday, Sep. 02, 1985:

• Falwell opposes apartheid, but professed faith that Botha will dismantle the system eventually, if only everyone is patient. [1]

I stand corrected. I'll update changes to reflect this. Stompum

• Page is locked. Mods please remove the line about Falwell's support for Apartheid.

Sept 11 comments

Why were these deleted? They're important, widely publicized, etc. I can't imagine anything other than censorship - that hallmark of Wikipedia - that would compel you to leave his unpopular side out of the article.-Speaker 17:13, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

When will you revert to re-include his Sept 11th comments?-Speaker 17:44, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

I believe that in the Nancy Pelosi article there is a section about her marching in the same group as a NAMBLA member. Seems very biased and one-sided to leave that part in there, but then take out any mention of Falwell's hateful statements on 9-11 because it might make him look bad. Prof0705 17:52, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

I don't think you are going to see anything but a hagiography here. Mr. Falwell represents everything this site's owners hold dear. I'll stick to paraphrasing Randi Rhodes: "If I had anything sympathetic to say about that man at all, I'd say it." But these people love him, and it's their site. Human 18:30, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Hagiography! Now there's a ten dollar word! Despite his apology, Rev. Falwell's quotes will forever be part of the 9/11 memory. But since the sysops love him, there's no way they'll include anything slightly negative here. RIP Falwell. Hope you don't meet any pagans, homosexuals, feminists, or ACLU members in heaven. Czolgolz 11:29, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

Well let's make sure the comments are recorded on the talk page if not in the article. Does anybody dispute that the Rev. Falwell said this? The abortionists have got to bear some burden for [the attacks of Sept. 11] because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way -- all of them who have tried to secularize America -- I point the finger in their face and say, 'You helped this happen.'--Britinme 19:21, 18 May 2007 (EDT)

If he apologized & retracted the statement, why should we repeat it? And without making that point, it's more out of context quote mining. RobS 21:13, 18 May 2007 (EDT)

I didn't know he'd apologized and retracted, but thank you for telling everybody so that we have that clear. However, he said it and presumably he said it because he thought it. Moreover, it's totally in line with other things he said, so I have no reason to think he said something he didn't mean. The fact that he was shamed into retracting it because it was so howlingly outrageous doesn't mean it doesn't represent what he thought.--Britinme 22:28, 18 May 2007 (EDT)

Yes that is a good point. Let me throw out a rhetorical question: (a) Do you think gay adoption would be a good propaganda recruiting tool to exploit by Islamic terrorists, and (b) Do advocates of gay adoption have any moral responsibility to the rest of us if in fact gay adoption is a good recruiting tool to get suicide bombers to kill Americans? RobS 23:14, 18 May 2007 (EDT)

a) No - it is totally simplistic to imagine that terrorists attack us because they think we're morally decadent b) That is a 'have you stopped beating your wife yet' question. Now I'll ask you a couple of questions. a) Do you think Jerry Falwell's statements that "I think Muhammad was a terrorist" and that he "was a -- a violent man, a man of war" - statements against a man regarded by Muslims with as much reverence as Christians regard Jesus Christ, and that he later stood by - were more likely or less likely to increase terrorist attacks against Americans both here and in Iraq? [2] And b) do you think Conservapedia's continuing to host (for at least the last two months) a copy of one of the cartoons that caused rioting in Denmark on our article about the Muhammad cartoons controversy is more likely or less likely to help bring about peace? --Britinme 23:12, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

I think the 9-11 comments are important because they may show an inadvertent but disturbing (mis)interpretation of Scripture on the part of the good Reverend. When the Lord God was moved to destroy the city of Sodom, Abraham bargained with Him to wait until all the good innocents were evacuated. In fact God said that He would not smite the city that invented gang rape, sodomy, incest, homosexuality, miscegenation and all other sins UNTIL the innocent were freed from its evil clutches. I do not believe that God would send his angels (in the guise of Muslims no less) to destroy the WTC until the buildings were cleared of innocents. I realize there were probably Jews, Muslims, homosexuals and other apostates in the towers but nonetheless there must have been at least 10 good Christians in the towers when the planes hit. Scripture tells us God would not do such a thing. I do not know why the Good Reverend would say such a thing. He was probably trying to make sense of the world at a time when things seemed to vulnerable, tender, fragile, and ripe for violation. But I believe that he mistook the work of Satan for that of God, and by conflating Satan's work with the name of God he in effect called Satan "God". See Gen 18:16

Thus we must allow the comments to be published to show us that he was truly a Good Christian, one who was capable of making mistakes like any human being who occasionally mistakes Satan's tricks for acts of God.

Also, according to the piece by John F. Harris running in the Washington Post on Friday, September 14, 2001 he did not apologize or retract the statement but framed it as a theological issue, thereby furthering my argument.

