quote:I imagine that's not close to being true, but if it is, I feel very sorry for you.
To me, this is something that most adults worthy of the name are capable of doing. You may have a different perspective if you hung out with a more mature crowd.
Ha! Tell me more, Mr. Squicky, about having a lack of perspective to comment, hmm?
*sigh* If only my crowd was as mature as Mr. Squicky's! Then he wouldn't have to feel sorry for me! *sigh*
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Despise the actions of the man, if you like, but don't despise the man. Falwell was a man who, by all appearances, seemed dedicated to doing what he thought was a great good for the world. It is possible that his beliefs were twisted, leading him to do things that merely seemed good to someone with his distorted viewpoint - things which may have actually caused a great deal of evil and which contradicted God's will. If so then it is his beliefs and the actions that resulted from those beliefs that you should despise, not Falwell himself.
For that reason, I don't think anyone should call this a happy event. Falwell's beliefs and actions did not die yesterday. They existed long before him, and will continue on in many other people. Rather, it was a person that passed away - and that is never a thing that merits celebration.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, and just to be clear, I agree with what Samp said about Falwell too. The one-sided commentary, that is. There was more to the man than just that, but those were definitely big parts of him.
quote:Rakeesh, I pretty much agree with what Samp said, and I don't despise Falwell nor am I glad he's dead. I think, intellectually, he did a lot of harm in the world, but he's so far removed from me that I have little to no emotional response to him at all. For me to despise him, I would have to know him personally or at least what he has done would have to have directly harmed me or those I hold dear. So I don't think there was anything disingenuous about Samp's post, and your attack on him frankly baffles me. Say he's being rude if you want, but I don't see where you get off saying he's not being honest.
*shrug* Perhaps we define the word 'despise' differently, then.
You're not glad Rev. Falwell is dead, then. What are your feelings on the fact that his hate-filled, bigoted, intolerant, makes-the-world-worse presence and influence can no longer be felt directly in the world?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
He was trying to do what he thought was right. I happen to disagree with almost everything he stood for, but I do give him credit for trying to do what he thought was right. There's a huge credit in that, I think.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fred Phelps is, by all accounts, doing what he thinks is right.
In fact, I would say that it is far, far rarer for people to consciously work towards goals they believe are wrong.Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think it will make much difference one way or the other, honestly. There are plenty of people who will carry on what I found distasteful about his work, and plenty of others who will act to make the world a more loving, accepting, tolerant place. All I can do is try to be one of the latter more than I am one of the former. There is nothing to rejoice in in a man's death, but I can't say I particularly mourn his passing, either. He is irrelevant to me, except for as a public figure (now a historical figure) who I believe was severely misguided in how he chose to serve his god.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm glad his specific influence was removed. I'm not glad that this was acheived by his death. There were many better ways, for the world and for himself, that the former could have happened without the latter.
---
edit:
I did want good things to happen to Jerry Falwell. There was always a chance for him to be redeemed from the dark path he walked. And while I may have wanted his pernicious influence to be destroyed, I didn't wish ill on the man himself.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd have to go with MrSquicky here. I don't enjoy the death of an enemy, but I can certainly enjoy the absence of his motivating force.
I don't despise Falwell. I don't know him, never met him, never will, now. I do heartily despise a vast amount of everything he has ever publicly said, but he may have been an excellent dinner companion. And, to his credit, he remains one of the few big televangelists who was not caught committing what he preached against.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're right that it's true for Fred Phelps too, and for any number of really unsavory people.
Yet I was thinking of the huge number of us who vaguely wish some things would change, but never really work toward positive change, or give much of ourselves in the effort to make it happen. I don't admire Fred Phelps and others like him, yet I do think they get some credit, in the grand equation, for working toward what they think is right.
For instance, Malcolm X was a great man, I think, because he sought the truth, and was honest, and true to himself. Even though in his early days he believed in some things that I think were bigoted and mistaken, he worked for what he thought was right, and learned a lot along the way. I only hope I make as few mistakes, and am willing to change and grow as much as he did in his life both public and private. I admire him as a person.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:In fact, I would say that it is far, far rarer for people to consciously work towards goals they believe are wrong.
