68
votes
Pat Robertson, broadcaster who helped make religion central to GOP politics, dies at 93
Link information
This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
- Title
- Pat Robertson dies at 93; founded Christian Broadcasting Network, Christian Coalition
- Published
- Jun 8 2023
- Word count
- 1323 words
I was brought up to never celebrate a death, but...
Happy Pride everyone.
Honestly never understood that. Why should a dead person get more respect than all the people they harmed while alive?
Like why shouldn't we celebrate the death of people who only brought pain and misery to the world? That polite society crap doesn't fly with me unless it's warranted.
If we could get Pat and Kissinger in the same year, that would be cause for a reeeeeally exciting Pride!
Good riddance. There are few I would classify as monsters. But Pat was pretty damn close.
Didn't know who this guy was before today. And I wish it remained that way. No one seems to like the guy at all. But the harsh truth is he had a well good life and faced zero repercussions. It's just sad. There is nothing positive in this.
Life is unfair.
I’d say that, given his terrible legacy, his no longer physically existing is more positive than if he were to continue to exist to contribute to that hate. That said, yes: life is indeed unfair.
I was raised in one of those fanatical evangelical households where Christian media was all we watched and listened to. Pat Robertson is on my personal shortlist of people whose voices I heard endlessly as a child and now have a visceral reaction to (shoutout to the singularly awful James Dobson who probably makes #1 on that list). I've deconverted and am proud of myself for the work I've done to thoroughly deprogram and address the religious trauma I experienced. I don't celebrate Pat Robertson's death, but I certainly won't mourn him...I'll save my mourning for the millions of people harmed and/or brainwashed by his vile, hateful rhetoric.
The book of Hebrews addresses this line of questioning pretty directly. Also, in Romans 3:21-26 Paul talks about how Christ was the method of OT's salvation.
I’m not here to convince you on your belief, I agree that if while going through the exercise you stopped believing then it becomes moot.
However, my references in the new testament are essentially exegesis of Old Testament theology. They’re doing the work that you set out to do. The individual who wrote Hebrews and Paul, who wrote Romans, were Jews themselves. Paul was a high priest before converting.
They’re not adding anything beyond the Old Testament theology other than clarifying the mystery that was revealed with Christ’s death and resurrection.
Wait, you mean this reply, stating for a fact that I own the entire universe and everything in it, cannot and does not prove itself to be true?
what the hell
Nearly exactly the same on all counts here, have my vote.
I was raised pretty much exactly the same, am definitely familiar with the dramatis personae you mention, and agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments.
Growing up in a Christian household where his programming was on the “allowed list” of items I could watch on TV; i realize i am still trying to reprogram myself from being indoctrinated and brain washed to hate myself and that God hated me. There is no such thing as love the person and hate the sin. When what is being perceived as sin is the make up of who the person is. I am glad he no longer has an outlet to spill his hate.
This is so familiar to me & I just wanted you to know that I empathize. Although I'm no longer a Christian, & thus don't believe in the Bible or any of its teachings, I do still find some comfort in the idea of caring for that kid-version of me that was a believer. It's a little hard for me to put into words -- but I can feel a sense of healing when I imagine myself caring for someone (my past self) who has been hurt and who needs that hypocrisy gently pointed out. For example, Pat Robertson (and others) say that queer people like me are fundamentally broken and go against God's design. "But," I can remind that hurt kid version of myself, "I thought I was made in God's image? I was made this way, so how can I be broken?"
The good news for people like us who are healing from this shit is that, at least in my experience, extreme beliefs always break down under scrutiny -- which makes the work of deconstruction/deconversion a lot easier. Folks like Pat Robertson have profited off amplifying the parts of the Bible that support the us-versus-them narrative (and that subsequently drives donations). Congrats to you on escaping; just know you're not alone.
I still get mail for my late grandmother from the 700 Club. Thankfully she didn't let it rot her brain completely and in her later years found him questionable too (that's the best I could hope for since she was very religious)
Whether or not you think this statement is celebratory: the world is better off without him
Do we here on Tildes celebrate the deaths of people we dislike the way they do over at Reddit?
No, we do not.
That said, Pat Robertson is not merely someone "we dislike," he is someone with a wikipedia page dedicated to his atrocious views that is longer than the page dedicated to him. He is someone that has, if not steered, guided a lot of the rhetoric that seeks to destroy the lives of millions. He used his platform to state and convince others that terrorism and murder were the victim's fault.
If his religion is true and his god is just, then there simply is no other place he can be that isn't the hell he has stated so many others are damned to experience for eternity.
Not to mince words, Pat Robertson is an utter and irredeemable piece of shit and that's an insult to excrement itself.
I'm not going to celebrate the death of anyone, but I'm also not going to act like the world didn't just get a little bit better when he stopped wasting oxygen.
