Rev. Peter Morales Was Very Poorly Advised When It Came To Failing To Answer The Legitimate And Quite Serious Questions That I Posed To Him

Literally. . .

Here is the brand-spanking new follow-up comment that I just posted to The Denver Post article 'Unitarians elect golden pastor to presidency' which announced Rev. Peter Morales' election as President of the UUA after discovering that Golden Colorado U*U Martin Voelker had posted some pure unadulterated U*U BS in response to my initial comment on that article -

So Martin Voelker "personally advised" UUA presidential candidate Rev. Peter Morales against responding to any of the serious questions that I asked him on his 'Along The Campaign Trail' blog. That is news to me but I am prepared to take his word for it here even if some of the other things he said in his comment are misinformed if not outright falsehoods. . . Martin Voelker alleges here that "the instant the Morales campaign blog was up" I started "flooding it". Well anyone can go and visit Rev. Peter Morales' 'Along The Campaign Trail' blog and read the comments that I left on it including the dates they were posted on. I am confident that most people will agree that what I posted there hardly constitutes "flooding" Rev. Morales' blog.

The questions that I posed to Rev. Peter Morales on his blog were important questions, including some hard questions about some rather questionable public statements that Rev. Morales had made during his "stump speech" announcing his candidacy for President of the UUA. Amongst other things Rev. Morales had quite offensively "trashed" Judaism, Christianity and Islam, along with any number of other unspecified "old religions" as "obsolete religions created for another time". It seems now that Rev. Peter Morales' failure and apparent outright refusal to responsibly respond to the legitimate concerns that I raised about some of his campaign rhetoric was quite literally poorly *advised*. . . Well done Martin!

http://emersonavenger.blogspot.com/2009 ... e-uua.html

http://the-emerson-avenger-for-uua-pres ... -than.html

:For the past decade Mr Robin Edgar has been relentlessly posting allegations on blogs relating to Unitarian Universalism but he no longer is a member of any UU congregation.

Correct. I was permanently expelled from the Unitarian Church of Montreal for the terrible crime of engaging in peaceful public protest against the anti-religious intolerance and bigotry of Rev. Ray Drennan and other hostile, abusive, and outright malicious "fundamentalist atheist" "Humanist" U*Us. The fact that I was "excommunicated" by outrageously hypocritical and quite *totalitarian* Montreal Unitarians for the crime of publicly embarrassing them by "going public" with my entirely truthful "image tarnishing" protest against the kind of anti-Christian and broader anti-religious intolerance and bigotry that some U*U ministers agree is a "major problem" of the Unitarian*Universalist "church" has no bearing on either the validity and gravity of my serious grievances or my constitutionally guaranteed civil right to continue to publicly share what former UUA President Bill Sinkford once rightly described as my "obviously deep concerns". The anti-religious intolerance and bigotry that I have been protesting against for over a decade now is sadly all too common in the so-called Uncommon Denomination.

:Years ago he was ordered to leave his Canadian congregation after repeatedly failing to comply with agreements he had entered into regarding his conduct.

Wrong Martin. The fact of the matter is that I was very much in compliance with the *coerced* agreements that I had made *under duress* with the leaders of the Unitarian Church of Montreal who misused and abused the UUA's Disruptive Behavior Policy in a deeply misguided and outrageously hypocritical effort to prevent me from sharing my serious concerns about Rev. Ray Drennan's anti-religious intolerance and bigotry, and the UCM Board's effective condoning of his intolerant and abusive conduct. . . with my fellow congregants by calmly and peacefully distributing letters of grievance following Sunday services. Since when is calmly distributing letters of grievance to congregants "disruptive behavior" Martin? In fact I never at any time agreed not to engage in peaceful public protest against the injustices, abuses and hypocrisy of Montreal Unitarian U*Us. Never. Au contraire. . . I repeatedly warned Montreal Unitarian U*Us that I would engage in peaceful public protest in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal if they continued to obstinately refuse to redress my very serious grievances about Rev. Ray Drennan's demeaning and abusive clergy misconduct. Believe it or not Martin, the chairperson of the UCM's DBC John Pike, who was the vice-president of its Board at the time, expressly stated that the "Disruptive Behavior Committee" did not mind if I peacefully protested in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal yet, soon after I did so, I was expelled for six months for doing so by his successor as church vice-president and DBC chair John Inder. If anyone is guilty of repeatedly failing to comply with agreements that they had entered into regarding conduct towards me and other people it is outrageously hypocritical Montreal Unitarian U*Us who not only abjectly failed to comply with their own bylaws but have repeatedly broken the *covenants* aka solemn promises that they made as a U*U congregation -

