interesting article on falwell from slate

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.slate.com/id/2166337/fr/flyout#





Faith-Based Fraud

Jerry Falwell's foul rantings prove you can get away with anything if you have "Reverend" in front of your name.
By Christopher Hitchens


The discovery of the carcass of Jerry Falwell on the floor of an obscure office in Virginia has almost zero significance, except perhaps for two categories of the species labeled "credulous idiot." The first such category consists of those who expected Falwell (and themselves) to be bodily raptured out of the biosphere and assumed into the heavens, leaving pilotless planes and driverless trucks and taxis to crash with their innocent victims as collateral damage. This group is so stupid and uncultured that it may perhaps be forgiven. It is so far "left behind" that almost its only pleasure is to gloat at the idea of others being abandoned in the same condition.

The second such category is of slightly more importance, because it consists of the editors, producers, publicists, and a host of other media riffraff who allowed Falwell to prove, almost every week, that there is no vileness that cannot be freely uttered by a man whose name is prefaced with the word Reverend. Try this: Call a TV station and tell them that you know the Antichrist is already on earth and is an adult Jewish male. See how far you get. Then try the same thing and add that you are the Rev. Jim-Bob Vermin. "Why, Reverend, come right on the show!" What a fool Don Imus was. If he had paid the paltry few bucks to make himself a certified clergyman, he could be jeering and sneering to the present hour.

Falwell went much further than his mad 1999 assertion about the Jewish Antichrist. In the time immediately following the assault by religious fascism on American civil society in September 2001, he used his regular indulgence on the airwaves to commit treason. Entirely exculpating the suicide-murderers, he asserted that their acts were a divine punishment of the United States. Again, I ask you to imagine how such a person would be treated if he were not supposedly a man of faith.

One of his associates, Bailey Smith, once opined that "God does not hear the prayers of a Jew." This is one of the few anti-Semitic remarks ever made that has a basis in fact, since God does not exist and does not attend to any prayers, but Smith was not quite making that point. Along with his friend Pat Robertson, who believes in secret Jewish control of the world of finance, and Billy Graham, who boasted to Richard Nixon that the Jews had never guessed what he truly thought of them, Falwell kept alive the dirty innuendo about Jews that so many believing Christians seem to need. This would be bad enough in itself, and an additional reason to deplore the free ride he was given on television, if his trade-off had not been even worse.

Seeking to deflect the charge of anti-Jewish prejudice, Falwell adopted the cause of the most thuggish and demented Israeli settlers, proclaiming that their occupation of the West Bank and Gaza was a holy matter and hoping that they might help to bring on Armageddon and the return of the Messiah. A detail in this ghastly narrative, as adepts of the "Left Behind" series will know, is that the return of the risen Christ will require the mass slaughter or mass conversion of all Jews. This consideration did not prevent Menachem Begin from awarding Falwell the Jabotinsky Centennial Medal in 1980 and has not inhibited other Israeli extremists from embracing him and his co-thinkers ever since. All bigots and frauds are brothers under the skin. Trying to interrupt the fiesta of piety on national television on the night of Falwell's death, I found myself waiting while Ralph Reed went all moist about the role of the departed in empowering "people of faith." Here was the hypocritical casino-based Christian who sought and received the kosher stamp from Jack Abramoff. Perfect.

Like many fanatical preachers, Falwell was especially disgusting in exuding an almost sexless personality while railing from dawn to dusk about the sex lives of others. His obsession with homosexuality was on a par with his lip-smacking evocations of hellfire. From his wobbly base of opportunist fund raising and degree-mill money-spinning in Lynchburg, Va., he set out to puddle his sausage-sized fingers into the intimate arrangements of people who had done no harm. Men of this type, if they cannot persuade enough foolish people to part with their savings, usually end up raving on the street and waving placards about the coming day of judgment. But Falwell, improving on the other Chaucerian frauds from Oral Roberts to Jim Bakker to Ted Haggard, not only had a TV show of his own but was also regularly invited onto mainstream ones.

The evil that he did will live after him. This is not just because of the wickedness that he actually preached, but because of the hole that he made in the "wall of separation" that ought to divide religion from politics. In his dingy racist past, Falwell attacked those churchmen who mixed the two worlds of faith and politics and called for civil rights. Then he realized that two could play at this game and learned to play it himself. Then he won the Republican Party over to the idea of religious voters and faith-based fund raising. And now, by example at least, he has inspired emulation in many Democrats and liberals who would like to borrow the formula. His place on the cable shows will be amply filled by Al Sharpton: another person who can get away with anything under the rubric of Reverend. It's a shame that there is no hell for Falwell to go to, and it's extraordinary that not even such a scandalous career is enough to shake our dumb addiction to the "faith-based."

I don't think Jerry Falwell was really a true Christian. I always thought that those elite "reverends" were paid by political parties, to brainwash Christian into voting for them I could be wrong.

You should see Hitchens on TV. He said relatively the same thing in the article on CNN, but the way he called him a little toad cracked me up.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkAPaEMwyKU&mode=related&search=[/youtube]
Also lays into Ralph Reed on Hannity & Colmes:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doKkOSMaTk4[/youtube]

I think there should be a live cam on his grave.

a live cam? so we can watch the dancers?

Jerry Falwell was a rank opportunist and a terrorist of the lowest caliber. He terrorized people with their sincere beliefs, turning their beliefs against them and into fear of the 'other'. He was not interested in the American Way.

Tinky Winky (the teletubbie he said was "gay" because she was purple and carried a purse) says 'Bye Bye!"

Merle

oh, yeah, a joke "Why can't Jerry Falwell fly around heaven?"

no left wing. . .

