Falwell changed his mind – once
Fresh Air replayed an old interview with Jerry Falwell yesterday, in which Terri Gross asked one very good question, in fact the crucial question. Unfortunately it went right past or over Falwell; he either pretended not to get it, or really didn’t get it. Gross made one attempt to press the point, to straighten him out and thus get him to answer the real question rather than a bogus one, but it didn’t work, and she didn’t press it further. I wish she had, because it’s absolutely central. I wish everyone would press this question. As a matter of fact, come to think of it, it’s the same question (in a different form) that Dawkins asked of the homophobic preacher in ‘The Root of all Evil?’, and he too did not press it, and again, I wished he had, for the same reason. We’ve got to learn to keep pressing this question until we get a real answer – we’ve got to stop accepting non-answers and letting it go at that.
What question. This one. She asked if he ever had any doubts, then to explain her meaning further she pointed out that he had opposed the Civil Rights movement until about the mid-60s, when he changed his mind. He cut in to say that God had taught him; Gross cut in to say that she wasn’t asking him to defend his former views, that wasn’t the point, the point was that they had been one thing and then he changed his mind, so did not that lead him to think he could be wrong about something in the same way now? A blindingly obvious and essential question – and it simply went right past him and flopped harmlessly into the dust. It was immensely frustrating – because it gets to the heart of what is wrong with people like Falwell, and what is dangerous about their influence and power, and what is wrong with theocracy in general – and he not only didn’t answer, he seemed not even to understand it.
It’s so basic. If you got it wrong about Civil Rights, if God showed you that you’d been wrong and you changed your mind – how can you possibly know that you’re not wrong about (say) homosexuality or feminism now? What possible conceivable reason can you have for thinking you know that? What is it about what you know now that makes it fundamentally different from what you knew in 1959?
Nothing, Dr Falwell. Not one thing. What you think you know and what you think your God wants you to say is just your own entrenched opinion, just a human opinion like any other, mine, hers, his, theirs; it’s not God’s, it’s not God-endorsed, it’s not cosmic, it’s not Absolute, and it’s certainly not immune from error. That’s why people like you, who apparently can’t even allow that idea house room, are so damn dangerous. That’s why we hate you and fear you: because you’re not just wrong, you’re impervious to correction or argument or persuasion, and not only that but proud of it. Despite knowing and acknowledging that you have changed your mind in the past, you dress up your current opinions as God’s laws and make a virtue of refusing to doubt them. You’re a horror show, you and your gang.
Falwell was a tent revivalist clown who gained political power on the wave of the Reagan upsurge beginning in 1979. Right place at the rightwing time. That he was taken seriously as a political, at times moralistic, commentator by the Liberal Media showed that you can say the craziest, hateful shit, and if you claim to be speaking for God, it will not seriously hurt your career.
Fred Phelps is a partial exception to that, but that just points up how low the bar is for everyone else.
How rebarbative all this is. Reverend Faithandfamily. Bleah.
Yeah. Anything just slightly more refined than “God Hates Fags” seems to be acceptable in our f’d up media.
It’s so rebarbative that it’s disbarbative. I find that I no longer have to shave.
ROFLMAO, again, and this time you meant it….
Dave:
When have I not meant what I said? You’ve lost me (if that was, indeed, directed at me).
The media also took him seriously as a commentator because he had a lot of power behind him in the Moral Majority days. He did turn out the votes, and that kind of political power was rather novel at the time (the religious mailed fist probably hadn’t been seen since Prohibition times). Also, he provided a good contrast to the usual liberal spokespersons, and the mainstream media constantly want to balance X against -X, like the two halves of a Cartesian axis, because that’s how they think they can get at the “truth.”
But for an explanation of the Falwellian mindset, go no further than Peirce’s “method of tenacity” in “The Fixation of Belief”: pick an opinion you like and stick with it come hell or high water. It’s the simplest and most satisfying way of getting rid of the irritation of doubt which Peirce speaks of. When you find another opinion you like better, drop the old one and grab just as tenaciously onto the new one. If you need to, rationalize the change by saying “God gave me a new revelation.” Or some other magical incantation. That doesn’t much matter. It’s the present sensation of blissful certainty that’s important.