I'd think that nobody does that - which is why I've argued previously that all people are fundamentally good.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh, I think you misunderstand me. You were the one who said that the people you know aren't mature by saying that they aren't capable of doing something that adults should be able to do. I don't actually think that this is true, but if it is, I do feel bad for you, because in that case, it sounds like you may not be getting good examples of how adults (and Christians) are supposed to act.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
No, I think there are people who consciously work for choices which they know will benefit only themselves but will cause, in sum total, a net loss to the world. And I think many of these people believe that this should be considered "wrong," but do it anyway.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:But you don't harbor any ill-will towards a man who was "...pro-apartheid, anti-civil rights, virulently homophobic, aggressively bigoted man who devoted his life to essentially making life worse for a lot of people by propagating his intolerance...", right?
C'mon, your words make it pretty clear you despised the man, and that you're glad or at least relieved he's dead.
Which is fine with me, honestly. What gets my goat is the pretense of courtesy and tolerance.
There is no pretense. I simply do not celebrate the passing of a human being, nor do I despise Falwell. I also am not 'glad or relieved' that he's dead, because it's a selfish thing to be glad about when it entails so much tragedy to those close to him. Why would I waste time despising a dead man? If anything, I'm just sorry that he chose to dedicate his life's work to ends which were so profoundly harmful to so many people.
But there is a commentary that has to take place, and that is that the man had a past full of opinions and actions that come to the forefront as his life is analyzed. That is the extent of what the man was, in my unflattering summary.
He was a man who did and said bad things. Even if I'm going to give my condolences and feel bad about his death, it doesn't mean that he gets an automatic whitewash for the judgement that will be rendered here on earth based on his actions. What I write is something that I consider to be an essentially accurate account of Falwell's general notoriety. I, too, can claim to hate the sin yet not the sinner. If you want to claim that I'm a liar with whatever pretenses I ostensibly have, that's your judgement to make, I guess.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
I thought I'd been getting along with you pretty well lately, and in the interests of continuing to do so, I'm going to drop this aspect of the conversation with you and just say that I disagree what you describe makes someone mature or a Christian or an adult.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm aware of that. You also think it is okay to use "They started it." as an excuse for your own poor behavior, which I wouldn't accept from a pre-schooler.
I'm trying to get across that, if this is how the people you hang around with act, you might benefit from seeking out or emulating a more mature crowd.
Or, at the very least, not accuse people of lying because you have a limited view of what adults should be like.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
All this assuming people feel glee or are glad someone is dead just because they seriously disagreed with his actions, and expressed that disagreement, is pretty disgusting.
I had felt everyone was being pretty respectful. I was taught to leave the dead in peace, and I do.
quote:No, I think there are people who consciously work for choices which they know will benefit only themselves but will cause, in sum total, a net loss to the world. And I think many of these people believe that this should be considered "wrong," but do it anyway.
I think that those people just think it is right for them to be selfish. They may realize society considers their behavior "wrong" in some abstract moral sense, but don't understand the value in acting in accordance with that morality.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
If there is any hope of letting this thread be about honoring the dead, please, let it be that. This is too much like going to a funeral and having people duke it out, knock the body over, fall into the floral wreaths, etc. OK, actually that would be fun to watch, but only if it was just a movie.
Posts: 544 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Squicky, I've made myself very clear that I'm dropping this with you. I don't want to fight with you for a change, and I'm not remotely interested at this time with how you think adults should behave, so keep your character judgements to yourself.
-----------------------------
Porce, I don't think anyone (here) feels glee that he's dead. I remain convinced, though, that there are people who are glad he's dead. How couldn't you be for someone whose influence and life you found so hateful?
I'm not talking about, if you or Samp had the choice, you'd kill him or something. I'm talking about there being something, even if it's just a little part, that's glad he's dead, because of his hateful influence.
People have expressed gladness when loved ones die sometimes, if they're suffering. Why is it so ridiculous to assume that someone might be glad a hate-filled bigot (as he has been described here) is dead, when he inflicts suffering on the world (again, another description here)?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Qaz, Could yout point exactly what it is that bothers you about this?
I don't think (or at least I very much hope) that you are going to get a thread on Hatrack honoring Jerry Falwell. The way he conducted himself while he was alive was not worthy of honor and I don't think that that changes merely because he died.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why is it so ridiculous to assume that someone might be glad a hate-filled bigot (as he has been described here) is dead, when he inflicts suffering on the world (again, another description here)?
It isn't, really. But that's not what you did.