As to the "gay adoption" dilemma mentioned above, I am horrified by what I am about to say, for it has disturbed me to even contemplate such prurient thoughts - shame on you for bringing up such a topic in an otherwise wholesome discussion. Must we resort to discussions of sodomite behavior even in a discussion page about the only recently deceased Good Reverend? I do not believe that "gay adoption" is even in the Arabic vocabulary. All they need to do is tune into any of Rupert Murdoch's satellite stations and see the depravity that is Baywatch, Charlie's Angels, the Badge, Beverly Hill 90210, Paris Hilton, Janis Joplin and Ms. Coulter's too short skirts to know that American conservatism has failed to rein in rampant sexuality and avarice. Regularity

Quotes

Here's a website (I know it's biased, but the quotes are accurate): http://home.att.net/~jrhsc/devil.html

You can form your own opinion about him, I don't care what you think, but I just thought it might be helpful to create an opinion on him (to conservatives: look for the two anti-semitic quotes.) MiddleMan

Oh really? Let's take this one,

• Alcoholism and Negroes

"There are almost as many alcoholics as there are negroes." Rev. Jerry Falwell

You alleged "source" gives us a classic argumentum ad ignoratiam. RobS 17:57, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Your reply is barely coherent. Explanation?-Speaker 17:58, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Your source uses the conjunctive word, "and"; Rev. Falwell nowhere conjoins alcholism and Negroes; in fact, Rev. Falwell does a compararison of the statisical population of both. This is typical of the trite garbage that passes as reasoned discourse from some sectors of liberalism. RobS 18:04, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

So that's one quote that might be out of context. The rest, though?-Speaker 18:06, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Hey, don't shoot the messenger (I did mention the source is biased), you're entitled to your own opinion. MiddleMan

OK, I randomly picked a liberal quote of Jerry Falwell:

"I listen to feminists and all these radical gals - most of them are failures. They've blown it. Some of them have been married, but they married some Casper Milquetoast who asked permission to go to the bathroom. These women just need a man in the house. That's all they need. Most of the feminists need a man to tell them what time of day it is and to lead them home. And they blew it and they're mad at all men. Feminists hate men. They're sexist. They hate men - that's their problem."

Colorful and statistically accurate. I agree it's not politically correct. Go to Hillary Clinton for political correctness. Jerry Falwell spoke the truth in a colorful way, and we thank him for that.--Aschlafly 18:19, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

How come you don't like women?

Hey I'll have to tell my husband he's a Casper Milquetoast who needs to ask me for permission to go to the bathroom. He'll die laughing. Do people really take these ridiculous stereotypes seriously?--Britinme 19:17, 18 May 2007 (EDT)

How about these?

"The idea of separation of Church and State was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country."

Rev. Jerry Falwell

"If you're not a born-again Christian, you're a failure as a human being."

Rev. Jerry Falwell

"He is purple - the gay-pride colour; and his antenna is shaped like a triangle - the gay-pride symbol."

Rev. Jerry Falwell (Falwell on the teletubbies, come on, how much more paranoid can you get?)

Did he really say this? Check a less biased source.Bohdan

Falwell's magazine to his supporters (and not even Falwell himself) first brought up the topic, but it was a repeat of what was already being winked at in media circles. Both Time Magazine and TV guide had already brought out the same information (albeit not in a negative form), a fact easily forgotten when the opportunity to blame Jerry Falwell arose. Learn together 22:06, 18 May 2007 (EDT)

I got 10 identical matches on the first page of google... MiddleMan

Yes, but he himself did not say this. It was his newspaper. He had no involvement.Bohdan

I wasn't there, and wikipedia is rather vague about it, but the BBC link is pretty clear, what do you think of his claims about Jews? MiddleMan

He said: "God doesn't listen to Jews." --Britinme 19:20, 18 May 2007 (EDT)

And for all those people with little Israeli flags on their user pages:

"I know a few of you here today don't like Jews. And I know why. He can make more money accidentally than you can on purpose.

Rev. Jerry Falwell

The Jews are returning to their land of unbelief. They are spiritually blind and desperately in need of their Messiah and Savior.

Jerry Falwell, Listen, America!

MiddleMan

Confronting his critics

While I disagree with the Rev on many issues, he was never afraid to discuss his disagreements with others. He would have gladly sat down with Clinton, Dawkins, anyone, and debated any issue. I do wish more people would follow that example, rather than censoring or pushing away those with whom they disagree.JoyousOne 20:22, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

History will judge him harshly

Ultimately, Falwell was one of the group who used religion as a cause for separating rather than uniting. His notoriously stupid remarks about gays just after 9/11, a somewhat thinly disguised anti-semetism, and some absurd remarks on pop culture (you know, the one about the Tele-tubby being a gay role model), rather than appealing to our better selves, goaded our darker sides.

