Newdow, much hated, for so little.

The Non-Profits latest episode did had a great cite to a page about Michael Newdow.

Wow, the hate and utter stupidity of the average American is horrifically lacking.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=67117

--

* ""Under God" was added in the 1950's to combat the 'godless communists' - it's propaganda, and it SHOULD be removed."
* "For the deist and atheist who deny GOD and the Biblical foundation of the United States of America… they would do well to objectively consider the truth of the matter: For my brothers and sisters in Christ, please pray that GOD will pour out His Grace on those who are blind by choice. "Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, is of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important." - C.S. Lewis JOHN 3:16"
* "Take it out or not, I will ALWAYS, REPEAT ALWAYS, say ONE NATION UNDER GOD when I make the pledge."
* "Lil ole Newdow at it again eh? Not surprised. Anyway, the phrase which he bases his lawsuit on "seperation of church and state" appears nowhere in the Constitution or in any Founding document. I agree with the comment that if Newdow doesn't like it here, well, go live somewhere else."
* "Why do they allow Michael to continue with his diatribe on this issue??? One nation under God. There can be no other way. Like it or not we are a Christian nation only by the grace of an Almighty God."

--

These are just taken one after another. These are tame (I chose them at random) but even that crap... tame.

Westboro Baptist Church - God hates the World

http://view.break.com/278059 - Watch more free videos

Why do people dislike the Phelps? I think it takes a lot of courage to stand up for what you believe in, when what you believe in is so insane as to warrant near disbelief. They believe that the US is like a modern day Sodom and Gomorrah and that all the bad things which happen are the result of God's hatred for America because we are all "fag enablers" -- Apparently not doing what it says to do to homosexuals in the Bible (kill them/their blood will be on them/Lev. 20:13). They feel inclined to warn people that God hates them, and thanking God for the instruments of his wrath (AIDS, IED, Iraq).

Biblically I don't think their argument is that bad. Really, if you read the Bible it's a reasonable conclusion to come to if you are inclined to accept that the Bible is not horrific fiction worthy of scorn.

It seems pretty clear that they are using their first amendment rights to free speech to spread their first amendment right to religion via their first amendment right to protest. Their Biblical interpretations aren't bad... the only thing really that bad in this whole debate is the Bible. Anybody who believes that is going to be this batshit insane. But, they are within their rights and non-violent.

And if you notice from their theology and certain interviews they gives that they never interject their own opinion on the issue, it's always God. God hates fags. God hates America. They are careful not to express such beliefs directly. This is a very real line that they do not cross. It is, I feel, much the same as the line which many atheists are careful not to cross by insulting people. Focusing instead on the beliefs people have rather than the people themselves. Apparently people recognize this distinction just as often in their case. They are very careful to present the Biblical view on reality rather than their own. It is akin to God hates the sin, God hates the sinner.

If the Bible were not cruel bronze-age immoral fiction, they would have a pretty good point. Sadly however, this actual reductio ad absurdum isn't more widely understood. Rather we are left with the vague hatred which says gays shouldn't be allowed to marry their lovers or care for children. Really this is just a purified form of the Biblical hate bantered around to deny people rights. They aren't shallowly using the Bible to justify their own hate, they are presented the hate the Bible expresses as truth. I prefer the Phelps' God's bigotry to the kind which is effective in creating constitutional amendments to get introduced on the floor of congress.