No need to worry about whether still another “revelation” might come in the future; that’s up to God. Worrying about something like that might just bring back that awful sensation of doubt, and that’s principally what the Falwellian mind wants to avoid at all costs.
Whole religions can be, and have been, built on this simple principle.
Leave the guy alone he dead already!
Jerry Falwell may be dead, but there are many others who carry on his battles, using the very same tactics and attitudes he used (although often with more subtlety and less bluster). Talking about Jerry Falwell after his death isn’t primarily about Falwell – it’s about Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Richard Land, Chuck Colson, Tim LeHaye, and hundreds more who have altogether too much influence in American life and politics. It’s about der Popenfuhrer’s unsupportable and immoral pronouncements on birth control, abortion, homosexuality, and other matters where he does his damnedest impose his entrenched, rigid, medieval opinions on as many people as possible – and just like Jerry Falwell, never considers any real criticism or the possibility that he might be wrong. A trait that also seems to be shared by our President, frighteningly enough.
Rigid faith – attributing one’s personal opinions to God and refusing to ever seriously doubt those opinions – is a widely-shared vice. Jerry Falwell was in many ways the premier icon of this sort of pervasive self-righteous certitude in American public life, so it is only appropriate that his death should serve as an occasion to reflect on and discuss that vice. The man not an isolated hate-monger, he was a respected elder statesman of hate-mongering. If we cannot come to understand how this small-minded, petty, vicious, hate-filled, willfully ignorant religious huckster became so powerful and influential, how can we oppose others of his ilk?
No, we’re not quite done with Jerry Falwell. Not yet. Not until there are no more like him.
Richard:
Jerry Falwell isn’t bothered in the slightest that we of secular humanist values are glad that we have to contend with him no more. He’s DEAD!
If Falwell had such power and influence how come his death has not caused even a ripple? I am not a great fan of these guys but should point out that they are not all bad,for instance Pat Robertson has been calling for a monatorium on the death penalty I dont see any leading democrats doing the same.
A couple of Falwell quotes:
“If you’re not a born-again Christian, you’re a failure as a human being.”
“Christians, like slaves and soldiers, ask no questions.”
His comments may be stupid but I dont see the hate?
You’re absolutely right, Richard. Falwell wasn’t a hater, and neither are you. In fact, when you really think about it, Fred Phelps just really loves heterosexuals.
His comments may be stupid but I dont see the hate?
Try this one from the previous post:
“AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals.”
Here Falwell makes a statement that indicates righteous anger, and indicates that he agrees with it. This righteous anger, which kills people, is directed against homosexuals purely because they are homosexuals. He is saying it is good that there is something that kills homosexuals (and heterosexuals, and undecided babies, and haemophiliacs of whatever persuasion) because it is right that it should happen.
A dictionary definition of hatred is “intense dislike or ill will”. Falwell’s comment here qualifies, it shows both intense dislike and intense ill will.
I appreciate that he doesn’t say “I hate homosexuals”, or “you should hate homosexuals”. This post doesn’t flat out say that you are wrong.
It just demonstrates it beyond reasonable doubt.
Could Doug please give the source of the quotations.
The scond one is particularly good; if that doesn’t turn you against christianity, I don’t know what will.
It sounds like a fascist rallying cry. In fact substitute the word fascist for christian and isn’t that the entire creed of fascism – to obey without question?
“Jerry Falwell quote” Think exist.com
“It appears that America’s anti-Biblical feminist movement is at last dying, thank God, and is possibly being replaced by a Christ-centered men’s movement which may become the foundation for a desperately needed national spiritual awakening”
Also see: Positive Atheism’s Big Scary List of Jerry Falwell Quotations.
Oh, honestly, Richard – I’m starting to lose my patience with you. Hitler and Stalin are dead already too; is that a reason to ‘leave them alone’ i.e. not criticize them? I criticized Falwell’s thinking, which is 1) pervasive and 2) well able to go on influencing other people despite his death. There is every reason to criticize his thinking and his way of thinking, and no genuine reason that I can see (genuine in the sense of not merely sentimental or pious) not to.
