Merged Fred Phelps nearly dead/Is dead.

In reply to a post by ApolloGnomon which had obviously been edited to remove whatever was initially posted, as the post Shemp replies to reads simply "Nevermind":






:D That's made my day! (I am unmoved by Phelps' fate.)

When I'm moved by phelps I make sure to wash my hands after I flush.
 
But that pales besides the next bit:
This sounds to me like complete nonsense...if true, why does the author not list any of these studies? I'd agree that some homophobes are secretly gay; but the idea that it's concrete evidence of homosexuality? Sorry, I have trouble buying that.

Actually, there is a considerable amount of evidence that suggests a certain type of homophobe has a very high likelihood of being a repressed homosexual. The studies have been posted in other threads; but the upshot is that there are two types of homophobes, the passive and the active. The passive homophobe is the most common kind, generally due to cultural or religious influence, and is unlikely to instigate any kind of verbal or physical attack, though some join in an attack instigated by someone else, particularly under group pressure. The active homophobe is much less common, and is much more likely to instigate some sort of active harassment or violence against homosexuals. Studies show that a high percentage of these sort of active homophobes become sexually aroused by homosexual stimuli. Their own latent homosexuality is so at conflict with their anti-homosexual worldview that they react by attacking those who are openly homosexual (a behaviour pattern seen under many other circumstances as well).
 
Fred Phelps (apparently) nearly dead.

Actually, there is a considerable amount of evidence that suggests a certain type of homophobe has a very high likelihood of being a repressed homosexual. The studies have been posted in other threads; but the upshot is that there are two types of homophobes, the passive and the active. The passive homophobe is the most common kind, generally due to cultural or religious influence, and is unlikely to instigate any kind of verbal or physical attack, though some join in an attack instigated by someone else, particularly under group pressure. The active homophobe is much less common, and is much more likely to instigate some sort of active harassment or violence against homosexuals. Studies show that a high percentage of these sort of active homophobes become sexually aroused by homosexual stimuli. Their own latent homosexuality is so at conflict with their anti-homosexual worldview that they react by attacking those who are openly homosexual (a behaviour pattern seen under many other circumstances as well).


In other words, Fred Phelps is probably gay, but cultural indoctrination means we can't be sure about the rest of his church, except for the non-family members who joined it from outside.

Fun fact: One of the biggest and most overt racists I ever knew had a LOT of interracial porn on his PC, mostly of the kind featuring a black man taking a white woman while her white husband watched. I'd never heard of "Humiliation Porn" before. The psychology of his racism was almost as fascinating and disturbing as the psychology of his misogyny.
 
Last edited:
In other words, Fred Phelps is probably gay, but cultural indoctrination means we can't be sure about the rest of his church, except for the non-family members who joined it from outside.

Fun fact: One of the biggest and most overt racists I ever knew had a LOT of interracial porn on his PC, mostly of the kind featuring a black man taking a white woman while her white husband watched. I'd never heard of "Humiliation Porn" before. The psychology of his racism was almost as fascinating and disturbing as the psychology of his misogyny.
Yeah cuckold porn is something of a niche, as is interracial BDSM.
 
I still think the best comuupance Phelps got was when he pickted Comiccon in San Diego,and a counter demonstration was organized.........

My favorite of the counter demo signs:

"God Hates Sentinels"...........
 
I am old enough to not care anymore about making oneself better or not.
I do care enough to teach a lessons on "getting a serving of their own dog food".

I am quite fond of your interpretation - especially if they eat the dog food after the dog has processed it a bit for them.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::mad::jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:D
 
This may sound crazy but nothing is too out there for these people...

Is there any chance Phelps was excommunicated because he was dying?

I could see the other members reasoning that his decaying health and/or imminent death was god's punishment for some transgression (eating an extra piece of pie or somesuch) and decided to rid themselves of him lest they anger the god of love further. In their world of twisted logic, this may actually make sense.
 
You don't think? Books will be written about him, if there aren't already.

"Fascinating" doesn't mean he wasn't despicable.

"Fascination" is a subjective quality. I understand someone being fascinating doesn't preclude them from being detestable, and I assumed you didn't admire Phelps in any way. However...no, I personally don't find him fascinating at all. Not even particularly interesting. I think he's historically notable for finding a way to become extraordinarily famous- which is why books will be written about him and people comment about him on forums. I realize many people find these type of characters fascinating. About the only thing I find somewhat interesting about him is why his family decided to kick him out of the operation. Didn't see that coming.

I do agree that Phelps probably accelerated the end of homophobia, by giving gay-bashing a bad name...in this country. But his campaign might have contributed to a wave of brutality and draconian legislation in other parts of the world.
 
This may sound crazy but nothing is too out there for these people...

Is there any chance Phelps was excommunicated because he was dying?

I could see the other members reasoning that his decaying health and/or imminent death was god's punishment for some transgression (eating at the Y - if you know what I mean and I think you do or somesuch) and decided to rid themselves of him lest they anger the god of love further. In their world of twisted logic, this may actually make sense.

FTFY!!!
 
Isn't that just a tad hypocritical? Supposedly we hate Fred Phelps for picketing funerals and upsetting grieving relatives, so if we do exactly the same thing then how are we any better? Why should it be OK for us to do it, but not him? Because he 'deserves' to be hated on?

But of course we don't actually hate Fred Phelps - we love him - for giving us a safe outlet for our antisocial urges. If it wasn't for Fred Phelps (and people like him) we might be forced to direct our ire at less 'deserving' victims such as pedophiles, politicians, actors, or newbie posters who make spelling mistakes.

And the irony is that while Fred Phelps may be a loathsome individual who enjoys upsetting others with his extreme religious views, he's also right. Anybody who has actually read the Bible knows that God really does hate fags. We shouldn't be excoriating Fred Phelps for making plain the truly hateful nature of his God, we should be thanking him.

I don't love him. I don't hate him. I am indifferent. I don't care.
 

Back
Top Bottom