dos

5/15/2007 8:58:28 PM

Now all the GOP candidates have to take a stand on him.

hah-hah

(double hah-hah for the pun)

5/15/2007 9:20:01 PM

they avoided it on the debate.

big surprise, foxnews made it easy on the republicans by saying they wouldn't address it.

[Edited on May 15, 2007 at 9:22 PM. Reason : .]

5/15/2007 9:22:00 PM

big surprise, chris matthews was a total jerkoff last time

[Edited on May 15, 2007 at 10:19 PM. Reason : s]

5/15/2007 10:18:51 PM

these debates with SO many people for such a short time are pretty stupid anyhow.

5/15/2007 10:21:00 PM

presidential debates have been a waste of time for decades now anyway

5/15/2007 10:21:34 PM

no argument there.

the debate commission is a disgrace to american politics.

5/15/2007 10:22:56 PM

Quote :

"i hope larry flynt says something about him"

Here you go....

Quote :

""The Reverend Jerry Falwell and I were arch enemies for fifteen years. We became involved in a lawsuit concerning First Amendment rights and Hustler magazine. Without question, this was my most important battle – the l988 Hustler Magazine, Inc., v. Jerry Falwell case, where after millions of dollars and much deliberation, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in my favor. My mother always told me that no matter how much you dislike a person, when you meet them face to face you will find characteristics about them that you like. Jerry Falwell was a perfect example of that. I hated everything he stood for, but after meeting him in person, years after the trial, Jerry Falwell and I became good friends. "

No "Good Riddence" from his arch enemy.

5/15/2007 10:30:54 PM

Regardless, I refuse to respect someone who campaigns against reality and civil rights.

5/15/2007 10:57:22 PM

Quote :

"If Chief Justice Warren and his associates had known God’s word and had desired to do the Lord’s will, I am quite confident that the 1954 decision [Brown v. Board of Education] would never have been made…. The facilities should be separate. When God has drawn a line of distinction, we should not attempt to cross that line."

5/16/2007 12:50:08 AM

Quote :

"Jerry Falwell and I became good friends."

So let's see.

He was "good friends" with a PORNOGRAPHER, but condemns AIDS-patients, feminists, and homos to hell, and says 9/11 was their doing?

What a hypocrite.

5/16/2007 12:54:10 AM

^i hope you're just trying to be funny, because you're a moron if you think that makes him a hypocrite

Quote :

"we can always rely on Wlfpk4Life and prep-e to bring the stupid"

"bring the stupid" as in i called you out for being a douchebag and mocking someone's death

[Edited on May 16, 2007 at 1:07 AM. Reason : /]

5/16/2007 1:03:15 AM

So you think it is ok for a religious person to fraternize with a pornographer?

Nothing objectionable with pornography, as far as Christianity is concerned?

And you call me a moron?

5/16/2007 1:13:54 AM

^It's only hypocritical if he refused to fraternize with homosexuals, feminists, etc...while fraternizing with Larry Flynt.

Many religious people/leaders fraternize with "sinners"...it's how most of them do their thing actually.

[Edited on May 16, 2007 at 1:27 AM. Reason : sss]

5/16/2007 1:24:05 AM

Quote :

" we can always rely on Wlfpk4Life and prep-e to bring the stupid and good riddance i say"

Hooksaw just needs to post and the party will be complete.

[Edited on May 16, 2007 at 2:10 AM. Reason : y]

5/16/2007 2:10:23 AM

So much misinterpretation in this thread its hard to know where to start. I'll try to keep it short.

There is a difference between condoning an activity and loving an individual who is engaged in that
activity. It is possible to love the sinner and hate the sin. Many of you cannot understand that because you have come to the erroneous conclusion that the sin defines who that person is; that is homosexuals are just born that way with no way out. My suspicion would be that what Falwell meant was that tragedy and pain and suffering are all aspects of a world that has rejected God and continues to demand to live its own way, enter the examples of gays abortionists etc...