Did you even notice that none of the comments are personal? We don’t care what he looked like or his family life or whether or not he was a nice guy; we’re talking about his influence, political and epistemic. Death does nothing to render such discussion less necessary.
Nice link KB !
Apparently, Fred Phelps is going to picket Falwell’s funeral. Apparently poor Falwell was an Arminian heretic and did not hate Jews and Catholics near hard enough. For which God really hates him with all His hatred. Or at least Fred Phelps does.
Look, I’m always mindful of the way reality can outdo comedy – but if it wasn’t for Phelps’ tasteless picketing of military funerals and his near-abusive involvement of his family in his escapades, I would be bound to believe the man to be a hilarious spoof by some subversive militant atheists. It’s just too funny to be real.
Yes, I saw that. It was hard to resist the conclusion that Phelps has a slight tendency toward attention-seeking. Very slight, of course.
Richard, are you, by any [angry] chance looking for a plumbing job?
Quote taken from Slate
The great reverend ascertained….
On homosexuality: “I believe that all of us are born heterosexual, physically created with a plumbing that’s heterosexual, and created with the instincts and desires that are basically, fundamentally, heterosexual. But I believe that we have the ability to experiment in every direction. Experimentation can lead to habitual practice, and then to a lifestyle. But I don’t believe anyone begins a homosexual.”
Mr Paisley founded the “Save Ulster from Sodomy” campaign in the late 1970s in an unsuccessful bid to prevent the decriminalisation of gay sex acts in Northern Ireland.
He is also the Moderator of the Free Presbyterian Church, which preaches that homosexuality is evil.
TWINKLE TWINKLE LITTLE STAR!
Continuation…
There are an awful lot of drain pipes that need clearing….?!!?
Hell/Fire/Brimstone has notwithstanding, been found wanting.
You obviously have the tricks of the trade?
Mike Rogers: “Could Doug please give the source of the quotations.”
Here you go:
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/05/16/1220/
Complete with Tinky Winky pic.
KB Player:
Thanks for the Hitch video link. Great stuff. Well worth the 5 minutes it takes.
BTW, I don’t remember where I read this, but somewhere I read that Jewish anti-Nazi partisans, who obviously were operating at great risk to their own lives, would, after executing traitors that they found in their midst, bury them and then literally dance on their graves. Can you blame them?
Well, that’s just stating the bleedin’ obvious.
Grrrrrrrrrrrr.
Let’s hope that doesn’t come back.
I think he’s moving from blog to blog – he had hit six other ones ‘ccording to google.
What the hell are you people talking about? Something’s been deleted, I take it.
O.B.I would hardly put the rather small minded Fawell in the same bracket as Hitler or Stalin or Fred Phelps for that matter!
Look i am not defending the guy I just think that some people are being a bit unfair in their comments,he may have been unpleasant but to put him in the same boat as Fred Phelps is a bit of a stretch!
O.B.I thought for the most part your comments were fair to Falwell I was commenting on some of the other posts.
Falwell’s utterances as reported make me feel better disposed towards British clerics – they say daft things sometimes but no-one takes them seriously and there is a lot of ineffectual goodwill behind their daft speeches unlike the cruel Pharisee behind Falwell’s kind. I exclude Ian Paisley and that bloke at Christian Voice.
Richard: the difference between the two though is that Falwell inspired a powerful and influential political movement, and Phelps inspires hilarity. You should check out his music videos (“God hates the world” and “Smell the brimstone”). Spent enough time on the far left to know how extremists fall into unintended self-parody, but I’ve never seen anything like this. He’s kind of the benchmark. He’s to Christian fundamentalism what De Sade is to sexuality: no matter how hard you try, you can’t end up there.
So Phelps in a way has redeeming features. Falwell and Robertson and others who actually have the clout to influence people do not.
