+49 49 0
Published 5 years ago by ckshenn with 21 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • sjvn
    +5

    Of course they are. Bastards.

    • Gozzin (edited 5 years ago)
      +6

      Yup..Scumbags need some attention. I wish a plane would fly low over them and dump a huge bucket of liquefied cow manure on them and their car.

  • hereorthere
    +5

    I am pretty damn sure they are not at all Christians. Jesus would be disgusted.

    • spaceghoti
      +5

      Do they also play the bagpipes?

    • leweb
      +4

      Sorry, but they are real Christians. Check out Gen 19:5-8, Lev 18:22-23, Lev 20:13, 1Cor 6:9, 1Tim 9:10, Rom 1:26-27. This is what the Bible teaches. As long as people keep fooling themselves about the reality of their religion they will keep serving as cover for the extremists.

    • Yamadori
      +4

      Religious affiliation is self-determined. If they say the are followers of Jesus, however misguided they are, then you have to call them Christians. They are simply interpreting the same material vastly differently. You see this in Islam as well, except they go to war about it.

      • RoamingGnome
        +2

        Yeah, the old "No True Scotsman Fallacy" bullshit. The fallacy in the NTSF is that the NTSF is bullshit. Just because someone identifies as something does not make them that thing. There are certain things that must be done in order to be that thing.

        Let's use your example to prove my point.

        According to you and people who think the NTSF is valid, one must only claim to be a thing in order to be a thing. No. A Christian has certain commandments and rules and whatnot that they are to follow. If they don't do those things, they are not a Christian. Period. Do the Westboro people do the things that Jesus commanded? No, they do not. In fact, they do just the opposite. Therefore, they are not Christians, and, once again, the NTSF is bullshit.

      • Zyracksis
        +1

        Is that really true though? If someone says they're an atheist and yet believes that God exists, should I say they are not actually an atheist?

        • spaceghoti (edited 5 years ago)
          +4

          Yes, it's true. "Christian" means "follower of Christ" so a person who claims to be Christian but doesn't agree with you on which parts of the Bible are most important is still a Christian. An "atheist" is literally "without theism" so an atheist who believe in a god doesn't understand what non-belief means.

          • Zyracksis
            +1

            But are they still an atheist if they believe in God? If not, then someone who doesn't actually follow Christ, but still claims to, is not a Christian.

            • spaceghoti
              +4

              Who decides who is or isn't "following Christ?" Is there a universally accepted criteria for that among the forty-two thousand sects of Christianity? If you claim the WBC members aren't real Christians based on your subjective interpretation of Christianity, can't they say the same about you?

              There's no similar subjective interpretation of atheism. Belief is a binary state: you either believe or you don't. The only nuance to it is why you don't believe.

            • Zyracksis
              +1
              @spaceghoti -

              Obviously there isn't a universally accepted criteria for atheism either, because there are people who believe in God who claim to be atheists. Why is a universally accepted criteria necessary?

            • spaceghoti (edited 5 years ago)
              +4
              @Zyracksis -

              You're absolutely determined to redefine atheists as people who can also believe in gods. Why is that?

            • Zyracksis
              +1
              @spaceghoti -

              I'm not, I'd say that definition is silly. I think we should be able to say people aren't in a particular group even if they say they are.

            • spaceghoti
              +4
              @Zyracksis -

              There are over forty thousand different sects of Christianity based on something like seven major doctrinal disagreements. They all give different weight to different doctrines and scriptural interpretations. They all claim to be Christian and none have yet successfully demonstrated that they have the proof that they are true Christians or that others are false.

              On the other hand, atheism is just one thing: a rejection of claims regarding the existence of gods.

              Do you see the difference?

            • Zyracksis
              +1
              @spaceghoti -

              Atheism is defined by us as the position that God does not exist. But some people who claim to be atheists and also believe in gods presumably define it differently. Are we justified in saying that they are incorrect, and not atheists?

              If so, we are also justified in saying that people who claim to follow Jesus but do not are not Christians, regardless of what they think.

  • Yamadori (edited 5 years ago)
    +5

    This is why separation of church and state is so important. Imagine if a group like this gained serious traction and got members into elected office. They would try to pass laws based on this line of thinking. They would prosecute everyone they disagreed with, and they would feel good about it because it was in the name of their god.

    • RoamingGnome
      +4

      We don't need to imagine, it's called the Republican party.

  • NotWearingPants
    +3

    Hopefully the Hells Angels will show up to provide security like they did for fallen soldiers.

    WBC announced their plans to show up a lot more often then the actually showed their faces.

    • Qukatt
      +4

      a group of volunteers dressed as angels with privacy screens for wings will be standing the perimeter of the funeral

    • RoamingGnome
      +4

      The HA providing security for a gay mass funeral? I've seen stranger things.

Here are some other snaps you may like...