It is unacceptible to snark at people, accusing them of being liars and of pretending to courtesy and tolerance, and say that they must despise people. It is ridiculuous to ignore what Samp, ElJay, CB, porce, and I have said about this.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not ridiculous to ignore what you said. My reply was to porce, not to you. I meant what I said about dropping this with you, Mr. Squicky.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
No glee here, honest to goodness. No sadness, really, except for his family. I'm sure he was a pretty nifty grandad. We all go eventually, and I hope someone sees evidence of an organizing intelligence in the universe in the manner of my passing, when the time comes.
Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Their 2nd reason to me is what makes it all come together, incidentally its that reason that is the most specious.
Makes the most sense, yet makes the least sense, weird huh? "Speaking out against WBC's rightful bible preaching = sinning against the Holy Ghost." And here I had no idea I had already commited the unpardonable sin.
Falwell speaking out against the WBC is one thing I can compliment him for doing.
edit: I just realized by their logic, anyone who speaks out against them is beyond Jesus' saving grace. What a terribly powerful thing to claim.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I may have to change my plans and request a funeral when I die, just in the hopes that Fred Phelps will picket me.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just read a decent biography of Phelps, and I must confess there is MUCH more to him then I originally thought.
So much contradiction that makes a weird sort of sense. I highly reccomend reading his wikipedia article and checking the references.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:In fact, I would say that it is far, far rarer for people to consciously work towards goals they believe are wrong.
I'd think that nobody does that - which is why I've argued previously that all people are fundamentally good.
I wholeheartedly believe capitalism is wrong and detrimental and yet I am working very hard to own my own business someday. I am fundamentally EVIL. Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Qaz, Could yout point exactly what it is that bothers you about this?
I don't think (or at least I very much hope) that you are going to get a thread on Hatrack honoring Jerry Falwell. The way he conducted himself while he was alive was not worthy of honor and I don't think that that changes merely because he died.
It bothers me to see hatred and venom spewing out at any time. It is especially not good the day after the target of your hatred died, to turn the thread on the topic into a childish squabble.
But I know I cannot win this. I wish those who are so full of hatred could feel ashamed enough to change their hearts, since after all they can't change anyone else's anyway, especially a dead guy's.
Since I can't win I'll just give my opinion. Falwell didn't rape or murder or kidnap anyone, but he is way more hated here (US) than bin Laden or Saddam Hussein. I think it is partly because we all know it is perfectly safe to hate people like him -- he would never try to exact revenge -- and also because we hate people who damage us where it matters most. The genocidal maniacs and terrorists, all they do is kill people that aren't us. Falwell did something else: he said there was a moral authority and that some of the things we do violate it. When it's a contest between ourselves being dissed and someone else being tortured and killed, there is no contest: we hate the man who only used words. Like Mel Brooks said in this mangled quote, "Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall into a pit and die."
A more honorable perspective is "I disagree with him, may he rest in peace." Many here have said that.
Posts: 544 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
You should really go look up the threads that happened after Hussein was executed, if you think Falwell is more hated. They were completely vicious.
However, the fact remains that this is not a funeral or a wake, and we are not in the company of the deceased's relatives. This is a discussion board, and this is an event that was reported in the news. While I agree that there's no reason to be disrespectful, discussing the facts of his life and politics is not spewing hatred, and is perfectly appropriate.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Qaz: Since I can't win I'll just give my opinion. Falwell didn't rape or murder or kidnap anyone, but he is way more hated here (US) than bin Laden or Saddam Hussein. I think it is partly because we all know it is perfectly safe to hate people like him -- he would never try to exact revenge -- and also because we hate people who damage us where it matters most. The genocidal maniacs and terrorists, all they do is kill people that aren't us. Falwell did something else: he said there was a moral authority and that some of the things we do violate it. When it's a contest between ourselves being dissed and someone else being tortured and killed, there is no contest: we hate the man who only used words.
Falwell tried very, very hard, for most of his adult life, to create a world that I dont want to live in. He wasnt just a preacher who tried to influence his flock to live a Christian life. He was a political and religious leader with alot of power in his hayday, pushing an agenda that is almost the complete antithesis of everything I believe in. To say he "only used words" severly downplays the power words have in our society.
I dont mourn his death, nor do I feel the moral obligation to do so. If anything, I mourn the world that might have been had he chosen to direct his considerable intelligence and charisma towards promoting peace and tolerance, as opposed to hatred, fear, and bigotry. He is one of the people who helped create the United States we live in today. I would not thank him for that.