I only know of him from The 700 Club, which was occasionally on our television when I was younger, but not a big part of our lives.
Thus, I was pretty surprised at the number of controversial things he did and said on that wiki page. I think when religion and politics become so intertwined its bad for both. And I definitely believe that the 'prosperity gospel' that has some tv evangelists like him owning vast wealth is in direct contradiction to what Jesus taught.
I just hope for a nuanced discourse on someone like him on Tilde. I saw the announcement on reddit and before I even read the comments there I knew how hateful they would be. I wasnt disappointed. At least here, people explain why they feel the way they feel without just trying to come up with the most vitriolic insults they can think of.
But why would you be surprised that people hated someone who actively made people's lives worse and who's entire existence was predicated on sucking up wealth for himself under the guise of religion? That's pretty disgusting, I'd say.
What nuance are you looking for? It's just odd to me that some people will do anything to glean something defensible about someone who so obviously deserves to be reviled.
Im not surprised. After years on reddit, and social media, Im well aware of how negatively MOST of the posts swing toward the negative on anyone or anything that is strongly Christian. That's not new.
But if you're actually asking that in good faith, I would say that Pat Robertson made SOME people's lives worse, but that the vast majority of people who knew him through his outreach were admirers and followers because they benefited from what he offered. There are detractors for every online minister (although far fewer for someone like Billy Graham) and I cant say Im a fan of mega ministries or online evangelism, but that doesnt mean what they did was all terrible for the world.
I think for literally millions of people who watched The 700 Club, his program was a source of encouragement in their faith. That included supporting his outreach ministry Operation Blessing whose express purpose for 40 years is to alleviate human suffering around the world through hunger relief, clean water projects, disaster relief and medical services. I also understand that through his ministry he also supported other humanitarian organizations like Samaritan's Purse, that does the same kind of humanitarian work. The kids at my former school used to pack shoeboxes with gifts to be sent to poor countries and distributed to kids at Christmas. It was a very practical way for kids to help other kids.
So, its quite easy for people to crap all over large Christian ministers and the work they do. But this guy ran his program all over the world and Im quite sure he has helped thousands of people, if not hundreds of thousands with humanitarian aid. He walked the talk that many don't.
I also might point out, no matter whether you believe in the Christian faith or not, MOST of the world's large humanitarian organizations have their basis in the Christian faith or their leaders were from Christian backgrounds. The largest and most well know would be the Red Cross, but there are many. In my own country, the fact that we have universal medicare for free, is due to the hard work of Tommy Douglas who was a Baptist minister before being elected to government. Thats no small contribution to the life of every single Canadian because we have all benefited from his vision - and it came from his faith.
Therefore, when someone like Robertson dies, I expect the criticism, but I would say that it most often comes from people who only focus and only know of his faults or things he said they found offensive, and not his the things he did that were admirable. No man is pure evil nor pure good, but on the balance of probabilities, Robertson did a lot more good in the world than evil. Was he a saint? Likely not, but he did a lot more good than I ever have.
Thats the nuance thats missing in the criticism.
That's not nuance, that's just deflection using your religion as the shield.
The dude said HIV was god's plan to weed gay people from society. Excuse my French, but FUCK that guy.
People's opinion of him isn't swinging negative because he was "strongly Christian." Our opinion of him is negative because he was strongly a terrible person filled to the brim with hate. You're trying to phrase it like he is being unfairly persecuted for being Christian and that is simply not true, I would say the same things about him if he was an atheist. He wanted all gay people to die and thanked god for sending AIDS to kill them, what more do you need? I have gay friends and relatives, anyone who actively promotes harm against my friends and family is my enemy.
No, it did not come from his faith. As a child he had Osteomyelitis and almost lost a leg, but a well known orthopedic surgeon offered to treat him for free if his parents would allow medical students to observe. It took several operations but they managed to save his leg. It was that experience that made him believe healthcare should be free for everyone. In his own words:
As a Canadian I'm actually offended that you would bring up Tommy Douglas in order to defend Pat Robertson. It does, however, completely destroy your belief that Robertson is only so hated because he was Christian. If that was the case, I'd hate Douglas too, but I don't. I don't care about anyone's religion as long as they are otherwise a good person and don't try to force their beliefs on me. Tommy Douglas was a good man who did good things. Pat Robertson wished some of my friends and family dead. There is no comparison between the two.
(For the record, Douglas had some questionable views on homosexuality too. He believed it was a disease that could be cured through psychiatry. Despite this he did however vote in favour of Bill C-150 which decriminalized homosexuality, definitely a step up from Mr Robertson)
Thats a very incomplete reason for his impetus for free healthcare. That was one event as a young boy that lit a spark but its very clear from reading his life history that "the greatest Canadian" life motivation came from his faith and his experience as a preacher who had a very strong belief in a Social Gospel.