My reading of the new testatment indicates that Jesus preached tolerance and loving thy neighbor. And indeed, when I was a kid, I recall religous folks were always pretty nice people, even if their kids couldn't play hockey on Sunday.

Tell you what, read the book of Matthew, look at some old Billy Graham sermons, and forget this mean-spirted blowhard.--Trajsmith 20:44, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

My reading of the new testatment indicates that Jesus preached whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. When you say "his notroruiously stupid remarks," you sound exactly like Rev. Jerry Falwall, that is you are not trashing Falwell the sinner, but rather make reference to his foolish behavior. This is just as Falwell always said, hate the sin but love the sinner. When you refer to Falwell as a meanspirited blowhard, however that is ad hominem--to the man (or sinner). Now, how shall we characterize "blowhard"? Is it akin to "raca", meaning worthless, or "fool", in danger of the fires of Gehenna?

What never ceases to amaze me is when someone seeks to mock Christians by quoting the Bible they just cannot seem to ever get it correct. RobS 00:02, 18 June 2007 (EDT)

So I guess an apology means nothing, huh? RobS 21:14, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

I don't think that an apology undoes the harm he did to a country that was trying to heal, when he tore the wounds open & rubbed salt in them again.-Speaker 21:25, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

will someone explain exactly what harm he did?Bohdan

Bohdan, here [3]

Speaker, Frankly, I'm certain Falwell spoke from the heart, and quickly realized America needed to be united in the coming war, and not fighting among ourselves. That's why he immediately issued the apology. Truth is, I'm also fairly certain Falwell gave voice to the sentiments a lot of other Americans were experiencing at the same time. And based upon the daily drumbeat of hatred we see from gays and neopagans directed at Bush, (and comments we've seen here), Falwell was right. RobS 21:42, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Daily drumbeat of hatred from homosexuals and neopagans? Can you give an... actual example? I'm thrilled to see it.-Speaker 21:53, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Polls say 60%+ nolonger wish to take the war to the terrorists. RobS 21:57, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

I hate to say it, but that's 60% of the American people, right? So it's not like it's exclusively gays and pagans who don't particularly like Bush. I'm sure there are people in the 60% who are not gay or pagan who hate Bush, while not the majority. GofG _|^|_| Talk 21:59, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Go to Category:Anti-war movement and see who's been anti-war since Falwell made this statement. Incidentally, too bad the NAMBLA article got deleted, they've been leading the anti-war movement since March 2003. But for reference, you can visit NAMBLA advocate Harry Hay. Seems he's no stranger to anti-war activity and working with America's enemies since the Korean War. RobS 23:07, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

That's Guilt By Association, and it is most certainly a fallacy. NAMBLA most certainly has not been leading the anti-war movement. Have you seen any news reports about NAMBLA organizing anti-war protests? I sure haven't. Not on Fox or otherwise.

Then again, you might be implying that the reason why NAMBLA is anti-war is because Falwell accused them of being responsible. As he didn't even mention NAMBLA in the quote, I find this hard to believe. GofG _|^|_| Talk 07:14, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

Past tense

Someone who actually sees "edit" rather than "view source" on the article page should go around and change all the verbs to past tense so that instead of saying he does something they say he did something. The man is dead. He's not doing any of those things anymore. Nakedtruth 23:06, 15 May 2007 (EDT)

Name

Add: Jerry Laymon Falwell Sr.

Thank you

--User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 07:58, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

External links

Add also a link:

External Links: J. F. Website

And a pic: Image:Falwell.jpg|right

( source:http://www.falwell.com/index.cfm?PID=13737 )

--User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 08:03, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

I would think that this first image is too wide for use on a CP page and should be cropped. However, I haven't checked the copyright so:
1. Is it legal in the first instance?
2. Would any license be invalidated by cropping? BrianCo 23:26, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

Picture

Can this picture be added to the article. I uploaded it before I realized the page was locked.

Edit protected requests

1. Please put a section header before the third paragraph in the "Controversy" section called "Personal", or something else appropriate - neither his marriage, nor homegoing were controversial

2. Please add proper attribution information to the image description page. The image copyright is owned by "Liberty University" and it has been released under the GFDL.

Thank you. --BigDT 14:27, 17 June 2007 (EDT)

Tense Still a Problem

Locking a page has its problems... like having things still say that Falwell "does" things when he is in fact "done." Rockthecasbah 07:37, 19 March 2008 (EDT)

Typo

There is a typo in the first sentence of the "Controversy" section, but the article appears to be locked against editing. Can somebody please fix it? AlexWD 20:48, 15 December 2009 (EST)