I’ve been waiting for this:
Westboro Baptist Church loses lawsuit in Maryland.
BALTIMORE (Reuters) - A jury on Wednesday ordered an anti-gay Kansas church to pay $10.9 million in damages to relatives of a U.S. Marine who died in Iraq after church members cheered his death at his funeral.
*snip*
“It’s enough already to bankrupt them and financially destroy them,”
We can only hope this will finally shut them the fuck up.
All of those STUPID Krixstains should be rounded up, put in uniform and shipped to Iraq…. Without any Armour
I hate these fuckers as much as the next person, but I’m a little leery about this whole invasion of privacy ruling. So when I show up at Bush’s funeral someday holding a sign that says “It’s about time” I can be sued by his family now???
I say let them make jackasses out of themselves. It’s one of the best form of advertisement we have for losing your religion.
$10.9 million to one family? What about all the other ones who were harrassed by these psychos?
$10.9 million to one family? What about all the other ones who were harrassed by these psychos?
I was thinking the same thing.
I hate these fuckers as much as the next person, but I’m a little leery about this whole invasion of privacy ruling.
I’m just glad that someone finally stood up and challenged these freaks. They are lucky that someone doesn’t go berserk and shoot their asses. (That might happen if they picket the wrong funeral one day.)
I’m just glad that someone finally stood up and challenged these freaks. They are lucky that someone doesn’t go berserk and shoot their asses. (That might happen if they picket the wrong funeral one day.)
I think people have been standing up to them for a while though. I’ve seen plenty of videos of people confronting them. And didn’t a bunch of bikers form a blockade at one of the funerals they were picketing recently?
Oh ya, I totally agree that if they keep it up, somebody is going to get seriously hurt. Maybe they could be kept away from the funerals with the justification that it is for their own protection, because I doubt a jury is going to find anyone guilty of assault (or worse) if they attack these freaks.
Granted, I don’t know all the details about this case, so maybe I’m wrong, but something still bothers me about this ruling. I did plan on showing up to Pat Robertson’s impending funeral with a few signs of my own, but now I’m not so sure if it means I can be sued for invasion of privacy.
“I’m just glad that someone finally stood up and challenged these freaks. They are lucky that someone doesn’t go berserk and shoot their asses. (That might happen if they picket the wrong funeral one day.)”
Actually Star, I suspect one day this may happen. I do not think this lawsuit (which I’m sure will be appealed) will slow this guy down–on the contrary, it will likely strengthen his resolve. And having visisted this troglodite’s website and viewed his protests, I suspect part of him wishes to be “martyred for the cause.”
The most sickening thing about this (and there is so much about this to sicken you) is that this church often brings a large number of children to these “protests.” I don’t know if you’ve been “fortunate” to witness one of these public circle-jerks, but I have. When I was living in KC, they were protesting outside the national headquarters of the Boys and Girls Club, presumably because the Club didn’t hate gays enough. Granted, I was driving by, but I was unable to spot an adult (literally, not figuratively,) in the rather sizeable crowd.
Yes, these people are so selfish and demented, they put their own children in terrible harm just so they can soil the public stage with their verbal diahrrea.
I want to be optimistic about this, and I hope it does shut him up already, but, alas, I am doubtful.
Are they using the children as human shields?
They’ll have to sell the tires holding down the roof of their church trailer.
I think it was here that someone posted that video of the Aussie talk show where one of them went to one of these protests and starting coming on to one of the male members and the rest of them turned on him like rabid, starving wolves on a dear carcass.
It was funny and sad at the same time.
Maybe I missed something, but even though these people are nutcases, I don’t think it is good for the courts to stifle free speech like this. Even if you don’t like their street theater, I don’t think we should prevent them from expressing their opinion in a public place.
^But protesting at a funeral is pretty awful. How would you feel if someone you loved just died, and while you were saying your final goodbyes, there were people just across the street, yelling cruel things and holding up signs that basically said that your loved one was in hell?
No one should have to deal with that. Having someone die in a war is bad enough, and these people seem to just want to increase the pain of the grieving families. I really don’t have any other explanation. It’s not about free speech, it’s about basic human decency. You should have the right to bury your loved one and not have people protesting you while you do it.
“Dear Carcass,
Hope you’re doing well. We’re having a wonderful time, though there’s a deer carcass out on the road, stinking up the place something awful.
Anyway, gotta run.
Ta ta!”
It’s not about free speech, it’s about basic human decency.
Sarah, that sums it up exactly. IMO think that protesting at any funeral is just plain ignorant. There are other people to consider, and it is not the time no matter who it is.
This is a ceremony for the family and close friends to say goodbye…for the LAST time. They should be able to do this in peace.
To my knowledge, Phelps and his gang have been at this for years except it had been at gay people’s funerals. Now that they started their antics at soldiers funerals, the public has turned. Apparently 22 states have now adopted laws banning his “protests” within a certain distance of the funeral. I am glad that certain states are finally doing something about it, but it’s too bad all citizens don’t deserve the same protection soldiers do.
IMO think that protesting at any funeral is just plain ignorant. There are other people to consider, and it is not the time no matter who it is.
Apparently 22 states have now adopted laws banning his “protests” within a certain distance of the funeral.
Freedom of speech is not an unrestricted right. We place many limits on speech and justifiably so. I have no problem with states passing laws prohibiting “protests” within a certain distance of funerals. I think it can be as easily justified as not allowing someone to cry “fire” in a movie theater. And then if those asshats break that law, prosecute them to the full extent of it. Problem solved.
But I still don’t like the whole “invasion of privacy” court ruling.
I am glad that certain states are finally doing something about it, but it’s too bad all citizens don’t deserve the same protection soldiers do.
Just think, if we’d never had this war than Phelps could go on harassing the families of gays while those same military families who are complaining now could continue to turn a blind eye. I guess there really is a silver lining on every cloud.
And once the 3 principals and the church declare bankruptcy, are they off the hook for the remainder of the unpaid damages? Can their wages be garnished for life?
What’s going to stop them then from committing the same atrocious acts? Someone else could sue them, but it would indeed have to be just to make a point.
I think they are looking for a martyr for their cause. And they are putting their children directly in harm’s way. Some day, all the wrong buttons are going to be pushed and some grieving person is going to give these idiots exactly what they want.
I still disagree. What does “basic human decency” have to do with free speech?
Religious and other wingnuts can just as easy claim that certain speech they don’t like is against “basic human decency”. In fact, isn’t that what O’Reilly, Hannity, et al do regularly?
Blasphemy used to be considered to be against “basic human dignity”.
As I understand it from a legal perspective, the crux of the issue is whether a funeral is a public or a private event. Guarantees of free speech are more applicable to public spaces.
In any case, these pathetic nut jobs don’t have a fraction of the 11 million bucks that the father won in the court decision. But even if they did, appeals and such would drag on for years before a single dollar is paid out. That said, I’m still glad they lost. It couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of psychotics. Maybe some other families will file suits too. Sick ‘em!
I agree with Bernarda. While anything that, in anyway phucks the Phelps(beyond their own inbreeding and everytime they open their mouths) makes me jump and shout with glee. Schadenfreude, without a hint of remorse.
Still, how long before this sort of relativist interpretation of the first amendment 86s a lecture by Chomsky, a System of A Down show, the new issue of Playboy/girl or, cringe, a mAnn Coulter appearance? That slippery slope thing the right’s always babbling about in regards to the 2nd amendment/gun control, really applies here. I would, however, be willing to give the Judge a mulligan on this one, if we were able to insure that it couldn’t be used as precedent.
I’ve got this picture of the Phelps clan, repo’d and dislodged from their Oklahoma colony, just sort of drifting around America like some cross between the Joads and an algal bloom of pfiesteria dinoflagellates.
You are aware that they can only be killed by being impaled upon their own signage?
The bastards probably won’t pay.
Freddie and his clan are lawyers; they’ll appeal and make damn sure to tie this shit up in the courts for the next few years. The stories Prime could tell you about the sick fuck would make you rip out your hair. (He lived in Kansas for a while. How he kept his sanity I’ll never know.)
On another forum Prime and I frequent, some are suggesting that Freddie-boy may go Waco on us. I wouldn’t be surprised. He’s crazy enough to do anything. =/
This is a very tricky situation. “Morally” (and us atheists aren’t supposed to have morals) and ethically, I’m sure everyone is glad that the Phelps family got pissed on. And not too many here would be upset if they were physically beaten instead by an upset relative, I think.
But the privacy verdict just seems wrong. Either a funeral is private or not. Another alternative is to make it illegal to organize a demonstration during a funeral or within a certain radius of a funeral having to do with the funeral….as a matter of respect for humanity.
Perhaps we could just say the cemetery, leased as it is by the representatives of the dead in question(think a high-rise apartment building with no one to answer the door buzzer*), is private property, at least for that period of time when the invited guests are assembled. Trespassers will be shot and all that.
*- For the Phelps crew gathered in the lobby like a cockroach convention- or a new plague of flea-ridden rats, I’d suggest day-glo pink paintballs.
This pseudopoint “I think it can be as easily justified as not allowing someone to cry “fire” in a movie theater.” is an error.
Oliver Wendell Holmes decision in this case Schenck vs the U.S. was later overturned. What was Holmes’s court decision about?
Well, it condemned a WWI anti-war protester who was distributing anti-draft tracts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States
Suppose you have a group of war protesters loudly demonstrating outside a military recruitment center or at some job fair at a school with recruiters present. The recruiters might say that they are “defamed”, and that there is an “invasion” of the recruitees privacy, and that they all experienced “emotional distress”.
Christopher Hitchens addressed this question aptly at a debate in Canada.
http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2007/03/free_speech_6.html#comments
Latest news…
Legal fights highlight church’s message
They hate America and everythIng American, but then they use the rights that America gives to hurt other Americans. And then they get “evil liberals” like representatives from the ACLU to help defend their right to hate and disrupt families as they grieve.
It is just a matter of time before someone goes beserk at one of these funerals, and it isn’t gonna be with one of those pink day-glo paintball guns.
Is it okay for the KKK to intimidate black people? Should Anti-Semites be able to bring placards and posters containing hate speech on the streets outside of synagogues and homes of Jews? Looking at it from the other persepective…how far should we let hate speech and hateful protest go? When is protest considered “harassment”?
Just because we have certain rights, doesn’t mean we are allowed to abuse them.
In Canada, we still have hate speech laws, not sure how different they are in the US.
God Hates Fags would definitely fall under hate speech laws here.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_hat6.htm
It’s all about responsibility. The framers of the Constitution took the chance, when they granted us all these freedoms, that we would be responsible individuals and have the soundness of judgment to know when it was appropriate to speak our minds and when tact- or just good manners, demanded we hold our tongues. In addition, it is also our responsibility to deal with any repercussions that come from us flapping our gums. If you’re, say, that bounty hunter moron throwing the N-word around, don’t whine- or be surprised, if you get your
facecareer punched in by the weight of public opinion.Like those ridiculous Danish cartoons. No question those papers had the right to publish them. It’s just that good taste- and a sounder grasp of the realpolitik, called for not doing so.
Too, when
PhelchPhelps squeals, “God Hates Fags,” we know it translates literally to “My imaginary friend hates fags.” And nobody gives a shit what Fred’s imaginary potentate has to say. Well, except Dani. I wonder how many of his children Fred has schtupped?These asshats aren’t giving up, and have been “busier” than I thought they were for the past 17, unfortunately. Maybe the media should stop giving them the attention they rely on. Now they’ve come to my town:
stardust, lots of problems with your post.
“Is it okay for the KKK to intimidate black people?”
“intimidate” is a charged word which needs definition. A common debating error.
“Should Anti-Semites be able to bring placards and posters containing hate speech on the streets outside of synagogues and homes of Jews?”
What is the definition of “hate speech”? Who decides? (See the link to Hitchens I posted)
In this particular example, racist zionists like Abe Foxman of the ADL define criticism of Israel has hate speech.
“Looking at it from the other persepective…how far should we let hate speech and hateful protest go? When is protest considered “harassment”?”
Once again, what is “hate”, much less “hate speech”? Go back to the Holmes’s decision convicting a peaceful anti-war protester in WWI.
“Harassment: to create an unpleasant or hostile situation for especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct”
“unwelcome verbal” conduct? No more speech at all. See what happened to Peter Stark who was forced to “apoligize” for saying the truth.
“Just because we have certain rights, doesn’t mean we are allowed to abuse them.”
Define “abuse”. For me the right to “abuse” the rights is exactly what makes them rights.
This is a tough one for me, as I can really identify with both sides. I do worry about “shutting Westboro down,” though; I still think that having wack-packs like them out in the open, with the full light of sanity and public scrutiny upon them, is safer in the long run than driving them underground.
Considering and protecting cemeteries as “private property” during funerals might be the best road to take at this point, and I think the Patriot Honor Guard’s huge success is evidence that counter-demonstrations / protests do work. Suing Phelps just brings him more publicity and gives him better excuses to cry persecution.
Considering and protecting cemeteries as “private property” during funerals might be the best road to take at this point,
Eve, I agree.
I think the Patriot Honor Guard’s huge success is evidence that counter-demonstrations / protests do work.
Another good point, and counter-demonstrations by the people will probably prove more successful in shutting these freaks up than anything. I still say one day someone is going to do more than “counter-protest’ against the Phelps’ circus. It’s just a matter of time.
bernarda,
The Phelps freaks are simply harassing private citizens, not for a reasonable cause or concern that affects society in a negative or potentially harmful way…but simply because of their deep hatred and inbred bigotry. And pointing out hatefulness of other group does not justify it. They are abusing the law to harass private citizens who have done nothing to them or anyone. There are laws to protect private citizens against harassment. I am sure you would want them removed should they bring their traveling circus to the funeral of one of your family members.
Hmmm…
How ’bout a gang of atheists showing up carrying signs something like:
“THE BIBLE IS A LOAD OF MAN-MADE PUTRID CRAP!”…and…
(similarly, Stardust…in all CAPS, of course)…
“Born-Again Fundie Christians Have Lethal, Contaminated Shit for Brains!”…and…
“Fuck Everyone’s Motherfucking Religion!”…and…
“Phelp Phuckers?…Do something positive for the world…stuff a WHOLE Bible WAAAAY up EACH ONE of your bungholes!”
…and…
“Your Great Grandfather Loved to Fuck Male Pigs (and Sheep)…IN THE ASS!”…and…
“______________” (For any creative GifSters suggestions?)
What’s that, fellow GifSters?…Nice try…but NO WAY ChuckA?
Yeah…I guess y’all are right.
EVERYONE…bikers (even the carcass?) included…would probably beat the living shit out of ‘those’ atheists.
Of course, I’m too chicken shit (and old!) to actually BE one of ‘those’ atheists; and, I think it goes without saying…the news media would pay absolutely NO attention to the carnage!
Chuck…did you happen to catch the Chicago news on television tonight with footage of the Phelps circus comes to Chi-Town?
Amendment I
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I(a)- Said Government, however, shall make no claim on the liberties of those who, having the free speech of another foisted upon them involuntarily, do find themselves involuntarily compelled to inflict grievous bodily harm upon the source of such utterance; provided the declaration be devoid of intellect, taste, and an agreed upon facsimile of baseline humanity.”
The current standard is “Brandenburg vs Ohio”, in which the Supreme Court defended the right of free speech for a pretty despicable person, a KKK’er. The Supreme Court upheld the right to profess “deep hatred and inbred bigotry.” This could also apply to your “And pointing out hatefulness of other group does not justify it. They are abusing the law to harass private citizens who have done nothing to them or anyone.”
http://www.answers.com/topic/brandenburg-v-ohio
“The Brandenburg test, however, allowed government to punish the advocacy of illegal action only if “such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action” (p. 447).
By requiring an actual empirical finding of imminent harm, this test protects the advocacy of lawlessness except in unusual instances. But government may still punish speech that is demonstrably dangerous. The test is also distinctly more objective than the old danger test. Brandenburg is the linchpin of the modern doctrine of free speech, which seeks to give special protection to politically relevant speech and to distinguish speech from action.”
These Westbro folks were apparently not even advocating lawlessness. The fact that it was a civil suit is a means of avoiding strict standards for protection of free speech.
It is a dangerous precedent.
(Two t’s in bitterness, sweetie) Bitterness? Not about life in general, but in all honesty we are bitter against those who wish to impose their delusional beliefs on us and into our secular government. We may be a bit “bitter” because of self-righteous xians like yourself who seem to feel compelled to preach to us your sky daddy delusions and try to use our atheist site as a billboard for your proseltyzing and propaganda that you have been brainwashed to say.
A few things I will tell ya all here… Never rejoice over a mans death.
Funny you say that when you rejoice of a man’s death (Jeebus) every day! How typically contradictory and hypocritical of you!
Yaddayaddayaddayaddayadda . . . . (yawn)
The rest of your proseltyzing message has been deleted due to violation of our comment policy, which you obviously did not read. Had you contributed something relevant to the topic of the post, your comment would have been allowed through, “unaltered”.
(Cold weather must be forcing the trolls indoors once again.)
Erm…No, Stardust [RE#35]…I hadn’t caught the local news yesterday.
So THAT’S why I was so blissful and cozy in my totally self-absorbed little temporary ‘nirvana’!
Thanks so much, Star, for bringing me out of my complacent, selfish…masturbatorial stupor!…?
To show my depreciation…here’s a link to that relevant “Chi-town” story:
http://patdollard.com/2007/11/02/westboro-baptists-plan-to-assault-more-grieving-families-today/
(Hope the link works!)
I was kidding, as per usual, in MY comment about these Westboro psychopaths; but read some of the responses on the article page. Just the few I read, display and spotlight…besides atrocious spelling…a whole other bunch of seriously disturbed people. Mostly OTHER godbotherer types, I presume! They sure love that ‘burning and rotting’ in their oh-so-loving Gawd’s created hell.
To me, all this, and other interminably related insanity, points up just HOW fucked up all this World’s…so-called…”Holy sCRAPtures” rot the brains of the terminally deluded, ’spellbound’, and stubbornly moronic believers.
Now, if y’all will excuse me; I’m going to attempt to return to…
What’s that?…”those thrilling days of yesteryear”? (that VERY old “Lone Ranger” radio fan reference?)…erm…NooooOO…
Just today’s particular version of selfishly avoiding and shutting out the fucking ‘World News’ insanity…Yeah…
My little “Quasi-Nirvana” trip.
(sips more coffee…This time, WITHOUT simultaneously drooling and masturbating?)
Yes, Stardust and everyone…I AM ‘Joshing’!
RAMEN!
bernarda said: These Westboro folks were apparently not even advocating lawlessness.
Harassment is lawlessness. Stopping harassment protects the innocent from emotional or physical injury.
Harassment, not protest is what the Westboro people are doing. The people they are “protesting” against aren’t even homosexual in most cases. Their slander and hate-speech harm the family members, emotionally.
Again, I think that you would not welcome these freaks to picket the funeral of one of your loved ones and would want them removed.
i am extremely surprised we havent seen or read a news article with the following headline:
“HOMOPHOBIC CHURCH CONGREGATION PHYSICALLY ASSAULTED DURING LATEST HATE PROTEST”
in an age where violence and the power of a good defense attorney go hand-in-hand, youd think someone would just physically remove them from the premesis.
stardust, what “harrassment”. Did they repeatedly go to the family’s home or business?
I fail to see how a one-off event is harrassment.
Protecting from “emotional or physical injury”?
Were there any physical threats? “Emotional” injury can mean just about anything.
In any case, you didn’t seem to notice my reference to the Supreme Court decision.
bernarda, (Yes, I did see your links) and you didn’t answer my question I asked twice if you would welcome these freaks to protest the funeral of one of your loved ones? Can you honestly say you would meekly walk by and allow them to shout hateful slurs and stuff disrupting your services?
I already defined “harassment” and it doesn’t have to be repeated to be considered harassment.
Here it is again
The best thing to do, like Eve suggested, is just to uphold that cemeteries are private property and off limits to uninvited circus events.
