Blogcritics: Comments on On Being Offended

Comment by Sheri

Mon, 24 Oct 2005 21:32:22 EDT

Don't ask me how, but somehow I ran across these blogs/posts. I couldn't believe there was a site called Godhatesfags. I went there and to my surprise they are going to be in Ann Arbor to picket the Laramie project on Sat. Nov 19. I just recently got involved with supporting the Glbt community when I heard the the executive director of Triangle Foundation speak of his formation of the Triangle Foundation at a small benefit party in a home. I guess it isn't really a surprise, more like a nightmare. I actually felt like I was in a real nightmare when I got to the WBC chronicles pages on the Laramie project and phelps addressing Judy Shepard as the "mother from hell", especially since I just went last month to see Judy in person when she spoke at Oakland University on her journey with and without Matt. I am determined to go to the Laramie Project in support of the Laramie Project. Hopefully it's not sold out, because I sure don't want to be standing outside with that crazy freak. I guess you gotta do what you gotta do. As I've been trying to get this message across to my friends and family for the past year or so and starting to feel like a Jehovah witness without being one, I've found aomething in Dirtgrain's posts that really brings out this point. "First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me." You're post are informative and awesome, Dirtgrain and so is this site!

Comment by Al Barger

Wed, 7 Sep 2005 16:07:06 EDT

Fred's been out lately protesting the funerals of US soldiers killed in Iraq, on grounds that they were defending a "fag country." He reminds me more and more of Col Fitts, the violently closeted gay dad in American Beauty.

Comment by Laurel

Wed, 7 Sep 2005 15:25:41 EDT

Fred Phelps reads the Bible very selectively. I don't claim to be a theology expert, but "Love thy neighbour" is a verse I don't think he's read.

Comment by Dwaine AKA Scooter AKA D.J.

Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:31:59 EST

Here's a comment for you: AARRR RRRRRRRRRRGGGG GGGHHHHHH H!!!!!!!!!! I AM YOUR FATHER!!!!!!

Comment by Craig Lyndall

Mon, 26 Jan 2004 08:37:47 EST

Mis-using a belief would be George W. Bush saying that he is making it his mission to protect the sanctity of marriage. Sanctity is a religious word and by Bush writing it into his job description to protect the "sanctity" of anything is wrong. That is a violation of the separation of church and state in my eyes.

Comment by superman

Mon, 26 Jan 2004 01:26:16 EST

Man, the way I'm going on these message boards I feel like the "anti-Mac Diva." I know the point is that the people in the government shouldn't misuse their beliefs. My question to you is, what would misusing a belief entail? I can't really understand your comment until you clarify this. Please, I am all for intelligent discussion even though I am aware we have conflicting views.

Comment by Mac Diva

Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:55:00 EST

Oops! 'The point is not. . . .'

Comment by Mac Diva

Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:51:16 EST

The point is that people in government can't have beliefs, it is that they not misuse them. Largely, people comply with that or we would be living in a theocracy by now.

Comment by superman

Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:34:53 EST

Uhh, the separation of church and state is a myth that doesn't work. Then the only people who could hold government office would be atheists because any theist might have their religion influence their decisions. Then you would totally screw up society and exclude all Christians/Muslims/Jews/Hindus from the entire government in the name of separating church and state. As long as our government is run by the people, and some people go to church, you can't separate church and government. Anyway, doesn't everyone ascribe to some view in the same way religious people ascribe to church? Doesn't everyone have their own "church," their place where they go to meet with others who share their beliefs? Separate church and state? You might as well kill us all.

Comment by Mac Diva

Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:01:10 EST

Well-written and thoughtful, but way too long. This needs to broken up into more than one entry. I don't think there is really any question that continual abuse harms people. The rates of hypertension, depression and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder are extremely high in minority communities. The constant battling against a hostile society definitely takes it toll. I doubt any person of color ever goes a full week without at least one clear episode of discrimination. We pay for it many ways, including shortened lives. However, I don't see freedom of speech, which attaches only to government action, as much of a bulwark against the daily abuse fest that is living in America much of the time.

Comment by Dirtgrain

Sun, 25 Jan 2004 13:54:10 EST

Thanks, Eric.

Comment by Eric Olsen

Sun, 25 Jan 2004 12:47:41 EST

Excellent post DG - when people don't comment on a post of mine - as is often the case - I choose to believe it was because there was nothing to complain about. I too am for free expression - let the ideas contend in the intellectual marketplace. I am a staunch believer in the separation of church and state however: if we are going to say it, then we need to actually do it.