March 24, 2014 Would Even Jesus Be Welcome at the Westboro Baptist Church?

By Timothy Shuh It's not often that someone feels happy about the passing of a human being, but on March 19th, many people were relieved at the passing of Fred Phelps, the pastor of the Westboro Baptist Church, who died at the age of 84. This man led the church to picket funerals of American soldiers, and performed rallies against gay people. Cal Thomas of the Chicago Tribune says that Phelps will be denied at the pearly gates of heaven for all the sick deeds he has orchestrated throughout his life. Many perceive the church's notions as incredibly wrong, while members of the church believe that their actions are justified by the word of the Bible. I couldnt disagree more with the members of the church. There's no way around it. The Westboro Baptist Church commits acts of hypocrisy and makes ludicrous judgements. But who is right? And what determines wrong? Recently I was in an argument with a fellow classmate on the topic of right and wrong, and how this pertained to homosexuality. I am not going to tell you that being gay is right or wrong. That would be nothing more than a waste of time. I will simply tell you where the principles of "right" and "wrong" come from. Morality is defined by Webster's dictionary as "principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad." Some may question whether the Westboro Church makes a distinction between right and wrong. Members of the church follow the teachings of the Bible, but I believe their actions may convey a message hinting that these rules when inadequately interpreted may be immoral after all. Let's take a look. There are two types of morality that are heavily argued. Robin Schumacher, a philosopher from the research ministry of Christian apologetics, defines moral relativism as "a philosophy that asserts there is no global, absolute moral law that applies to all people, for all time, and in all places." On the other hand, moral absolutism points to a black and white, right and wrong answer. There is a clear dispute between the two. When the majority of the population is asked the question, "was the Nazi genocide of the Jews right?" they would say of course not. This was a horrific crime against humanity. In the same way, if I asked whether it would be alright to beat my wife, the answer would be not a chance. But if I took her to United Arab Emirates (UAE), this "crime" would be perfectly legal. Times of India writer Rajib Aadil comments that a man can beat his wife and young children in UAE as long as there are no marks left on the body. However, the majority of the population would speak up if I flew myself and my spouse to UAE, beat her, and then returned. The second argument reveals a much different approach. Moral absolutism points to a clear answer about right and wrong. An example can be seen in the view of rape. I know for a fact that rape is wrong. So does everyone else in the world. This is why in all places of the world, rape remains illegal.

Anyone who is found and convicted of committing this crime is put behind bars for an extended period of time. From these two arguments, it can be gathered that moral absolutes do in fact exist. But to have these absolutes, there must be a standard by which to measure. The standard must be perfect, and must stem from the beginning of time. If this werent true then it remains an opinion of right and wrong, and absolutes could be created at any time. Anyone could and would create arbitrary laws that only suit them self. I, as a lover of sports, would make it illegal to not play sports on a regular basis. But I'm clearly not a perfect being. Neither are you. So lets leave the law making to someone else. The perfect measure must exist everywhere, and in doing so, every person has the same sense of right and wrong. Right and wrong shouldnt change from area to area. No human being exists everywhere. It is difficult for many to conceptualize a perfect being that is timeless and is present in all areas. My belief is that there is an intelligent creator who encapsulates these aspects. I know this being as God. The ideologies logically follow that for absolute morals to exist, there must be a God. Humans across the planet, whether believing that there are or arent absolutes, live like there are, as many crimes are recognized as universally wrong. All of this brings me to the conclusion that to live in moral correctness means to follow the Bible as closely as possible. This makes perfect sense to me, but the final question still remains: Are the members of the Westboro Baptist Church following scripture and what God says correctly? No. Here is where they are wrong. God's greatest commandment to his followers says to "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mindAnd the second is like it: Love your neighbour as yourself." In order for the church to hate gays or picket funerals, they first have to wish for these things themselves. No human being longs to be hated. I strongly believe that the Westboro Baptist Church needs to re-evaluate how they live God's word. Personally, the death of Fred Phelps doesn't stir any emotion within me, because he contravened God's greatest commandment. The members that walk in the footsteps of Phelps certainly dont create a message that brings followers to Christ. Their hypocritical actions are a disservice to the God of Love and the people who live to serve Him. "Thank God for Katrina" and "Thank God for dead soldiers" embody the attitude of the Westboro Baptist Church. On March 19th, some may have thanked God for the passing of Fred Phelps.

Members of the Westboro Baptist Church display their views through signs in Topeka Kansas