Good ol' Tommy Douglas was a devout Christian who lived his faith through and through - and changed Canada for the better because of it.
I would say to both you and @AgustusFerdinand (because they hit it pretty solid)...
We don't celebrate so much as have a wake. Many of the other posters sharing how Pat personally damaged them, their families, and their communities is a healthy outlet, and is frankly what should be left on Pat's digital headstone. Much how people will share stories of a loved one whom died. It's more productive than what you'd see elsewhere with the indiscriminate vitrol and profanity IMO.
Whilst I have disdain for Pat for numerous reasons, it's not strictly personal. However, when Sean Hannity kicks the bucket...... I will have many words.
In general, no. But I suspect people are happy when certain others, one way or another, are no longer able to add their broken moral values on an already struggling world. I cannot comment on this one dude, as I didn’t know him until now, but I can sympathise with that.
I’ll say this: one of my strongest “spiritual” beliefs is that we are all one with the universe; part of the same system. Someone once asked me how I reconcile that with being happy about certain people dying.
But if you had cancer, wouldn’t you be happy when your cancerous cells died? Though they are “part of you”, aren’t they?
If a death is news-worthy it will be posted, and then you'll likely have a self-selection of those who reply.
Those that don't have much to say or have some compunction about "speaking ill of the dead" (me, if irrational) won't have a reason to post, so you'll get people celebrating in a way you may find distasteful.
Just to explore your thoughts, do you think you would be opposed to celebrating death if it was someone like Pol Pot or Josephy Kony? What about someone directly impacted by the actions of the deceased, like the children of Josef Fritzl, or the neighbors who alerted police about Dahmer?
If you find yourself on the same sort of spectrum where some deaths are worth celebrating (e.g., because they signify one less child warlord in the world) I think its easier to understand why others are celebrating something you find distasteful.
I celebrate no deaths.
If you hold the position that it is wrong--not just for yourself, but for others--to celebrate the death of someone committing genocide, then yeah, you're probably not going to find much support.
Actually I'm just trying to gauge how similar in tone Tildes is to Reddit.
Fair enough!
As with most content out there you can to some extent curate your experience. There are plenty of great, thoughtful, empathetic people on tildes, including some new faces. Nothing about this event will lend itself to that sort of discussion.
Some people that otherwise would be tonally what you're looking for may have suffered directly (e.g., a grandparent giving away their savings to the 700 Club) or indirectly (homeless after years of childhood abuse from a Christian family) from the influence Pat Robertson had. Both of those examples coming from people I've known.
You may celebrate no deaths, but you probably haven't had any experience comparable to surviving Auschwitz. We were, thankfully, not locked in a sex dungeon for a decade by a parent. Neither of us can understand, except through some limited capacity to empathise, what that is like or what load-bearing role hate can take.
I don't mean to go to a hyperbolic place for anything but rhetorical use, but I get where you're coming from so I wanted to express that I think you miss a piece of the puzzle of understanding humans if you don't understand the use-and-abuse of hate.
It would be unthinkable to me to tell someone who was the only member of their family who survived the concentration camps that it was wrong to feel hate towards their captors, or feel humanised by the expressions of disgust/hate on the allied forces. From that hyperbolic extreme it's easier to get people having strong feelings about Phyllis Schlafly or Limbaugh dying.
And if hate is a real piece of the human puzzle it is going to be pretty hard to escape in any sort of forum, since, well, people are people.
We generally try to prevent it from being the norm but distateful discourse and discussion happen everywhere. Not to defend what I also agree is poor behavior, even if its towards who I feel to be a demonstrably bad actor. Assuming you've been here long enough (a week?) You can also tag them accordingly as malice or however you feel is appropriate as part of our moderation system. The timeframe is just for when the feature turns on.
I wanted to try and find love in any life that ends. A moment of time in which we could understand the frailness of a human perspective, that fails more than succeeds. I look at what this man has done in his life, and found quite a bit of that. We are all shallows, changing day to day with tides and landslides. But a man of faith only needs to find love in pain and suffering to bring peace to its victims, scapegoating them is a weak understanding of the complexities of God. I am sorry for the lives he marginalized, and for the people turned from faith because he couldn't find love or compassion times when God would call for it the most. There are some people who sit far from a bonfire on a cold fall night, they stare at its brilliance but cannot bring themselves to let the fire warm them. Maybe they think the fire is dangerous, or maybe they have never felt that kind of warmth before, so they shout at other people walking toward the flame to stay by him, to gather their warmth. His is a lesson in the difference between the fire from fear, be warm my friends.
One of my favorite Chris Hitchens quotes was about Jerry Falwell's death, “If you gave Falwell an enema, he could be buried in a matchbox.”
Good riddance. May this breed of television grifter go extinct with the rest of the rotten lot.
Let us welcome him to the Void that awaits to consume his soul.