Comments on: The Fall of Falwell

By: Nate

Nate — Tue, 22 May 2007 15:52:42 +0000

Jim, while I don’t agree with taking the road of venom-spitting, Falwell’s actions have indelibly marked his legacy. He supported racial segregation. He supported denying gay people rights. He attacked one’s right to be an atheist, to have secular schools, to embrace humanism. He thought there should be no public education – only government sponsored private education. He supported Apartheid. He created a video making wild accusations about Clinton – one he himself was unable to claim was true. He openly lied about things he said, as proven in a court of law. And, finally, he blamed the 9-11 attacks not on a handful of extremist terrorists, but on gays, abortionists, pagans – anyone not in his religious camp.

This man said and did a lot of abhorrent things. Things that people have the right to get mad about. At the very least it is hypocritical to say that he can spit so many years of this venom, of this hatred and self-serving thinking and declare that though he may have been a ‘bit’ negative, and ‘perhaps’ intolerant, those people who disagree with him are the ones in the wrong for pointing back at him and saying, “This man was despicable, I will not honor him even in death.”

By: JimDriskill

JimDriskill — Sun, 20 May 2007 16:09:35 +0000

Jerry Falwell sometimes seemed a bit negative, closed-minded, and perhaps intolerant. But he was nothing compared to some of the the venom-spitters in this group.

By: Stephen Uitti

Stephen Uitti — Fri, 18 May 2007 17:15:03 +0000

Good Lord. I wish Christopher Hitchens wouldn’t mince words, and tell us what he really thinks.

I argued that Falwell will burn in Hell. That, and i’m a Lutheran, who believes that it isn’t up to me to decide these things. But burn he does. Another contribution to Global Warming.

By: Analyzer

Analyzer — Fri, 18 May 2007 04:44:24 +0000

“When you kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.”

I wasn’t given the opportunity to kill Falwell personally. Spitting on his grave is all I get.

By: kavik

kavik — Fri, 18 May 2007 01:04:46 +0000

I don’t know – perhaps a bit of civility was in order. “When you kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.” (Winston Churchill)

By: Analyzer

Analyzer — Thu, 17 May 2007 22:55:03 +0000

Is there something particularly scientific about bashing recently dead people before they are even buried?

1. Is there something particularly unscientific about it?

2. Is there something requiring Cosmic Variance to discuss nothing but science?

3. Was there anything scientific about Jerry Falwell?

Sadly and unfairly I believe JF was treated as if he were Fred.

Falwell was vastly more powerful than Phelps is ever likely to be. A crazy, bad man whose influence is limited to shouting at funerals is less worthy of derision than a crazy, bad man with millions of dollars and millions of disciples.

By: drunk

drunk — Thu, 17 May 2007 22:30:16 +0000

The separation of church and state is not effectively null and void. It has been subverted by the elite, and successfully brain-washed into the public using modern techniques of mass media psychology. It can be restored by determined actions of the public who refuse to be brain-washed by neo-religious extremism and nonsense of faith, the kind we witnessed in the political arena and corporate-controlled mass media of the past decade. Americans have a choice – continue with current path leading to government of theocracy, by religious evangelical fundamentalists, for big corporate business – a new American fascism. Or return to a state with Lincoln’s ideals – of the people, by the people, for the people. Look across the pond and we see Europeans have made their choice – strongly entrenched governments of secularism and very much (some say too much) for the people, after centuries of religious conflicts and the madness of the 20th century.

By: JC

JC — Thu, 17 May 2007 18:35:17 +0000

drunk,

How would the (damaged) notion of separation of church and state work in the future, if America becomes majority Muslim? If the separation of church and state is effectively null and void, then could something like Islamic Sharia Law become the law of the land in America?

By: brandon

brandon — Thu, 17 May 2007 18:05:09 +0000

Two Words: James Dobson

By: drunk

drunk — Thu, 17 May 2007 18:03:08 +0000

The Moral Majority movement infiltrated the Republican party and gained political power. As a result, we now see Bush#2 installed himself as a neo-god on a holy mission, answerable to an authority higher than the Constitution. Falwell sees his biggest achievement – the integration of church and state in the USA and laugh all the way to hell. Not only did he helped screw up the Israel-Palestine peace movement he, with Bush#2 as his proxy, now engaged America in wars with the Islamic fundamentalists that may well last for decades. While JF partner in ideology, a certain OBL, triggered a holy attack on America, it is JF who sow the seeds for an era of Christian-Islamic religious wars that will help bring great destruction to both.
Since its inception as the state religion of the Roman Empire, Christianity is all about wars. Continuous, bloody all-out wars as history amply confirms. America was founded on the principle of separation of church & state in a brave attempt to end religions gaining state power. Because the founders, having saw what happened to Europe after the 200 Year War of the Catholics-Protestants, knew all too well that the moment a religion, especially the Christians gain the powers of government there will be wars. So now we have war of religious ideology, not of security or economics. That is the achievement of Jerry Falwell and his kinds.