A couple of months ago I emailed godhatesfags.com, the Westboro Baptist Church's website, to put forward a couple of questions which they hadn't answered in the FAQ and therefore, I thought, would be more likely to answer. A representative wrote back and for about the next week, before they stopped replying, we argued via email - these are copies of my emails and his replies.

Afterthought: Upon reading this, I discover that the e-mails appear to have been written at a time when, aside from not having yet re-adopted the capital letter, my punctuation was less than perfect. I have left them as is, but would like to apologise for any distress thus caused to fragile pedantic noders.

Dear godhatesfags.com

I have two questions. Firstly, since you offer an explanation of sorts for your use of the word 'fag' to describe gay men, to prove that you are not 'engaging in childish name-calling', I would be interested to know you reason for using the words 'dyke', 'sow' and 'whore' to refer to lesbian women, since to my knowledge these are terms of abuse, pure and simple.

Secondly, you have in your photo archive a picture of the 'bullet-ridden sign' outside westboro baptist church, with the line 'fags are violent'. I wonder if it has not occurred to you that if the main message of your church was, perhaps, that black people are inferior to white or women to men and you pursued it with as much obsession and prejudice, your sign would be equally bullet-riddled. Would you take this as a sign that black people or the female of the species are especially violent?

Thanks


Although I cannot and do not believe these questions are serious, the answers are:

1. Dykes are what you call yourselves. As for sow and whore, both are perfectly good Bible terms. The sow returning to the mire (come on, I'm sure you've heard of that). There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel (no question you've heard of that).

2. Nowhere in the Bible are black people called an abomination. Fags are. Nowhere in the Bible doies it say that black people are given up (because they are black). It does fags. Black people have zero control over the color of their skin. Fags, on the other hand, can control their filthy, vile, beastial urges.

Remember, GOD HATES FAGS.

Chris R. Davis


The questions were serious.

I know that dyke is used as a term of affection in the lesbian community. So is 'queer'. This doesn't refute the fact that I have had both hurled at me as abuse, as i'm sure is the intention of notices proclaiming 'dyke sin', since it's obviously not being used affectionately.

I did not say that the bible called black people an abomination, I wasn't really talking about whether or not homosexuality is a sin, you can believe whatever you choose although i find it somewhat sick. The point i was making is that if you make any group the target of a hate campaign, they are likely to retaliate. Also, I'm sure every homosexual in America did not drive up to your church to shoot your sign, you cannot judge any group by a minority.

Why bestial? To my knowledge most of my friends are human.


The Bible refers to you fags as "natural brute beasts." 2 Peter 2:12. You know, no conscience, no morals, controlled by your lusts, libidinous, no proper thoughts about God, eternity and hell.

GOD HATES FAGS.

Chris R. Davis


You are wrong. I have morals and, whereas mine are based on my own knowledge, intelligence and conscience, yours appear to be based solely on an ancient religious text, much of which may well have been either invented or grossly exaggerated. I admit that I am, to an extent, controlled by my lusts and, as you put it, libidinous. Most human beings are. Am i any more so than a heterosexual man who rapes a woman for sexual pleasure? and i do have thoughts about God, eternity and hell, although probably not by your definition 'proper' ones as most of them lead to the conclusion that god and hell are an invention of humanity and eternity is something that it is impossible to comprehend.


"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good." Psalms 53:1. There is coming a day when the Lord God Almighty will require your soul and the only thing left for you will be a certain fearful looking for judgment and fiery indignation, which will devour you. The day is coming, and quickly, when you will look up, being in torments (e.g., gnawing your tongue for pain, being eternally eaten on by the worm that never dies, being tormented eternally in the flames of hell) and see us in the bosom of our Savior and you will curse the day in which you chose to ignore the fact that

GOD HATES FAGS.

Chris R. Davis


I look forward to it, and I'm glad to see that you seem to have given up on attempting rational argument.
Goodnight.


It does not get more rational than the pure word of God, which includes

GOD HATES FAGS.

Chris R. Davis

This final reply was accompanied by another email, this time from someone - who I can only presume was some sort of relative of his, given that she had his name - whom he seemed to have given my email address so that she could join in the fun.

Naomi;

To use this name on you, man, what a waste of a very beautiful Bible name. Maybe it wouldn't hurt you to read about this beautiful person of the Bible, it just might prick your heart to say and do things as God has commanded you NOT yourself.

Theresa
Happy and humble servant of the one and only true God, the God that HATES FAGS AND FAG SUPPORTERS (this can be read without any interpretation in Romans 1)

p.s. Naomi, you truly have the morals and those morals are about as big and good as that of a knat's ass.
p.p.s. You really should learn your grammar and watch your spelling.

I have reproduced the text of 2 Peter 2, from the New International Version (the King James Version is more oblique but essentially the same). It talks about God's punishment of false prophets, people who will not submit to the authority, and those who follow "corrupt desire of the sinful nature." It is difficult to see how this can be applied to homosexuals any more than it can to adulterers, murderers, and stingy people. There is mention made of Sodom and Gommorah, but also of fallen angels and of the entire non-Noah population of the world prior to the flood... so again, this is a bad precedent for claiming that god hates fags any more than he hates anyone else.
This chapter also contains the "sow" comment, but it appears to be about irredemable liars who twist God's word in order to mislead others, not specifically about lesbians.
1But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. 3In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

4For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment; 5if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others; 6if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; 7and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the filthy lives of lawless men 8(for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)-- 9if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment. 10This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the sinful nature and despise authority. 11Bold and arrogant, these men are not afraid to slander celestial beings; yet even angels, although they are stronger and more powerful, do not bring slanderous accusations against such beings in the presence of the Lord. 12But these men blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like beasts they too will perish.

13They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done. Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you. 14With eyes full of adultery, they never stop sinning; they seduce the unstable; they are experts in greed--an accursed brood! 15They have left the straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Balaam son of Beor, who loved the wages of wickedness. 16But he was rebuked for his wrongdoing by a donkey--a beast without speech--who spoke with a man's voice and restrained the prophet's madness.

17These men are springs without water and mists driven by a storm. Blackest darkness is reserved for them. 18For they mouth empty, boastful words and, by appealing to the lustful desires of sinful human nature, they entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error. 19They promise them freedom, while they themselves are slaves of depravity--for a man is a slave to whatever has mastered him. 20If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. 21It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them. 22Of them the proverbs are true: "A dog returns to its vomit," and, "A sow that is washed goes back to her wallowing in the mud."

I don't have the inclination to talk to people whose chief mode of discussion involves spewing Biblical quotes out of context. It seems to me that whoever wrote the answers to the godhatesfags.com faq doesn't have the reflective capacity to be anything other than a well-trained parrot. However, among the many glaring contradictions in this person's account, one just chews me to the bone: that is, his assertion that "We don't hate fags; God hates fags." As if a hatemonger as pedantic and stubborn as this one has no personal involvement in anything he says. This comment is particularly bad considering that in the same breath, the writer asserts that he is in fact called upon to hate everyone who God hates--but that this is a "perfect spiritual hatred," rather than "fickle human hatred".

The only way to reconcile the contradiction would be to regard the writer as inhuman.

Which doesn't seem that far off to me.

Log in or registerto write something here or to contact authors.