ChristiansUnite Forums

Nedd Kareiva
February 19, 2006


First the Nazis, then the Klu Klux Klan in the 1970s, then NAMBLA (the North American Man/Boy Love Association) in the late 1990s. What's the common denominator?

If you guessed the ACLU defending the above abhorrent groups, move to the head of the class.

Virtually no one, liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, supports the KKK — unless you count the alliance of Sen. Robert Byrd (D — WV) with them 6+ decades ago. Virtually no one backs NAMBLA, not even some ACLU supporters, though the ACLU of Massachusetts is representing them in a long standing court case..

Enter "Pastor" Fred Phelps and the members of the Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) in Topeka, Kansas to the mix.

Could the ACLU be defending a church, one whose web site spews much venom at them, even to the point of coining the acronym "Anal Copulators & Lesbian Union"? It may well happen.

There are at least 8 states (Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Missouri, Kentucky, Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma, according to the WBC's web site) crafting or having crafted such legislation with the Phelps clan in mind. It does seem odd, though not unheard of, to put together a law that primarily targets a specific church.

But that's what these states are doing. The issue — picketing at a military funeral.

At least one state, my own Illinois, has got the ACLU "concerned" about the legislation being drafted, a bill that would put a 300 foot buffer zone circa the location where military services would be conducted. The ACLU has not yet filed suit but all indications are that it may be coming.

And if the ACLU's suit does come into play, it may well succeed.

Reprehensible, abhorrent, disgusting, despicable, distasteful are a few adjectives that describe a church picketing a soldier's memorial, service and burial. And I concur with all of them.

But does the WBC have a right to picket and protest at such an event? Although most of us would like to think the answer is no, we must reluctantly come to the conclusion that the 1st Amendment comes into play here. Despite this writer's disdain for the ACLU and WBC, these groups appear to be on solid constitutional grounds, even if they are on unpatriotic grounds.

The WBC's web site name is one that virtually every American would find repugnant, regardless of religious persuasion. It doesn't deserve to be dignified in any form, (for this reason and the fact that such is against forum rules I have deleted the url from this article)

But before you click or copy and paste the link, first remove the L in "flags" to get to the actual web site. It was written this way to keep this writer from being censored from future columns, let alone that the WBC web site does not need to be glorified in any way.

And given Phelps' vitriol for the military and America as evidence on their web site and the signs they carry when picketing, there's little doubt they hate flags as well, especially the American flag.

Most people who have studied the background of the Phelps family agree that Westboro Baptist is primarily comprised of family members and few others, if any. It's definitely believable. After all, who would want to associate with people who can literally be identified with "hate"?

And the WBC is not aligned with any major Baptist denomination. Any surprise here?

However, the Phelps' gang are anything but dummies. They are savvy people who understand their 1st Amendment rights. There are several attorneys in the family and they have racked up many wins in courts over the years. Their web site sports images of two checks totaling 6 digit figures which they received from the city of Topeka back in 1999 in a similar 1st Amendment case.

And if they file suit against Illinois or any other states because of these buffer zones, they are likely to win in court, with or without the ACLU in tow. Their web site says they are willing to voluntarily provide a 100 foot buffer from any military funeral service.

And they have the money to spend to win in court. They're not some poor storefront church in a blighted city. They know the law and use it to their advantage.

So as sad and repugnant as the Phelps' crew is with their signs hating America and our military, they have a first Amendment right to do what they are doing. They have no history of initiating physical violence, though their signs have sparked many physical confrontations.

But we could suggest that the Phelps' gang join the ACLU and leave the country since they both hate it so much. The ACLU just tends to disguise their hatred. The WBC plainly shows it.

Certain Middle Eastern countries also come to mind..

A question begs an ACLU answer here. Why does it oppose the buffer zone for the Phelps' family but are silent on buffer zones enacted by cities and states regarding abortion clinics? Surely those are just as unconstitutional.

However, back in the late 90s, according to a section in the book ACLU vs. America, the ACLU supported an injunction mandating abortion picketers to maintain a minimum 15 foot distance from the entrance to abortion clinics.

300 feet at a military funerals too much? 15 feet too little? Seems like the ACLU uses subjective reasoning to come to its own conclusions about what is constitutional instead of the Constitution.

Then again, the ACLU never met an abortion it didn't like. It's been aligned with with Planned Parenthood almost since its inception.

It was really only over the last couple years or so that the WBC has turned its attention to our troops who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom (and theirs), something the Phelps' crew is too blind to see. Their pickets over the last two decades have primarily targeted homosexuals, a group the ACLU has consistently defended at all costs. And WBC has picketed the ACLU as well.

And the ACLU has rallied liberal church denominations embracing homosexual marriage such as the Metropolitan Community Church, the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ and the Presbyterian Church USA. This can readily be seen as these denominations have supported the ACLU in its current suit against the state of Maryland to force same sex marriage.

The ACLU, WBC, homosexuals and homosexually friendly churches. Oh what a tangled web we weave! Oh what a "holy" and yet unholy alliance!

No Christian organization worth its salt defends Phelps and company. Virtually all of them steer far away from them. After all, the church's web site claims they are all going to hell, from homosexual Episcopal bishop Gene Robinson in New Hampshire to Evangelist Billy Graham and pretty much anyone in between.

I'm sure I'm included as well.

But you have to hand it to Phelps in a couple areas. They are relentless, number one. And number two, they travel to get their message out. They have picketed homosexual events across the county and according to their web site, have even gone to Sweden and Australia to hold up their signs. Whether it's a school with a Gay/Straight Alliance in a public school or a city or company planning to give domestic benefits to homosexuals or a church minister preparing to "marry" a same sex couple, they are likely to be there. Their web site calls them "Love Crusades." But most people would view them as anything but loving.

Their activism does, however, put true Christians to shame who don't want to picket these causes. And unfortunately, the silence and inaction of true believers creates a mindset in many people that all Christians are just like Uncle Freddie and company, that we hate homosexuals and condemn them to hell with no possibility of redemption.

It's sad that we let fringe groups like the WBC define the meanings of love and hate and something that must change if Christians are going to have an effect on the homosexual agenda. We must take a stand against the homosexual agenda and the ACLU if we are going to have a cultural shift back towards morality. And we must counter the mindset of the WBC while taking our message to the same places they take theirs.

Nevertheless, the ACLU's support of the WBC is an alliance that most people probably thought not possible. It's important the public understand the connections here. After all, both have a disdain for our military. The ACLU has already launched numerous suits against our government for supposed military abuse of Iraqi terrorists. WBC hasn't but their web site is full of stories of hate against America and its military for supposedly allowing homosexual activist to plant deep seeds in our land and run the country.

There may be nothing we can do to stop the WBC from picketing the funerals of those who served and died for our country. But we can turn it up a notch and render them irrelevant.

Too bad Phelps and company haven't read Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People. The ACLU could learn some lessons there as well.

But then again, the ACLU and Phelps' alliance do indeed make for strange bedfellows, no pun necessarily intended.