The inherent worth and dignity of every person,

Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;

Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;

A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;

Montreal Unitarian U*Us, top-level UUA administrators, and Unitarian*Universalist U*Us more generally have *repeatedly*, indeed all but *continuously*. . . made a total mockery of these fundamental principles of Unitarian*Universalism and various other U*U principles and much more precisely defined U*U ideals.

:All of this is on record.

Wrong. What Martin Voelker said about me is not in fact on record because what he said is either ignorant and misinformed U*U BS or worse. . . knowing and willful misinformation and disinformation spouted by a U*U seeking to discredit me. That being said. This conflict is very well documented and church records do exist which will attest to *my* version of events. After all I am much better informed about this ongoing conflict than some U*U from Colorado who probably got his information from unreliable U*U sources who are themselves seeking to deny, ignore, and minimize the U*U injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy that I am protesting against. Allow me to rebuke atheist Unitarian Martin Voelker and all other "like-minded" small-minded and suspicious-minded, to say nothing of knowingly and willfully *close-minded*. . . U*Us with these words from the inaugural address of U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama on this Independence Day 2009 -

"To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand *if* you are willing to unclench your fist."

I say that it is high time that Totalitarian Unitarians paid heed to that good advice. . .

:Initially, many UU bloggers (including myself) let him speak but the fact that he started to hijack just about any remotely related thread has led to him being universally ignored.

Thanks for so publicly acknowledging that you and other willfully ignorant Unitarian*Universalists are chronically unready and obstinately unwilling to live up to the U*U "covenant" that calls for a free and responsible search for truth and meaning Martin.

More later. . .

Inquiring Minds Want To Know Exactly What UUA Trustee Rev. Will Saunders Said In His Weird And Questionable Prepared Statement Yesterday. . .

Besides "The president's vision is irrelevant unless it is also the board's vision. . ." of course, which we already know too well. . .

In a blog post titled, '“Weird” statement at first meeting of Morales and Board: a copy?' Rev. Scott Wells says,

"I feel like I’m missing a piece here — the thrust and tone of the episode — not the least because that there’s a reference to Saunders reading the comments."

And goes on to ask,

"Did he bring prepared comments? And are the available?"

"Was anyone else present who can shed some light on this?"

The answer to the first question is Yes, Rev. William Saunders did bring "prepared documents". The UU World blog reports about this controversy make it quite clear that Rev. Will Saunders read from a prepared statement, although this is not clear in the initial report about this incident. A follow-up report on the UU World blog titled 'Trustees start awkwardly, but seek common vision' says the following -

The Rev. Jeanne Pupke, a newly elected trustee-at-large, said she was concerned that a statement read by the Rev. Will Saunders at the start of this morning's meeting had seemed to say to Morales, "sit down and shut up."

Quite evidently Rev. Will Saunders did read from a prepared statement of some kind as this subsequent report in the UU World blog post underlines -

(UUA Moderator) Courter said that she hadn't read Saunders's (sic) statement in advance and "was regretting where it ended up being positioned."

So not only was Rev. Will Saunders' prepared statement written "in advance" of the UUA Trustees' meeting with President Peter Morales but it apparently *could* have been read and ahem *moderated* by UUA Moderator Gini Courter and/or other UUA Trustees. Thankfully it wasn't "moderated" aka censored in advance of Rev. Will Saunders reading it at the very beginning of that meeting so we have a nice example of the "very deep culture" of the UUA Board of Trustees that UUA Moderator Gini Courter acknowledges is not always "evident" aka visible aka *transparent*. . .

Next question please. . .

"And are the (sic) available?"

