Supreme Court Won't Hear Falwell's Appeal

[MrsSpringsteen]

I've never heard of that site, I will have to check it out. Good idea that guy had. Is it legally ok in most cases to create a site like that as long as you have a disclaimer?

Gina Holland, Associated Press Mon Apr 17

WASHINGTON -- Evangelist Jerry Falwell on Monday was denied a Supreme Court appeal of a case that sought to shut down a Web site with a similar name but opposite views on gays.

Falwell claims that a gay New York City man improperly draws people to a site by using a common misspelling of the reverend's name as the site's domain name.

A federal judge sided with Falwell, who runs a Virginia-based ministry, on grounds that Christopher Lamparello's domain name was nearly identical to the trademark bearing Falwell's name and could confuse Web surfers.

But last year, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed and said that Lamparello was free to operate his "gripe site" about Falwell's views on gays at www.fallwell.com. Lamparello "clearly created his Web site intending only to provide a forum to criticize ideas, not to steal customers," the appellate court said.

The Jerry Falwell Ministries site is at www.falwell.com.

Falwell's Web site is more high-tech, with pictures of the minister and sales material for books and videos.

Lamparello's Web site is mainly in black and white, with no photographs or items for sale. He says that Falwell is wrong in preaching that gay people are sinners who can change. At the top of the site, a disclaimer reads: "This Web site is NOT affiliated with Rev. Dr. Jerry Falwell or his ministry."

Falwell's attorneys have fought over domain names in the past. Three years ago, an Illinois man surrendered the domain names jerryfalwell.com and jerryfallwell.com after Falwell threatened to sue for trademark infringement.

 

[melon]

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled correctly, staying consistent to past precedent on this issue.

Melon

 

[BVS]

Quit your whining Jerry.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

His site is interesting, very well thought out and touching. He doesn't just hit Falwell with a bunch of vitriol, not that I can see yet. When I have more time I will give it a good look but I just read this part..

"Sure, we can be tempted to say "what's the big deal, it's just his opinion". But it is a big deal. As you read this, multiple thousands of gay men and lesbian women are living lives that are made more difficult because Dr. Falwell still preaches that being gay or lesbian is a sin that can be changed.

Sometimes, a gay person opens up to his or her family, only to hear that they must "change" something that is unchangeable. How sad, that a message from a minister could cause someone's family to reject them.

Being rejected by one's own family is an incredibly painful experience. The words of Jerry Falwell cause families to reject their children under the mistaken belief that if they reject the child, he or she will change their sexual orientation.

In an interview with the PBS show Frontline, Dr. Falwell admitted, "I get emails and letters every day ... from Christian families who think they've done God a service by kicking their son or daughter out of the house."

While Jerry went on to say that he contacts the letter writer and tells them that what they did was wrong, he fails to see the bigger picture, which is that certain people, in response to the type of anti-gay rhetoric that he preaches, think they are doing a good thing by kicking a gay child out of their home.

Some people really take Dr. Falwell's words to heart. They become angry and combatant when they come into contact with people who are gay or lesbian. Some business owners fire their employees if they discover they are gay or lesbian. Some landlords do not want to give shelter to gays and lesbians.

It is just plain unbelievable that all of these slights are all committed in the name of Jesus Christ. Bigotry against gay people is a sin, and it is a sin against God."

 

[verte76]

I used to have a lesbian friend who'd been totally rejected by her strict Catholic family. She had all sorts of problems, and unfortunately couldn't afford therapy because she was uninsured. Unfortunately, she alienated alot of her friends, yours truly included, because of a really bad manipulative/ control freak tendency. Sometimes I wonder what ever happened to her. The damage that Falwell and his ilk have done nauseates and disgusts me no end.

 

[hiphop]

good site.

check this out:

http://www.fallwell.com/ignored verses.html

"Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says." (1 Corinthians 14:34)

This verse says that women can't speak in church. Period. It is completely ignored today. Applying this verse to the modern day church would be ancient, absurd and nonsensical.

When it comes to the verses about homosexuality, however, fundamentalists suddenly insist that they must be interpreted literally, word for word!

When it comes to this verse, however, they admit the facts. They acknowledge that it was only meant for that day. The truth is that the Apostle Paul wrote this verse because, during his time, women and men sat on opposite sides of the church aisle. Women would yell questions across the aisle to their husbands, causing a disruption of the service.

"If any man takes a wife, and goes in on her, and detests her, and charges her with shameful conduct, and brings a bad name on her, and says, 'I took this woman, and when I came to her I found she was not a virgin..." (Deuteronomy 22:13,14)

"But if ... evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones..." (Deuteronomy 22:20,21)

If a man discovers that a woman is not a virgin on her wedding night, all the men in town can murder her by flinging stones at her young female body as she screams in pain.

Is this the word of God? Hardly.

The command to stone to death a young girl who is not proven to be a virgin on her wedding night is simply an ugly man-made rule of murder that found its way into the Biblical text.

"Slaves, obey your human masters with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ." (Ephesians 6:5)

"Slaves, obey your human masters in everything; don't work only while being watched, in order to please men, but work wholeheartedly, fearing the Lord." (Colossians 3:22)

"Slaves are to be submissive to their masters in everything, and to be well-pleasing, not talking back ." (Titus 2:9)

"Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel. " (1 Peter 2:18)

Slaves should obey their masters? Hardly. Slavery was one of the most offensive institutions to ever befall humanity. Sadly, the scriptures condoned it, and, as you can see from the above verses, demanded that slaves obey their masters...even cruel ones. Are those verses the "Word of God?" Of course not. They are merely reflective of cultural biases which found their way into the Biblical text.

 

[nathan1977]

I'm curious what the verses you eliminated say. For example, what are masters commanded to do for their servants (indentured servitude was the cultural context for the time, not the slavery we think of)? What are husbands commanded to do for their wives?