The error in his statements would seem to be the tone of righteous indignation. That is well and good for God, but Falwell was not God and as such he should not have said incident X must be a result
of Y happening. The world is complicated and we have only a fragmented picture of the truth. I do
think it is possible to understand why things happen, but this is usually a personal thing which only
comes after much soul searching and at the appropriate time. Some of the statements that Falwell
and Robertson make are intentioned to raise controversy, unfortunately they play right into the
hands of those who seek to distort the message of Christ. The Gospel many hear from Falwell and
Robertson is that the world is evil and we Christians are good so ha ha and look God is going to crush
you peons. But, this is not the message at all. The point is that we are all equally helpless to resist
our sinful nature without Christ's sacrifice. This doesn't mean we get to go to the other extreme and
just say all sin is ok because hey we're born that way and its hard not to do it. Anyway you look
at it Christ is offensive at some point, but there is no need to add controversy that misses the point.
That is the chief failing of folks like Falwell.

All of this said, it is entirely possible that Falwell was taken out of context in many of the quotes above, I do think his heart was in the right place even if his mouth wandered at times.

5/16/2007 2:27:26 AM

This:

Quote :

"mathman: There is a difference between condoning an activity and loving an individual who is engaged in that activity."

is what I meant by this:

Quote :

"SourPatchin: Many religious people/leaders fraternize with "sinners"...it's how most of them do their thing actually."

Except without all that love crap. Cause I never got a love vibe from Falwell.

Quote :

"mathman: Many of you cannot understand that because you have come to the erroneous conclusion that the sin defines who that person is; that is homosexuals are just born that way with no way out. My suspicion would be that what Falwell meant was that tragedy and pain and suffering are all aspects of a world that has rejected God and continues to demand to live its own way, enter the examples of gays abortionists etc..."

Most of the evidence points towards to idea that homosexuals cannot change who they are, and it is foolish/futile to ask them to change and/or put them down.

[Edited on May 16, 2007 at 2:48 AM. Reason : sss]

5/16/2007 2:47:54 AM

Cannot change their inclinations or cannot change how they react to those feelings?

Everyone can change who they are... because 'who you are' isn't just the way you conduct yourself, nor is it just what you feel. It's a combination of the two.

5/16/2007 9:44:07 AM

Quote :

"I do think his heart was in the right place even if his mouth wandered at times."

You can say that about anyone, including people like Bin Laden or Hitler, it's a meaningless sentiment.

I doubt his heart was in the right place regardless, he was a politician more than a Christian, and has probably done more to hurt Christianity that Richard Dawkins.

5/16/2007 2:16:58 PM

Quote :

"Honkeyball: Cannot change their inclinations or cannot change how they react to those feelings?"

Oh, you're absolutely right. They should react to their feelings by ignoring/denying them, getting married to a person of the opposite sex, having two or three wonderful children, and then having a crisis at 45 and coming out to their quite possibly devestated families. Or even better...instead of coming out, they should just continue to deny it and live their whole lives knowing they are missing out on something that almost every heterosexual person in the world has the opportunity to experience.

And they should do all this because, you know, people like you are uncomfortable otherwise.

Quote :

"Honkeyball: Everyone can change who they are... because 'who you are' isn't just the way you conduct yourself, nor is it just what you feel. It's a combination of the two."

What the fuck are you talking about?

[Edited on May 16, 2007 at 2:48 PM. Reason : sss]

5/16/2007 2:44:52 PM

It's fine. When Michael Moore dies of a massive heart attack, I'll show him as much disrespect as I can muster.

5/16/2007 3:40:11 PM

ok? he's a pretty big douchebag/hypocrite too.

5/16/2007 3:41:12 PM

^^^ Take my point completely out of context why don't you.

I'm not arguing about the validity or invalidity of the homosexual or any other lifestyle. Showing restraint against natural urges has value in many different contexts, and you're reading far too much into my comment.

My point is that who a person is is a heck of a lot more than simply the desires (sexual or otherwise) that a person is born with... And that the argument that anyone "cannot change who they are" is absurd. You change who you are every day. That doesn't mean that straight people should be out there trying to make gay people straight, and I have never advocated that.

Quote :

"And they should do all this because, you know, people like you are uncomfortable otherwise."

The personal attack is entirely unnecessary. At any point did I make any homophobic comments? No. And I'm not going to sit here and have you make asinine accusations based on some stereotype that you figure I fit into.

5/16/2007 5:26:45 PM

Quote :

"Honkeyball: ^^^ Take my point completely out of context why don't you."

