Post Reply
Page 2 of 7  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Appropriate response to Westboro and the Phelps Klan.
3 years ago  ::  Mar 22, 2011 - 10:22AM #11
Christianlib
Posts: 21,848

Mar 22, 2011 -- 10:20AM, Ironhold wrote:


My recommendation for dealing with the Phelps?


 


Nickel & dime them to death.


Whenever they plan to show up somewhere, have cops on-hand to nail them on each and every last little thing.


Did one of the adults drop a candy wrapper? He'd better go pick it up and put it in the trash or else that's a ticket for littering.


Are all of your permits in order to actually protest? Better file at city hall if not.


Stuff like that.




 You can't beat them that way, Iron.


Most of them are lawyers.  That is exactly their game, inciting other people until they do something, then suing--individuals, churches, police depts., etc.


It is how the group supports itself.  This is all a moneymaking scheme.

Democrats think the glass is half full.
Republicans think the glass is theirs.
Libertarians want to break the glass, because they think a conspiracy created it.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 22, 2011 - 10:34AM #12
arielg
Posts: 9,116
Mar 22, 2011 -- 11:20AM, Ironhold wrote:

My recommendation for dealing with the Phelps?


Nickel & dime them to death.


Whenever they plan to show up somewhere, have cops on-hand to nail them on each and every last little thing.


Did  one of the adults drop a candy wrapper? He'd better go pick it up and  put it in the trash or else that's a ticket for littering.


Are all of your permits in order to actually protest? Better file at city hall if not.


Stuff like that.




Childish ways of expressing self-righteousness.



Why do you have to "deal" with them at all?  Why don't you just live your life and let them express the way they see it?

 If they were breaking any laws, they would have been dealt with  long ago.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 22, 2011 - 10:35AM #13
Christianlib
Posts: 21,848

Stephen,


I don't think they are "functioning in the name of Christ."


They may claim to be.  But that doesn't make it true.

Democrats think the glass is half full.
Republicans think the glass is theirs.
Libertarians want to break the glass, because they think a conspiracy created it.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 22, 2011 - 10:35AM #14
Stephenway
Posts: 225

What is tragic- they are functioning under the name of Christ.  Jesus said love your enemies.  By that, I mean these Westboro people seem to have identified the wrong people as their enemy, but if they perceive them as the enemy, they are supposed to love them.


These people obviously don't know my Christ.  They are too cruel to be defined by the Christian name in my opinion.  Yet they give true Christians a black eye.


Love ya', Steve

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 22, 2011 - 10:39AM #15
Stephenway
Posts: 225

Mar 22, 2011 -- 10:35AM, Christianlib wrote:


Stephen,


I don't think they are "functioning in the name of Christ."


They may claim to be.  But that doesn't make it true.





It's my understanding that they claim to be a church who worships Christ and are working under the auspices of that church.  Am I wrong.  If not, they are functioning 'under' the name of Christ, but it is not Christ's work, so therefore, their functioning is inappropriately categorized as a church (under the name of Christ) action.  Love ya', Steve

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 22, 2011 - 11:01AM #16
Iwantamotto
Posts: 8,153

BetteTheRedde:   Organize it via social media. The kids would love doing it. Meeting the Phelps' hate with love AND humour.



As I recall, that's what Comic Con did.  Nothing says fun like watching Buddy Christ and Boba Fett mocking irrational religious protesters.  :)


And I disagree that being a smartass is childish.  They want to be taken seriously.  They need to learn their real place in life.  After all, mocking them isn't against the law, right?

Knock and the door shall open.  It's not my fault if you don't like the decor.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 22, 2011 - 11:19AM #17
arielg
Posts: 9,116

"Thank God for dead soldiers" is more Christian than blessing them to go and kill. Not nice, but true.  Dead soldiers don't kill anyone.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 22, 2011 - 11:32AM #18
Stephenway
Posts: 225

Mar 22, 2011 -- 11:19AM, arielg wrote:


"Thank God for dead soldiers" is more Christian than blessing them to go and kill. Not nice, but true.  Dead soldiers don't kill anyone.





Whatever the religious or philosophical reasoning, that doesn't make it Christian like to put their families under unnecessary emotional stress and turmoil.  Love ya', Steve

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 22, 2011 - 11:38AM #19
Christianlib
Posts: 21,848

Mar 22, 2011 -- 10:39AM, Stephenway wrote:


Mar 22, 2011 -- 10:35AM, Christianlib wrote:


Stephen,


I don't think they are "functioning in the name of Christ."


They may claim to be.  But that doesn't make it true.





It's my understanding that they claim to be a church who worships Christ and are working under the auspices of that church.  Am I wrong.  If not, they are functioning 'under' the name of Christ, but it is not Christ's work, so therefore, their functioning is inappropriately categorized as a church (under the name of Christ) action.  Love ya', Steve




OK,


I didn't understand how you were parsing the term.  It makes sense now.


I think it also falls under "taking the Lord's name in vain," don't you.

Democrats think the glass is half full.
Republicans think the glass is theirs.
Libertarians want to break the glass, because they think a conspiracy created it.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 22, 2011 - 11:46AM #20
Stephenway
Posts: 225

Mar 22, 2011 -- 11:38AM, Christianlib wrote:


Mar 22, 2011 -- 10:39AM, Stephenway wrote:


Mar 22, 2011 -- 10:35AM, Christianlib wrote:


Stephen,


I don't think they are "functioning in the name of Christ."


They may claim to be.  But that doesn't make it true.





It's my understanding that they claim to be a church who worships Christ and are working under the auspices of that church.  Am I wrong.  If not, they are functioning 'under' the name of Christ, but it is not Christ's work, so therefore, their functioning is inappropriately categorized as a church (under the name of Christ) action.  Love ya', Steve




OK,


I didn't understand how you were parsing the term.  It makes sense now.


I think it also falls under "taking the Lord's name in vain," don't you.





I realized my first ambiguity and I must have been in the process of editing it while you were posting.  I understand your point.  Love ya' much, Steve

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 7  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook