A few days after this trip, as I’ve finally had time to reflect, I’m mentally going back to a paper that I wrote for Dr. Gray’s religion 101 course. Without posting the entire paper, my thesis was that the WBC’s marginalization isn’t only due to the way that they practice their religion, but also strongly due to how they react to others when confronted. In the paper, I cover many topics, including totalism, social exclusion, and reactions to social exclusion (prosocial and antisocial).

Previously, I made assumptions that they are constantly practicing totalism. It seems to me, that it is something they do struggle within day to day life. Jonathan mentioned that he enjoyed running but there were times that he felt he had to pull away because he was devoting so much of his life to it. Maybe totalism isn’t something they are doing, but rather something the WBC members aspire to do.

So, what about my assertion that a reason they are so marginalized is that the group reacts in an antisocial way when confronted? This would be like when in past interviews, a member of the church would yell at someone who is confronting their values and beliefs.

When discussing outsiders counter-protesting, it seems that they feel like it’s almost laughable. At the same time, though, they mentioned that they really respect the first amendment and therefore also respect these people sharing their opinions and using their freedom of speech. So, I wouldn’t say that they respond in an antisocial way, as I had previously assumed. Their response to this social exclusion is not antisocial or prosocial but maybe, nonsocial. A nonsocial response can be characterized as pulling back into your “comfort zone” when faced with exclusion. Usually associated with cowardice, this might just be a result of exhaustion. The church members seem to just be tired of fighting back. They don’t engage in the discourse as much anymore, possibly.

I was also curious why they believed that they are so marginalized. In an interview with Abby, she mentioned that she believes that one of the strongest reasons why the Westboro Baptist Church is so strongly marginalized can be attributed to the media. A term the media uses a lot when describing the WBC is “hate group”. She mentioned that this tends to then cause people to shift to the word terrorism. It was shocking to her that a term such as terrorist could be attributed to this group, considering they don’t partake in any physical aggression.

But does the group even care that they are incredibly marginalized? And are they really? In an interview with around 6 girls ranging from their teen years to their 30s, I found some answers to this question. While it can be seen from previous interviews with older adults that they were incredibly bullied for being in the church when younger, these girls say that usually, people let them keep their church life and home life separate. They also mentioned that they don’t care much to hang out with people their own age outside of the church. So, they do seem to be socially excluded or marginalized but that seems to be due to their own preferences, like a separation strategy. I don’t think this means that they want to be separate in all situations or seen as bad people, but it’s almost what comes with their choice to stay separate in most ways from the general population.

Overall, I feel that my previous assessment of the church doesn’t represent who they are as a group. It might have in the past, but it seems that the church has changed in their mannerisms. Many people have tried to explain this to us, but can’t exactly find the right words. I don’t know if this change will help or hurt how marginalized the group is, but I do know that it is happening, and it is noticeable.