Posts: 499 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If nothing else, the "pro-Apartheid" appellation should be supported a little more. Opposition to particular forms of anti-Apartheid sanctions does not automatically make one pro-Apartheid.
So far the sites I've found only quote the common wisdom that he "supported Apartheid" and quotes one anti-Tutu remark he made.
quote:Upon his return to the U.S. last week, Falwell denounced the drive in Congress for economic sanctions against South Africa and urged "reinvestment" instead of divestment. Falwell opposes apartheid, but professed faith that Botha will dismantle the system eventually, if only everyone is patient. The alternative, he said, is either a more draconian white regime or a Soviet-aligned revolution. Falwell also insisted that nonwhite South Africans agree with him. Referring to one who does not, Nobel- Prizewinning Bishop Desmond Tutu, Falwell said, "I think he's a phony, period, as far as representing the black people of South Africa."
That contains all the evidence I've seen cited for Falwell being "pro-Apartheid" on the couple of pages of a Google search. The statement that he opposes Apartheid is equally unsupported, of course. So far, I've seen nothing to allow someone to evaluate his stance.
Could someone - perhaps the one who made the initial accusation - please post some direct evidence?
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can feel frustrated or angered by Falwell, but I refuse to rejoice at his death. My heart's with his family.
Posts: 208 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, that Phelps news release made me think fondly of Falwell. That's scary, as the Rev. Falwell and I didn't agree on quite a few things.
But Phelps, man what a miserable sot he must really be. That much hatred cannot be a pleasant thing to live with.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Could someone - perhaps the one who made the initial accusation - please post some direct evidence?
Falwell started his career as a segregationist. Falwell used the Bible to claim the 1954 Supreme Court integration decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka was 'a satanic plot.' Hell, in 1967 he started a racially segregated christian school to attempt to keep schools segregated.
He even gave sermons at segregationist rallies as late as 1969, and supported and even ran schools that taught segregationalism based on the belief that blacks were stricken with "The curse of Ham" and were meant to be subservient to whites. He spoke out openly against Martin Luther King and he called his era the 'civil wrongs movement.' Hell, he even got a lot of Liberty teachers from the Bob Jones university, which he refused to denounce.
This makes the pro-apartheid stance fairly unsurprising.
In 1985, he went to South Africa to put his full support behind P.W. Botha, and acted out as a critic of sanctions of Apartheid. He even asked for his christian flock to back up Botha by investing in the currency of the minority white government there. In the process, he calls Desmond Tutu a phony.
While his actions were very unambiguously pro-apartheid, he tried to retcon the event. He has not very consistent in many dealings, and he would try to bury his past as soon as his actions and preachings were liable to destroy his empire. Even rotten noted that whenever Falwell was confronted with a choice between money, connections, or the appearance of propriety, propriety came last. This is why Falwell got all huggy-huggy with the former 'blasphemer' Reverend Sun Myung Moon after the good reverend bailed out Liberty College. He retcons. He recalled many of his earlier sermons to avoid the potential damage that could be incurred from their openly racist views.
As was the case with Falwell and blacks, as was the case with Falwell and Apartheid. When King was marching, he spoke against the man and said that we shouldn't trust him because of his 'known left-wing associations' and claimed that King's methods were only pretending to be nonviolent. Four decades later, he did a polar waffle and had the audacity to claim that he had supported King. Likewise with his position on Apartheid, which he tried to sugarcoat and alter.
Unfortunately, his actions speak louder than his retcons. He acted in support of the minority white south african government. He acted in support of P.W. Botha. He acted in support of apartheid. I know that there's a sight bit of historical revision dangled out there, but I don't buy it. The only real substance to the counterclaim are his trademark watery 'half-apologies' to individuals like Desmond Tutu. I would assume that the real motivation behind his actions involving South Africa would be ambiguous and might be innocent. If he hadn't had decades of history as a segregationist racist.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I can feel frustrated or angered by Falwell, but I refuse to rejoice at his death. My heart's with his family.
Refusing to rejoice is one thing. That's a noble idea, and I applaud you for it.
But a related question is: when you first heard about it, what was your first reaction?
Honestly, my first reaction was, "Well, maybe this will calm the waters." Maybe not the best reaction, I suppose, but first reactions aren't always the best.
Posts: 208 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: So you've got nothing new on it, samprimary. OK, thanks.
Information that he urged his flock to support and prop up the south african government against sanctions by investing in their currency is certainly not included in your 'all the evidence I've seen cited.'
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
