MUST SEE TV!!! WBC to Protest "Fag" Michael Jackson Funeral

Piggybacking On Jackson's Success

WBC is just piggybacking on Jackson's success, much like how many "christian" groups piggyback on the GLBT community for $$$$$.

WBC = smalltown hick church of filthy-mouthed weirdo's.  Possibly also an incestuous family.

Jacko = responsible for some damn good music with J5, The Jacksons, and solo (as well as working with his siblings on their albums).  Known weirdo, but IMO THE MUSIC outweighs his weirdness and controversy over the years.

WBC is jealous.

---

by: bluegrassfool @ Fri Jul 03, 2009 at 12:49:40 PM CDT

The Nation of Islam...

...is going to take this very seriously.

It may not even matter if this is a bluff and the Phelps clan doesn't show up. They may get a knock on their doors from some very nice men wearing bow ties today.

That's all I'm gonna write about it.

When you look for the bad in mankind, expecting to find it, you surely will.

- Abraham Lincoln.

---

by: Fritz @ Fri Jul 03, 2009 at 13:06:20 PM CDT

Fred Phelps - smooth criminal

There are more traumatized children at the WBC compound than the Neverland ranch.

Also, I'm surprised that the Phelps' didn't go after Jacko for his former Jehovah's Witness beliefs.  

---

by: Blood From Machines @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 01:38:27 AM CDT

Phelps

The clan was pretty savvy about finding a police presence to hook up with when they were in Chicago.  If there is a police station nearby, that is probably where they'll be.  

"You are the rest of the world."

---

by: TomChicago @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:27:14 AM CDT

This one could be good

Oh man i am so going to follow this.  This maybe the one time that the mofos get the shit beat outta them!  They go to protest at this event will be a sad day I believe for some of them. I so wish I was there for this one. I would just stand near this idiots and watch as the Nation of Islam encircles them and just begins to do what they do.  If not for them then the radical fans that will be hysterical for anybody talking smack about Michael. Yep. These people will have it coming i believe. Cop or no cop. Doesnt really matter.  

---

by: texaspigeon @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:40:44 AM CDT

Uhm...

Do the Westboro lunatics know where The Staples center is?

If they protest the funeral someone is going to kill them.

Besser ein ende mit Schrecken als ein Schrecken ohne ende

---

by: becca @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 09:08:36 AM CDT

Exactly

Having lived in SoCal for more than a decade, I know exactly where the Staples Center is and that's why this story is so intriguing. They are entering the lion's den.  

Close the GayTM. Only give to candidates who have actually done something other than make promises - most are just pandering for our cash.

---

by: JohnVisser @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 10:44:49 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Martyrs to the end

The emotional state of MJ fans will make the overwrought Friends of Dorothy at Stonewall look like Junior ROTC candidates.  I pity the WBC cult for believing (1) that they might get away from this protest unscathed (2) that they believe the police will care and (3) that any survivors will be aided by bystanders in identifying those to sue for "abridging the rights" of the slaughtered.

---

by: greatwhitebear @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 11:03:58 AM CDT

Jackson was not remotely gay

The Phelps Klan can find an excuse for bigotry in any occasion; they'd call Arnold Schwarzenegger a "fag" just to have an excuse to makes asses out of themselves.

This reminds me, though, of the attitude toward Jackson when he was at the height of his popularity. I was in high school at the time, and I remember how that perennial clique of hypermasculine males would deride his sexuality. There was nothing even remotely gay about Jackson; he just defied the stereotypical concept of masculinity, and that was enough. The same derision was also directed at Prince, from whose pores virtually dripped heterosexual passion.

Yet this same clique worshiped heavy metal bands with long, feathered hair, spandex leggings, lipstick, eyeliner, and enough foundation to anchor the Sears Tower. There is a doctoral thesis in that paradox somewhere.  

---

by: thinkoplex @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 11:17:35 AM CDT

I don't really condone violence

but these people are REALLY retarded for even considering this.

Usually they do get police protection, but in this case they are going to be hard-pressed to find that.  The police already have a huge job just dealing with the Jackson fans milling about in droves.  I do not believe these people deserve to have special protection on a day when the resources are already spread so thin.  Actually, they don't deserve special police protection EVER.  Screw them, I don't get a personal police officer every time I want to go out and be a gay activist.  

If they make it out of this alive, they will more than likely sue the city for not ensuring their safety.  

They are effin nuts... and I support them 100% in going to this particular funeral for protest.  I hope they can see how well their hateful version of god protects them.

---

by: flyerfier @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 11:51:41 AM CDT

Huh?

"This reminds me, though, of the attitude toward Jackson when he was at the height of his popularity. I was in high school at the time, and I remember how that perennial clique of hypermasculine males would deride his sexuality. There was nothing even remotely gay about Jackson; he just defied the stereotypical concept of masculinity, and that was enough. The same derision was also directed at Prince, from whose pores virtually dripped heterosexual passion."

What exactly do you mean by "nothing even remotely gay about Jackson"? Anyone can be gay. I doubt you'd see anything "remotely Gay" about me either yet I am. This sounds like you are saying it would be an insult to say Michael was gay, or that there is something wrong with it.

There is nothing wrong with being Gay, lots of Gay people don't have something about them that would scream Gay, and it is not an insult or a problem if Michael was Gay.

Sorry, this really, really bothered me.  

---

by: acoolerclimate @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:33:05 PM CDT

yup

methinks half of the drama and crap he experienced is due to MJ's gender-blending ways.

They put him through the wringer for not adhering to mainstream gender rules.  Sure is easy for them to point a finger of perversion at the different guy.

---

by: flyerfier @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:43:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Huh? to "Huh?"

How on earth did you get that I was implying that there was anything wrong with being gay? For the record, I am gay myself, and I certainly don't think there's anything wrong about it.

What I was condemning was the attitude that some people have that if a man deviates from stereotypically masculine behavior in even the slightest, he is pegged as "gay" (and the converse would go for women who are not stereotypically feminine). Thus, "gay" is transformed into a slur - that is certainly how his detractors used the term - and the range of accepted sexual expression is restricted.

And, if I may be "bothered" myself, I was recently fired from my job because I did not meet my supervisor and coworkers' concept of how my sexuality fit into the office. Your assumption, drawn from nowhere apparently, that I am straight because I was condemning those who condemned Jackson for his supposed sexuality does not sit well with my mood at the moment. So you are need in a refresher course in not judging people yourself.

---

by: thinkoplex @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 13:32:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Most reasonable people know what you meant

Again, this is another example of people who troll through the comments looking for something they can complain about.

This makes people have to choose their words so carefully that it has a chilling effect.

acoolerclimate ignored all of the good points that thinkoplex made and choose to take personal offense based on how he phrased something. (It was a bit artless, but so what? Why should we expect everyone to be perfect?)

Writing something like "Jackson never set off my gaydar" could have been a more artful way to state it. thinkoplex  chose different words. Big frickin' deal!

I'm so sick of this kind of crap. It doesn't contribute to the conversation. This thread is supposed to be about Michael Jackson, not how acoolerclimate feels personally insulted by another person's choice of words.

thinkoplex should not have to explain the obvious. I don't want the "word police" trolling through these threads. Does anyone else feel the same way?

When you look for the bad in mankind, expecting to find it, you surely will.

- Abraham Lincoln.

---

by: Fritz @ Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 16:16:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Here's hoping they get intimidated, but not assaulted

Remember -- the Phelps cult is loaded with lawyers! They'll sue anyone and everyone at the drop of a needle, not to mention enhance their martyr complex to heights not seen for decades!

AFAIC, the whole bunch should be visited by the Topeka Child Protective Services and the adults put on trial for abuse, for instilling those kids with the hate and bigotry spewed by that horrid, dried-up old man.

Listen to "TransTalk" every Thursday at 4-5pm ET on http://www.falconradio.org

---

by: Marlene @ Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 10:02:41 AM CDT

Problem is, they use their kids as human shields

When the Phelpsies were here in Pittsburgh protesting at Mister Rogers' funeral, they brought a good number of kids with them, some clearly as young as ten or so.  The crowd was very well-behaved, all things considered.  But every time anyone started to confront the WBC crowd, they'd immediately push their kids to the front of the queue.  It's swiinish, it's cowardly, but it's what they do.  If there is violence--and I sure hope there isn't--I hope people will be mindful of the WBC kids, who are after all only innocent pawns in all this.

I am not interested in picking up crumbs of compassion thrown from the table of someone who considers himself my master. I want the full menu of rights.  -Archbishop Desmond Tutu

---

by: QScribe @ Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 16:27:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sorry

I'm sorry I got bothered by the post. I love how when you say you are upset, instead of people trying to make you feel better, you get slammed.

The only thing that bothered me was when the poster said there was nothing even remotely gay about Jackson. That made it sound as if you couldn't be gay if there was nothing gay about you, which is false.

Where did it say in my post I thought the poster was straight? I didn't say that at all.

The post made me think of all the times I've said someone might be gay, and the other person said "no, there is nothing gay about that person" or "no, they couldn't be gay" as if there is something wrong with being gay or you have to show signs of it. (whatever those signs are).

No one else thought this? And why can't people say "I'm so sorry this hurt you, I didn't mean it like that at all. Here is what I really meant"....Screaming at the person who was hurt does not help them see anything except feel even worse.

And I am taking my own advice above and saying all of this to the people upset by MY post. I'm really sorry being hurt by something bothered all of you. If I read the post incorrectly, I'm sorry, you could just have said that. If I worded my post incorrectly, all I meant was that I was hurt, tried to explain why, and hoped people would politely tell me why I was wrong or agree with me.

Thanks so much for responding to me being hurt by blasting me. I thought this was a gay affirming site?

---

by: acoolerclimate @ Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 12:36:52 PM CDT

Wait, I have a better idea

Okay, I reread my last post and that was is probably going to get slammed too. Is't me being hurt that no one else understood why I was hurt in the first place. Well, not hurt, words can't hurt, just more bothered and wanting to show why.

So I have a better idea. Something practical. I love this blog, and I generally agree with everything on it. Occasionally I read something that bothers me. I'm sure that happens to everyone.

So when that happens, what is the appropriate way of responding to a posting that should bother you? Is there a proper way to do it, so that you get your point across, other people might counter your point, etc, and that it's done with mutual respect so both sides learn something? Is there a way to do it so that if I'm wrong to be bothered, or that I'm not wrong, but I took the other persons meaning the wrong way, that other people try to help you see that without thinking you're a total jerk, thread jacking, etc?

This is a sincere attempt to learn about posting so that I don't make the same mistakes again.  

---

by: acoolerclimate @ Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 13:22:14 PM CDT

Why is it necessary

to take issue with every post that "bothers" you?  This is a large and very diverse community; that's one of the reasons so many of us love it.  Not everything everyone posts here goes down easy.  But why not stick to the main subject/line of discussion instead of getting caught up in what are, after all, minor details/side issues?

With very rare exceptions, I assume that everyone here is well-intentioned; I don't think it's my duty to go around rapping knuckles every time someone uses a turn of phrase I find problematic.  Do you do that in conversation?  Are you constantly correcting all your friends?  Then why do it here?

The "nothing remotely gay" post annoyed me too.  Most people think there's "nothing remotely gay" about me--to the point where I've actually had the experience of having to argue with people to convince them of my gayness.  But on reflection it was pretty clear where this commenter was coming from, so I just shrugged it off.  I'd suggest you try to adopt that attitude too.  People here are not your enemies.  You don't have to be constantly on your guard about everything they say.

I am not interested in picking up crumbs of compassion thrown from the table of someone who considers himself my master. I want the full menu of rights.  -Archbishop Desmond Tutu

---

by: QScribe @ Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 16:43:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

My idea on a successful follow up post

to something you don't agree with:

Start a discussion.  Probe the original poster for their intent or clarification.  Sometimes, you just disagree with the wording they used.. or something wasn't clear.

I feel that the comment section on a blog, especially one set up like this, is made for discussion.  It's set up so we can reply to individuals directly.. that way we can work out the disagreement or misconceptions in what we say.

Most of the squabbles I've seen on here are about a post being a kneejerk reaction and clicking post before re-reading a response.

I guess it all comes down to wording.  I often fail at that. I feel like an imbecile compared to some of the eloquent prose and complex, well thought out ideas of some of the posters on this blog.   Nevertheless, I still want to engage with people.  It only makes us better.

---

by: flyerfier @ Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 17:38:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]