Well in that Rev. Will Saunders did *read* from a statement that had clearly been prepared "in advance" of President Peter Morales' meeting with UUA Trustees it seems to me that it *should* be available for U*U eyes to see and to read for themselves. Whether or not the UUA and/or its Board of Trustees will actually make the full document of that rather questionable prepared statement available publicly by posting it to the internet as part of a full report on that now quite controversial initial meeting between UUA President Peter Morales and the UUA Board of Trustees is not certain yet. In that aka whereas. . . widely distributed official UUA published tracts (Warning! Big fat U*U PDF file. . .) publicly assert that -

"Records* are open to scrutiny, elections are open to members, and ideas are open to criticism, so that people might govern themselves."

In that aka whereas. . . UUA Principles call for "a free and responsible search for truth and meaning."

And in that aka whereas. . . UUA President Peter Morales is "totally committed" to transparency and accountability, and on public record as believing that "secrets are terrible things."

I believe that the UUA should make the full record of that prepared statement publicly available in a timely manner so that U*Us U*U World-wide can enter into a free and responsible search for the full truth of what Rev. Will Saunders actually said when reading that prepared statement and the full meaning of what that prepared statement actually says or implies. . .

I am not alone in that belief.

In a follow up comment posted to Rev. Scott Wells' blog post someone self-identified as Derek commented -

"YES! In the interest of transparency, I would also like to see the text of Will Saunders’ comments."

I guess that makes two of us but I expect that there are many more U*Us and indeed some ex-U*Us and non-U*Us who would also like to see the full text of Rev. Will Saunders' prepared statement in the interest of transparency.

So I hereby officially *petition* the UUA Board of Trustees and the UUA as an institution to make the prepared statement that the Rev. William Saunders read on behalf of the UUA Board of Trustees at the beginning of yesterday's meeting with newly elected UUA President Peter Morales publicly available on the official UUA website and/or the UU World blog in order that *that* particular record of the UUA Board of Trustees may be open to scrutiny, and Rev. Will Saunders' ideas, which presumably reflect the not always evident "very deep culture" of the UUA Board of Trustees that UUA Moderator Gini Courter has acknowledged, may be open to criticism, so that U*U people U*U World-wide might govern themselves accordingly. . .




* Interestingly enough. . . it would appear that a presumably early/original version of this "classic" UUA produced tract written by freelance writer and U*U minister Rev. David O. Ranking said -

"Church records are open to scrutiny, elections are open to members, and ideas are open to criticism, so that people might govern themselves."

Is "The Elephant In The Room" None Other Than Brand-Spanking New UUA President Rev. Peter Morales?!! It Sure Looks That Way To Me. . .

Well at least he's not a White Elephant just yet. . .

Sorry all you 97% White U*Us but I just could not let that wordplay pass, and please do interpret it as an affirmation of Rev. Pedro Morales' Hispanic aka Latino cultural heritage. The more non-White U*U "elephants" in the room of the U*U World the better AFAIAC.

I can't believe how UUA Moderator Gini Courter so "awkwardly" contributed to the already inept if not outright awful, albeit not entirely *unprepared*. . . manner in which the UUA Board of Trustees "welcomed" UUA President Rev. Peter Morales at its meeting with him today.

I mean what possessed Gini Courter to "observe" -

"We started weird. . . Just because I don't know what to do with the elephant in the room doesn't mean you don't. . ."

What???!!!

So just who or what is "the elephant in the room" Gini? In light of the "context" of your weird and awkward aka inept "observation" it would seem that you can only be talking about newly elected UUA President Rev. Pedro Morales. Am I wrong Gini? Is this any way to refer to the President of the UUA? What part of respect for the inherent worth and dignity of *every* person do you not understand Gini? How would you like it if someone referred to *you* as the proverbial "elephant in the room" Gini? God forbid that anyone should ever dare to refer to Rev. Victoria Weinstein aka Peacebang as "the elephant in the room", somebody might end up "anally impaled on the Statue of Liberty's torch" or something!!