I'm not taking shit out of context. We're talking about homosexuals here. And you're making comments that imply some crazy ass shit. I make the assertion that they cannot change who they are, and they are homosexuals. And your response implies that they should somehow "change how they react to those feelings." Like, if I was a lesbian who "felt" that I wanted to share love with another woman, I should change my reaction to those "feelings" and share love with a man. That's out and out offensive and ridiculous. Just cause you put it in some vague question format doesn't make it any less obvious what you're getting at.

Quote :

"Honkeyball: I'm not arguing about the validity or invalidity of the homosexual or any other lifestyle. Showing restraint against natural urges has value in many different contexts, and you're reading far too much into my comment."

Okay, let's take a look at this attempt at craftiness... You claim not to be arguing about homosexuality, but then at the end, you tack on this bit about "restraint against natural urges" being valuable. Oh, but wait, you added "in many different contexts" so it will still look like you're not talking about homosexuals. Well, guess what--we're talking about homosexuals! mathman was talking about homosexuals, and I was talking about homosexuals when I responded to mathman, and you were talking about homosexuals when you responded to me.

Quote :

"Honkeyball: My point is that who a person is is a heck of a lot more than simply the desires (sexual or otherwise) that a person is born with... And that the argument that anyone "cannot change who they are" is absurd. You change who you are every day. That doesn't mean that straight people should be out there trying to make gay people straight, and I have never advocated that."

Of course, who a person is is a lot more than their sexual orientation. Everybody knows that. But when I say that the evidence suggests that they cannot change who they are...well, who are they? They're homosexuals. We're all a bunch more than that...but we're also homosexuals, heterosexuals, bisexuals, etc...and the evidence suggests that we cannot change that, we cannot change who we are (homosexuals, heterosexuals, etc...) And your underhanded suggestion that homosexuals should show restraint is hilarious. I expect you to take a vow of celibacy (abstinence, if you're not religious) and never date or get married. Show some restraint!

Quote :

"Honkeyball: The personal attack is entirely unnecessary. At any point did I make any homophobic comments? No. And I'm not going to sit here and have you make asinine accusations based on some stereotype that you figure I fit into."

You're not gonna sit there and have me make asinine accusations? What the fuck is that? A threat? OMG, ARE YOU GONNA STAND UP?!?!?

And as far as the stereotype goes, it doesn't matter how you dress it up or how you try to intellectualize it, you're a homophobe. You shouldn't be so weak about it...kinda makes you look like a pussy.

5/16/2007 7:11:55 PM

Lucky y'all didn't have to grow up in Lynchburg. Farwell was the biggest ASSHOLE in the world. He has no respect for anyone who lived there.

5/16/2007 8:14:54 PM

Friend of mine goes to Liberty, he says Jerry was the worst driver he'd ever seen. And he drove a huge bulletproof SUV, that would destroy anything it hit.

[Edited on May 17, 2007 at 12:15 AM. Reason : Other than that I think Lynchburg is a nice town, not too big, not too small.]

5/17/2007 12:15:05 AM

Christopher Hitchens weighs in:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkAPaEMwyKU

5/17/2007 12:51:48 AM

so who are the jerry falwells of tomorrow?

5/17/2007 1:51:22 AM

^^^^
what are you talking about? he was well respected by literally EVERYONE in lynchburg. i spent the last 3 years at liberty university, i've bumped into him multiple times and he was always very cordial. he was practically a local celebrity in lynchburg, everybody loved him. i would like to hear what you are referring to.

^^^
as far as i know, he's never hit anyone or anything with that SUV, it was bulletproofed for HIS protection, not to be some kind of destroyer

the ignorance in this thread, it scares me

you people had your mind made up about him since the first time you heard about one of the crazy comments he made back in the 80's. what you don't know is that in his later years he became a completely different person than what you've heard about him. he won the friendship of even larry flynt who hated jerry more than anyone in the world. he was very likeable, some people just don't like what he had to say so they make ad hominem attacks and say terrible things about him

he was a great man who did many great things for his country, and will be missed dearly

and if i can, i will be one of many thousands at his funeral on tuesday to pay my respects


[Edited on May 17, 2007 at 2:15 AM. Reason : ,]

5/17/2007 1:57:28 AM

Quote :

"you people had your mind made up about him since the first time you heard about one of the crazy comments he made back in the 80's. what you don't know is that in his later years he became a completely different person than what you've heard about him."