I said I wouldn't respond but...Hitchens isn't a slim guy himself. It's not as if Falwell went around making "fat jokes." HAHAHAHA! The sophisticated atheist reduces himself to petty insults. Pathetic.



Of course, Hitchens, who regards religion as mad and stupid, and feels that Falwell never believed in it declines to speak of the context. Falwell referred to a Jewish anti-Christ because according to The Book of Revelation, the anti-Christ will impersonate Christ himself, who was, of course, a Jew. Falwell isn't anti-Semitic, as any of his numerous close personal Jewish allies and friends can affirm. But, no, he must be, because of his theology, which



Now I don't know if he believes in that and despite the rants of secular leftists the vast majority of Christians don't spend their times dreaming of the end days. Falwell himself, despite this supposed connection to "Left Behind" (as opposed to his actual words), has never advocated violence against anyone.



Falwell thought that homosexuality is a sin. That's OK, right? He also thought that homosexual activity was less safe then heterosexual behavior, and in the United States the statistics bear that out. On occasion, he said things that were absurd, and he, unlike, say, Christopher Hitchens or most leftists, apologized when he felt that he caused offense. But that isn't enough to stop people from having people happily cheer on Marxist sympathizers like Hitchens dancing on his grave. I hope if I was famous I didn't get the same treatment.



Does Christopher Hitchens have "sausage-sized fingers?"



That's because he was honest, and free of money scandals unlike those the corrupt televangelist preachers that he did not like.



He was acknowledged he was wrong about criticizing the Rev. Martin Luther King's activism. Would it be better if he maintained he was right all along?



Oh, I see. If your a leftist Southern Racist and see the light it's OK, but if a right-winger does it then it's hypocritical.

ADDENDUM: How about you guys go talk to groups like the Council on Islamic Relations, or Islamist groups in Europe and Canada and ask about their attitudes regarding plurality in religion in this life rather then the next?

Wrong.
Falwell was a b***h.
And what's so tragic about it is he was probably completely gay himself.

strom thurmond also apologized for his racism doesn't mean that he's any less racist outside the public eye.



thurmond and falwell were cut of the same cloth.

homosexual activity? roflmfao
Thing is, never had any yet knock on my door trying to convert me. Now on the other hand.....
When the other hand sits down to get their lecture from me. I just remind them, gays probably wouldn't like them to damn much anyway.
They seem kind of shocked to think that. I just sit there and grin, such a bewildered look on their faces, priceless.
He got all bent out of shape over homosexuals and forgot to bash the guy or gal that was dinkin the monkey. Go figure. Did he have any pets?

I think the "toad" epithet referred to Falwell's moral character (slimy and repulsive), not his physical appearance.

OK, so let's say someone believes homosexuality is a sin. Does that, by default, make them a bad person?



There is absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever. By all accounts he was fully faithful to his wife. Hating gays does not automatically equal homosexual and Falwell didn't really hate gays.



By all accounts he was less of a racist when he died then he was when he ran for President in 1948 on the States' Rights ticket. Back then he wouldn't have publicly Black person's hand let alone vote for Black supreme court justices, or vote for the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday. This is not to say he still did not have any biases.

Isn't fighting against biases a good thing? Or is it better to have an attitude never to forgive?

Yes, because it is illogical.


Being fafithful to his wife doesn't mean sh*t. You can marry a woman and still be as gay as a penguin.

I believe it is not illogical, although I am agnostic myself (who opposes both gay marriage and civil unions). I am a bad person? I am aware I am asking a different question.



But you have no evidence that he is gay. You are just presuming it.

Yes, you are. Why do you want to deny me my rights?

yes. the same way saying that it's a sin for a white person to have sex with a black person.





fighting against biases is great. but i'm also a cynic...mainly because the reality of the world that surrounds me says that people are hard pressed to give up such things as racism. they'll closet it faster than a new jersey governor hides his homosexuality...but they never give up on those core beliefs.


as far as the flippant statment about falwell being gay....honestly, i think his sexual preference is that of power. i'd see him enjoying either going the ted haggard route or just all out child molestation....such a greed for power like he had is the kind of sickness that leads to such acts.


....not that what teddy did was wrong....i actually encourage legalizing prostitution and have no problem with gays....more that i have a problem with his lust for power (paying someone like he did and in his situation and stance is much a power move...not because he needed to pay like others do) and his blatant hypocrisy.

I appreciate your honesty.



This presumes the marriage of two persons, not only of different sex but also of the same sex, by the state to be a fundamental right. I do not agree. Where did you acquire this right? From whom was it granted? Obviously it was not God since he does not exist? Was it the Government? Was it yourself? Rights do not exist in a vacuum. You wouldn't have a Christian in Saudi Arabia say, "Don't take my Bible, it's my right to have one!" On the other hand, if the government tried to take bibles in the US they would be violating the First Amendment. If they ordered you to become a Buddhist they would be doing the same thing. However, there is nothing in the Constitution that mandates homosexual marriage, and nothing that mandates civil unions regardless of what the Massachusetts Supreme Court says.

Let's say I demanded the government stop taxing my corporate income. They say no. Oh, but I say, "It's my right." But it's doesn't make it my right, even if think it's unfair. I think sodomy bans are absurd but their was no constitutional basis to throw them out. I think abortion is MURDER but I don't see any basis for the Supreme Court to ban abortion.

Sorry, I guess this just makes me a bad person.



Those who claimed that it was a sin for a white person to engage in intercourse with a black person had to twist their interpretation of the bible even more then those who defended slavery. They made the absurd claim that Blacks were given the "mark of Cain."

The comparison is made more absurd by the physical differences between men and women compared to the lack of physical differences between black and whites.

Also, I am wondering how far this goes. What if the person thinks it is a sin but still backs gay marriage and it doesn't effect him otherwise? I mean not all Christians then all gays are going to hell...