Emotional Vandalism vs. Freedom Of Speech: Will The Malice That Embodies Fred Phelps Prevail?

Note: On Wednesday, Oct. 6th, the Supreme Court of The United States will hear oral arguments in the case of Snyder vs. Westboro Baptist Church.

Fred Phelps has now gotten exactly what he's always wanted: notoriety. From the time he threw the first punch at an attendee of  a revival (at age 17, his first preaching gig was to a Mormon group and someone didn't exactly agree with him), he's always courted fame. Fame through controversy. Fame through hate.

I've followed Fred's trail for over 14 years. The first time I encountered Phelps was as a book publicist for Fr. Daniel Helmeniak, author of the book, What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality. Helmeniak is an eminent Jesuit scholar who knew about Phelps and his homophobic rantings, so I was able to get Daniel on a radio show in Kansas City, MO. with Phelps debating him on the subject. Phelps was in the studio while Daniel was on a phone hook-up.

The interview was a typical Phelpsian circus with the Phelps clan picketing the radio station (allegedly for broaching the subject of homosexuality). During the interview, Daniel played the sweet, but thoroughly academic professional, politely asking Phelps which "pages" his Biblical sitings were on (knowing full well that Phelps had made them up). Frustrated Phelps grew impatient when the time came for questions from listeners who seemed to share Daniel's knowledge and sophistication. He stormed out of the station in less than twenty minutes. The host, however, kept Daniel on - for a full 90 minutes  - because the call lines were heating up (the program had only been scheduled for thirty minutes).

Phelps deemed the radio spot a "success." He's a hit-and-run publicity man.

A year after Daniel's interview, I came across an unpublished manuscript attached to a deposition as Exhibit A in a court case. It was an unauthorized biography of Fred Phelps. I read all 140 pages overnight.

To label Fred Phelps as evil is ridiculous, simply because, much like any real monster, Phelps' persona is beyond labeling. If Phelps' soul can be labeled anything, the closest definition would be grotesque: it is misshapen, hideous in its deformity; repulsive. Visually, it is like The Elephant Man, but without the slightest trace of humanity. And while Hitler had a disfigured conscience, Fred Phelps seems to have no conscience at all. He delights in both hating and being hated. He is a true egotist.

And as such, he hungers not for blood, but for publicity.

It is true that he used his exemplary speaking skills to defend civil rights cases. However, upon close examination, his oratory was meant to focus only on himself: one of the breaches of ethics he was cited for  in his disbarment was that if a client couldn't pay Fred's fees after losing a case, he would automatically turn around and sue the client. So very many of these cases came up, it was rumored that Phelps's primary income was derived from these turnabouts. 

For the last half century, Fred Phelps and his clan have alternated between bizarre soap opera and embarrassing nuisance for Topeka, KS: addiction to amphetamines, charges of a Fagin operation (involving the Phelps children), beatings, starvation, threats of knee-capping (with a .48), severe whippings, extortion, insidious and violent revenge on colleagues and neighbors, thwarted flights to freedom - all emanating from the martinet  who refused to give his children Christmas presents, demanded that all of them have law degrees, chose their spouses ... and made them believe he was their only portal to heaven. 

There are times when hatred makes a person either crazy or stupid. Hatred is, after all, a very negating emotion, canceling out anything positive. Hatred is man's most insipid emotion simply because it is so counter to survival. In the eyes of America, Fred Phelps has not only done things out of pure hatred,  but a total disregard for any form of reason: call Phelps insane and he will laugh. Call him stupid, however, and he will rage. Perhaps the reason why Phelps and has brood have pressed on so doggedly on the Snyder case is because Phelps will prove to everyone that he is not stupid: everyone will know him and listen, whereas nobody listens to an idiot.

The Snyder Case

While many people deem the upcoming Supreme Court case to be one of horrifically poor taste vs. freedom of speech, instead it can be argued that it is really a case that stretches the limits as to how much harm a person can inflict on another and still hide behind the premise of free speech. To the rest of the country, Phelps actions were even worse than what he had intended to do at Mathew Shepard's funeral - dance on his grave. Fred and his family posse fully intended to cause as much emotional harm and stress as possible to the Snyder family. 

This is where the claim of emotional vandalism comes in.

Every invitation to a funeral begins with the phrase "For those wishing to pay their respects..." The invitation is not open to those who want to desecrate the grave or to dance upon it. The funeral, therefore, is not simply open to the public as the Phelps family contends. In this case, the Snyder family paid for a respectful funeral, during which the bereaved would be comforted by the presence of friends, not enemies. The funeral and the proceedings were the property of the Snyder family. The Phelps family's intent was to mar the funeral proceedings by making entrance and exit from the funeral a fearsome, distasteful affair. They desecrated the funeral with malice aforethought. Emotional vandalism. Willful intent to damage or destroy another persons property.