And like RDZ has similarly stated, then if they so choose to set up their hate camp outside the cemetery, then people can’t be held responsible for “temporary insanity due to grief” and whatever they do to these people isn’t the fault of the grieving family members happen to “lose it”.
i can see how bernarda is merely playing devil’s advocate. if the phelps lose their rights to peacefully assemble and carry around signs it will be huge blow to EVERYONE’s right to do such things.
the real issue is to determine to what extent their actions should be outlawed. its trying to determine where the line is, which is much more difficult. the law doesnt say its illegal to walk around with signs and protest something simply because a funeral is going on nearby.
my point is, if you REALLY want to put a stop to it, you have to find something thats black and white. simply concluding that the answer is to ban assembly outside a funeral is too close for comfort. perhaps what we should be doing is beating them at their own game. they say “god hates fags” so, find a way to translate it to say “we hate fags”. if one can make the assumption that its THEM who “hate fags”, then all the sudden they arent peacefully assembling. they are getting together to propogate hate speech. and that my friend, is certainly punishable by law
benjamin, you’ve made some good points. The Phelps family members DO hate fags. Their support and promotion of the message that their god hates fags reflects personal opinion and so they are basically already saying that.
This is all about the rights of lunatics to have free speech.
The real issue should be is how come lunatics like the Phelps family aren’t in mental institutions.
This is what I say about Ernst Zundel: I believe in free speech, and he shouldn’t be in jail for his Holocaust denial….he should be in a mental ward.
The real issue should be is how come lunatics like the Phelps family aren’t in mental institutions.
Exactly! They need psychiatric help. And their children need protection from that sort of mental “corruption” the parents are inflicting upon them.
i just saw an episode of “30 days”. you know, its the one where morgan spurlock (from supersize me fame) films someone taking part in something different for…30 days, surprise surprise!
anyhoo this particular show centered around a conservative homophobe that was forced to live with a gay man in san francisco. one part of the show featured phelps and his crew. are you ready for this? aside from any other random “church goers” with him, phelps had his THIRTEEN children with him, along with his FIFTY THREE grandchildren. he said on video he thought it was a homosexual’s right to hear his message that they were going to hell. yes i typed that correct. he thinks its THEIR right to hear HIS opinion…
i take back everything i said earlier. screw the law. they should be dragged into a dark alley, hogtied like farm animals, and well…you do the math. as far as im concerned, they shouldnt be allowed to reproduce, let alone protest ANYTHING.
stardust, “bernarda, (Yes, I did see your links) and you didn’t answer my question I asked twice if you would welcome these freaks to protest the funeral of one of your loved ones? Can you honestly say you would meekly walk by and allow them to shout hateful slurs and stuff disrupting your services?”
I thought I had already answered that, at least implicitly. To be clear, what I may think in that case is irrelevant. If we base free speech law on individual anecdotal cases, we soon won’t have free speech.
Would I just walk by? I can’t say for sure, but probably. In this case I don’t see where they were threatening anyone, well maybe with hellfire.
In the past I have said nasty things in public places to army recruiters, bible-thumpers, and various wingnuts. Once I remember I pissed off a JW or Mormon or some such that one member of their group wanted to punch me. Maybe next time one might want to sue me for causing emotional distress.
As Frank Zappa said on tv debates and testimony before congress on censorship of songs, what we are talking about is words no matter how you want to frame it. On Crossfire in 1986. “We’re talking about words.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HljzEXJvj8&mode=related&search=
In the past I have said nasty things in public places to army recruiters, bible-thumpers, and various wingnuts. Once I remember I pissed off a JW or Mormon or some such that one member of their group wanted to punch me. Maybe next time one might want to sue me for causing emotional distress.
bernarda, I have done this too, and I do see your point. I, in all honestly, if it were one of my sons, I would have a hard time just “turning the other cheek.” To me, it is harassment and disturbing a private ceremony. If they want to protest somewhere, go protest outside the pentagon, or the White House.
The thing that is disturbing is that they are multiplying like rabbits (Shirley Roper has 11) and brainwashing their kids to take over the “cause”. AND they are putting their children in danger. Maybe someone should make a case about that? (I don’t understand why these god freaks keep making babies in a world they hate so much…but that’s another topic.)
I am still waiting for the day when some grieving family members go totally apeshit on their asses. When that happens, those kids are going to be in the line of fire.
When that happens, those kids are going to be in the line of fire.
That’s a distinct possibility, maybe even a probability, and with the Phelps family track record, they’d make martyrs out of those children and milk that martyrdom for all it’s worth in a heartbeat.
Ugh! I so despise people who deliberately use their kids this way; they may already be brainwashing them into seeking out and relishing the prospect of getting hurt “doing god’s work.”