O RLY?

After the September 11, 2001, attacks Falwell said on the 700 Club, "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.'"

5/17/2007 11:02:28 AM

link if pic doesn't work:

http://www.tshirthell.com/shirts/products/a941/a941_bm.gif

5/17/2007 12:38:30 PM

While I believe in free speech, and it's pretty obvious Jerry Fallwell used his to promote the over zealous religious point of view, he's just another person who used god as a pulpit to get what he wanted. Hell he might have believed he was gods right hand or something but this guy is just as bad and INTOLERANT as Pat Robertson and anyone else who blamed problems on lack of beliefs.

It's that stupid minded way of thinking that causes more problems instead of addressing the problem itself.

"AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals."
OOOOhhhh so that's why the majority of people in the world who have Aids aren't gay at all. Hmmm (see Africa)

"I do question the sincerity of People like the Reverend Martin Luther King..."
That's a politically correct way of being a bigot

God "is a Republican" [28] and Jesus "was the First American."
Uh Jesus was black, and he sure as hell wouldn't be a republican. read your own bible. If he did indeed exist (noone can prove either way so please don't try) he is definitely not the first american as he never set food on the land that would be called America.

These people pray on those who are either a) too stupid b) don't want to pay attention c) want to feel righteous.

He preached intolerance, bigotry, self-righteousness, racism and is (was) the poster child for straight out ignorance.

I'm not going to say I'm glad he's dead, but I am glad his influence is gone.

5/17/2007 12:50:04 PM

Quote :

"he was a great man who did many great things for set his country back years."

5/17/2007 12:59:11 PM

Quote :

"i spent the last 3 years at liberty university"

Well that explains a few things.

Quote :

"what you don't know is that in his later years he became a completely different person than what you've heard about him."

Oh? Did he retract his stance against reality and civil rights? If not, I still say good riddance.

5/17/2007 6:12:31 PM

he's said lots of stupid things that are certainly inexcusable. done lots of stupid things, too. but i agree with a lot of what he's stood for. thought this link might an interesting read, as well...



http://www.ctlibrary.com/15490

5/17/2007 8:54:54 PM

I know I'm coming into this thread a bit late, but I would also like to say good riddance to bad garbage regarding Jerry Falwell... and NO, the reason I say this is not because he spoke against gays, abortions, etc.

Quote :

"A fundamentalist preacher, Falwell burst onto the national scene in 1979, when he launched an organization he presumptuously called the Moral Majority. Critics liked to say that it was neither. What is undisputed is that the Moral Majority became the vehicle that carried millions of born-again Christians out of their separatist tendencies and into the center of political activism."

(Source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10188427)

Jerry Falwell is the biggest reason why the religious right is such a big part of America's politics today and why candidates for President still get questioned about whether or not the believe in evolution (and some say that they don't) and get their private lives probed, and why America is so far behind Europe when it comes to our social values.

5/18/2007 12:44:01 PM

Here's an amusing story...
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3201543&page=1
At Falwell's funeral...

Quote :

" And Campbell County authorities arrested a Liberty University student for having several homemade bombs in his car. The student, 19-year-old Mark D. Uhl of Amissville, Va., reportedly told authorities that he was making the bombs to stop protesters from disrupting the funeral service ... "There were indications that there were others involved in the manufacturing of these devices and we are still investigating these individuals with the assistance of ATF [Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms],"

Is this Falwell's legacy?

[Edited on May 23, 2007 at 2:57 AM. Reason : ]

5/23/2007 2:56:47 AM

Quote :

"everytime an evangelist dies an angel gets his wings"

Calling that man an "evangelist" is like calling Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson a "reverend".

5/23/2007 11:09:42 AM

Quote :

"and why America is so far behind Europe when it comes to our social values."

What does that even mean? How can you be behind someone in values? As far as I know, there is a right, and a left.

5/23/2007 11:22:38 AM

^ Yeah this is America. You can't make a judgment on someone else's values... that would be intolerant.

5/23/2007 5:34:36 PM