Oh man! I just watched “Smell the Brimstone.” Kreistalmighty! If that’s not parody, it’s scary. You can see it here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5smRlf6X2Ac
You’ve been warned.
Here’s a great bit from Hitchens making it abundantly clear that he’s glad there is no more Falwell. At the very end, he says, “If you gave Falwell an enema, he could be buried in a matchbox.” Richard, you’re not gonna like this.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/05/17/hitchens-brutally-eulogizes-falwell-on-hannity-colmes/
Yes something was deleted, a book-length comment on who knows what.
Richard, so you were objecting to the comments of Dennis Perrin and JonJ? No one else had made any substantive comments when you made your ‘leave the guy alone’ comment. So you think DP and JJ were unfair to Falwell? I must say, I don’t; I think both comments were measured, detailed, and interesting. I think you just got pissed off in some knee-jerk way, and that’s why I got pissed off back. If you want to defend Falwell in some substantive way, then offer evidence that he did something good; just shouting ‘leave him alone he’s dead’ doesn’t cut it. Bad actions don’t become good actions merely because the agent dies (and that, obviously, was the point of my reference to Hitler and Stalin, not that Falwell was their equivalent).
More lovely quotes from the delightful “Dr.” Falwell. Here’s a sample:
“You know when I see somebody burning the flag, I’m a Baptist preacher I’m not a Mennonite, I feel it’s my obligation to whip him. In the name of the Lord, of course. I feel it’s my obligation to whip him, and if I can’t do it then I look up some of my athletes to help me. But, as long as at 72 I can handle most of the jobs I do it myself, and I don’t think it’s un-spiritual. When I, when I, when I hear somebody talking about our military and ridiculing and saying terrible things about our President, I’m thinking you know just a little bit of that and I believe the Lord would forgive me if I popped him.”
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/gate/archive/2007/05/18/notes051807.DTL&nl=fix
My specific objection was the referance to him beig hatefull, in my opinion the term hate or hate monger ect are so over used they have become meaningless these terms should aply to real haters like Phelps,Farakan,Irving not small minded jerks,I didnt want to go to bat for Falwell so I just left the dead already remark1(probably a mistake I didnt even put an s after he).I also think the power and influence that these guys have is vastly over stated,several of them tried to get the then Gov Bush to grant a repreve to Carla Tucker,Bush just gave them the finger and sent her to the needle room.All these guys seem to get from the G.O.P.is empty rhetoric about faith and family values never anything concrete.
Thank you, that’s a lot more substantive. I don’t agree with it, but it’s substantive!
I’d love to be able to believe you about his influence, but alas – I can’t. It would take thousands of words to detail why, but anyway I can’t.
All I would say about the influence thing O.B.is people tend to look at what these gyus ask for (scary stuff)not what they actualy achieve!I have studied U.S.polotics for 30 years and I think I am right about this,let me give you an example these types have demanded pro life supreme court justices since Regans time what do they get from Bush,Roberts and Alito two pro life guys who made it clear they would not overturn previous precedents(code for we are not going near Roe v Wade)what I am basicly saying is the G.O.P. treats these gyus in the same way as the dems treat the black vote they take them for granted!
Another example Bush worked these guys in to a frenzy on the mariage amendment he also knew that the amendment was d.o.a.because constitutional amendments that start at the federal level always fail.
Richard,
But the Supreme Court is not all there is to it; abortion is still (within narrowing limits) still legal here but it is unavailable in much of the country, and a lot of the reason for that is heavy social pressure and especially threats. Doctors are not all that eager to risk their lives, so there are places where there simply are no doctors who do abortions; it’s as simple as that. So I think the influence of people like Falwell (and Falwell himself) is pretty strong.
I probably dont dispute your point on local influence other than to say that this sort of patchwork quilt is common to a lot of things like the death penalty or obcenety laws in the states,I know I will get my head handed to me for saying this but a lot of the problems you speak of have been exaserbated by Roe in my opinion, it shut of debate on a proces that was already moving toward liberalisation throughout the U.S.
Roe also gave the R.R. something to focus a huge amount of energy on!