So far, I haven't seen that particular angle to the prosecution, and since it has not been proffered, it cannot be introduced into this case. In my humble opinion, I fail to see why it should not have been. There must have been a reason why it was not.

The Responsibility of The Christian Right: Don't bet on it.

Although the case of Snyder vs. Phelps will not be heard before the Supreme Court until Wednesday, October 6, the prospects for Al Snyder look grim. Chief Justice Roberts on freedom of speech: "It's certainly the responsibility of the Supreme Court to uphold freedom of speech, even when it's unpopular." 

We must all brace ourselves for the imbecilic grins of the Phelps clan. 

We must also brace ourselves for the slightly muted cheers of our Rightwing Christian friends such as the Family Research Council, the American Family Association, the Southern Baptist Convention, and in particular, people like Tony Perkins, Bryan Fischer and Lou Engle. In addition, all those who say "we're not like Phelps" but who do absolutely nothing to chastise Phelps for his obviously un-Christian demeanor. These people, with all their righteousness at-the-ready, who bray and bloviate about morals and family values will not use one ounce of courage to tell the nation that Fred Phelps' free speech is not worthy to be heard by the dullest of the dull. This sector of our country has a moment to prove themselves to be worthy of their purported religion. They will, however, either cheer, whimper ... or remain silent.

Remember.

Author's note: 

This article is based upon personal experience, Fact-Archive.com, wikipedia.com, and Exhibit A of  PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF (Pursuant to K.S.A. Chapter 60-1701 et. seq.) as requested by Jon Bell, June 2, 1994.)

The Frightened and the Insane: Looking at the Latest In Right-Wing Intolerance

If for reasons of indolence or cowardice this fight is not fought to a finish we may imagine what conditions will be like 500 years hence. Little of God’s image will be left in human nature, except to mock the Creator.

- Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf

These last several weeks have brought out the worst and most unreasonable attitudes in people. It must have been the eclipse. Or the full moon. Or Gay Pride parades. 

Let's see, there was: Lou Engle spewing as much hatred as possible behind closed doors; not one, but TWO strikes against DOMA that inflames Tony Perkins' sense of the melodramatic; a HuffPost columnist trying to link Darwin to Hitler; the Call 2 Fall movement on 4th of July causing a lot of bruised knees and egos; the Texas GOP going completely draconian; Sharron Angle hoisting herself by her own petard; and the Phelps clan going to the Supreme Court armed with self-righteous stupidity.

We've covered Lou Engle's attempts to eradicate homosexuality (by eradicating homosexuals) and, quite frankly, if people haven't gotten the message that this is a very, very dangerous man, then no amount of additional, honest but unrestrained rhetoric will seep in. 

"Your honor, we believe the protesters were within their rights because they were nuts."

Before arguing a case before the Supreme Court, it is wise to submit a brief stating your client's case. It is not wise, however, to state that your client (also being your own family) was "hysterical" while exercising their right of free speech. The brief for the defendant in the case of Snyder v. Westboro Baptist Church is a case in point:

Phelps also argued that the church was engaging in public speech on a matter of public concern; that the funeral was a public event; and that the church did not assert provable facts but instead expressed “hyperbolic, figurative, loose, hysterical opinion.”

This is a case that will receive national attention simply because it is so emotional: do dimwitted right wingnuts have any right to spew insanely vile hatred anywhere near something as emotionally charged as a funeral? Remember, these were the same people (stretch of the imagination here) about whom The Laramie Project was based and who have a website featuring Matthew Shepherd engulfed in the flames of hell. The basic rule of humanity - that you NEVER insult widows or orphans or anyone connected to someone who has just died - is breached by people screaming how glad they are that the deceased are dead and rotting in hell! 

If the Phelps clan wins, then every hate-filled group on the planet will be marching with misspelled signs (oops, the Teabaggers already do that). At the very least, their victory will encourage some people to be more uncouth and vile in their protests. But if they lose, the Christian Right will have a very real conundrum on their hands: someone they hate (Phelps is bad PR) will have gotten the heave-ho using their only real defence - free speech. Tony Perkins will have a hard time choosing puns for that article.

It may also be the first time "hate speech" has ever gone to trial on a national scale. Will the "man addicted to hate," the man banned from entering other countries, the man who bred a family of haters, the man who invented passages of the Bible for his own purposes of argument, will that man win?

I shudder at the thought.

Well, Ducky for DOMA!

Sorry, but whenever I see headlines by Tony Perkins, my prose starts to whack to the right. His bon mots, puns and witticisms are as toxic as the BP oil spill and I should be pitied for having to slog through them every day. When district court judge Joseph Tauro decided two cases against DOMA, Perkins had this to say:

Yesterday, a U.S. District Court did its best to preserve Massachusetts's reputation as the most liberal state in America on marriage. In Boston, a federal judge used his gavel to shatter the one law preventing a complete capitulation to same-sex "marriage" at the federal level: DOMA. 

"... gavel to shatter." There's drama (which I like) and then there's melodrama. The characters in Perkins' plays all seem to have a large appetite for scenery. 

In his decision, judge Tauro ...

...stated that he could not find “any identifiable legitimate purpose or discrete objective” for DOMA to treat same-sex couples differently.

Lisa Keen pointed out:

That finding was important because, in 1996 decision, in Romer v. Evans, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that animus cannot be used to justify a law.

Hmmm. Perhaps the same can be said for the Phelps v Snyder case. 

On The Origin of Species Was REALLY Mein Kampf!

 

Columnist David Klinghoffer wrote a piece last week titled The Dark Side Of Darwin. And readers of the Huffington Post commented accordingly: 

Humans have been killing each other for millenia, we didn't need Darwin to tell us to do it. To claim such is intellectual dishonesty to the extreme.

Lauri Lebo at Religion Dispatches:

In his piece, Klinghoffer recites the tired lie that Hitler was inspired by Darwin’s theory of evolution to force the sterilization of 400,000 people he judged inferior in the quest for racial purity. Klinghoffer, by the way, is a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute, an organization which has been trying to insert religion into public school science classrooms under the guise of intelligent design and anti-evolution lesson plans.

There are, of course, intelligent people in the evolution debate, but an irony lies in the fact that they don't seem to be on the side of intelligent design.

"Spoiled" Nevada Unemployed Have Sharron Angle Coming To Their Rescue!

Nevada U.S. Senatorial GOP candidate, Sharron Angle, the one who promised Harry Reid physical violence via the Second Amendment, has a new attack ad featuring Nevada's high unemployment rate. It would be good strategy if Angle herself hadn't herself said that people receiving unemployment benefits were "spoiled" and that she would have voted against any extension of those benefits. Sort of like saying "you don't deserve jobs, but I'm going to get them for you anyway!" 

Prayers For Fear And Loathing

Sometimes it takes a foreign voice to give us a better perspective of how things really are: Matthew Harwood's article in Britain's Guardian, America's Paranoid Religious Right, gave a fairly good picture of Tony Perkins' Call 2 Fall nationwide 4th of July event. Harwood and his wife attended a Call 2 Fall service in a suburban DC church:

The experience was an insight into the cultural insecurities at work within the religious right and its Christian nationalism – the belief that the United States was, is, and for ever shall be a "Christian nation", utterly dependent on God for its success.

What Harwood experienced was what we, as Americans, have been experiencing on a constant basis: the "Christian nationalism" of which he writes has endeavored to put a strangle-hold on government and our daily lives. And in the process of strangulation, America has had to scream out the injustice:

What originally began as songs of love and sacrifice quickly rot into gay-bashing and the dangerous, yet indistinct talk of enemies everywhere. The room began to take on the darkness of Arthur Miller's Crucible more than the enlightenment of Thomas Jefferson's Declaration of Independence.

This article also begs the question: Just how many degrees of separation are these people from Fred Phelps? Certainly not six. 

No People Evolving or Marrying Queers In Our State! 

And last but certainly not least, America was treated to the latest GOP aberration: the Texas GOP platform, proving that since they don't believe in evolution, Texas GOPers haven't bothered to evolve. 

From Huffington Post's David A. Love:

To round out an astonishing set of policy positions, the Texas Republicans are against any regulations on gun ownership. Oh yeah, and they declare that this is a Judeo-Christian nation. And there should be capital punishment for rape convictions (like the good old days). Deep water oil drilling should resume in the Gulf of Mexico, employers should be able to discriminate, and the minimum wage law should be repealed, they say. No more birthright citizenship -- citizenship by birth would be limited to those born to a U.S. citizen. Finally, the Texas GOP assert that the U.S. should get out of the United Nations.

                 

Of course, tthe Texas GOP may have simply stated which direction other extreme right-wingers in this country really want to move: not right, not left, certainly no forward, but - you guessed it - backwards.

An emotional vandalism case hits the big time. A Senate candidate runs a clueless attack ad. A repudiation of DOMA creates some serious melodrama. The 4th of July incites prayers of paranoia. An egregious link between Darwin and Hitler surfaces. yet again. A party platform takes its clues from the Dark Ages. Whatever brought all this on? 

I dunno. But as surely as you can say "rabid right" we'll have more of the same. 

Pass the hemlock.