Thankfully UUA President Pedro Morales aka Rev. Peter Morales has "spent eleven years in journalism" (to say nothing of a similar number of years in U*Uism. . .) and thus professes to have "a thicker skin than most people." It looks like President Morales may well be needing that "thicker skin" if the UUA Trustees' "welcoming" of him today is any indication of what the future holds for him at 25 Beacon Street in Boston. Of course I would presume that any "elephant in the room" would have pretty thick skin to begin with, to say nothing of a couple of tusks to anally impale obstructionist U*U assholes on. . . :-)

In related news presented in the same UU World blog post quite revealingly, albeit somewhat awkwardly and ineptly, *entitled* 'Trustees start awkwardly, but seeks* common vision' -

Rev. Jeanne Pupke, a newly elected trustee-at-large, shared her concerns that the prepared statement read by the Rev. Will Saunders at the very outset of this morning's UUA Trustees meeting had seemed to say "sit down and shut up" to President Peter Morales.

Yup, that's pretty much how *I* read it too Jeanne.

Excellent observation. . .

Rev. Jeanne Pupke went on to very reasonably and quite rationally *observe*, "Our president was duly elected and has a lot of support." Rev. Pupke had been a supporter of Rev. Dr. Laurel Hallman, but wisely made it clear that she was eager to work with President Morales and wanted to welcome him in a manner that would actually make him feel *welcome* amongst UUA Trustees.

Oh well, maybe next time. . .

Rev. Rosemary Bray McNatt, the Metropolitan New York District UUA Trustee, and the chaplain of the UUA Board of Trustees, confessed that she had invited Rev. Will Saunders to read the riot act to President Peter Morales during this morning's meeting in order to focus the Board on its urgent need to tell UUA President Morales to "sit down and shut up" because she is *unprepared* to listen to Rev. Peter Morales' "critique of how awful/unprepared/inept we are". . .

UUA Trustees were split down the middle in their public endorsements for each of the two candidates for UUA president, but Rev. Will Saunders had remained neutral until he showed his true colors this morning. Rev. Bray McNatt acknowledged that she regretted not *thinking* more about when (or even *if*) such a questionable prepared statement as that read by Rev. Saunders would have been most useful on today's *agenda*. In fact I hear that Rev. Bray McNatt, and other UUA Trustees who put their foot in it this morning, are feeling just a tad awful as a result of just how awkward aka inept they were in "welcoming" the man who has quite justifiably critiqued U*Us about how awful/unprepared/inept U*Us are. I dare say that the UUA Board of Trustees might have very well advised if it had been a bit more unprepared than it was this morning because *prepared* statements of the kind that Rev. Will Saunders so ineptly read this morning are often pretty awful. . .

UUA Moderator Gini Courter claimed that she had not pre-screened aka "moderated" Rev. Will Saunders' dubious un*prepared statement and thus "was regretting where it ended up being positioned" in the U*U World. No kidding. . .

Gini Courter went on to observe, "This is a board with a very deep culture, and some of it will not be evident, and some of it has nothing to do with the current president of the UUA, or even with the previous president or the president before that. And I hear Peter saying that he knows it's not about him."

No of course not Gini it's not about Peter it's about "the elephant in the room" isn't it? I dare say that Rev. Will Saunders statement made it pretty clear aka *evident* that the UUA Board of Trustees has a very deep culture alright. . .



* Yo Chris, I am pretty sure that the "seeks" in your blog title should *really* be "seek". Right?


Update: The original title off this blog post was 'Is "The Elephant In The Room" None Other Than Brand-Spanking New UUA President Rev. Peter Morales Gini?!! It Sure Looks That Way To Me. . .' I have decided to delete Gini because some non-U*Us might not know that it refers to UUA Moderator Gini Courter and wonder who Rev. Peter Morales Gini is. One more thing. This is obviously a semi-satirical parody post, so before anyone suggests that UUA Moderator Gini Courter was not necessarily referring to Rev. Peter Morales himself when she spoke about "the elephant in the room" allow me to say that I am perfectly aware of that. That being said, Gini Courter's somewhat inept, and presumably unprepared, "the elephant in the room" statement appears to be so closely and intimately associated with Rev. Peter Morales' presence at the meeting with UUA Board of Trustees that this distinction is all but (dare I say it?) *irrelevant*. . .

UUA President Peter Morales' Vision Is Irrelevant Unless It Is Also The Vision Of The UUA Board Of Trustees. . .

But don't take my word for it, because I would not make such a highly questionable statement that clearly minimizes the role and influence of the President of the UUA. . . take the word of the UUA trustee from the New England District, Rev. Will Saunders, for it.

Can U*Us say "power struggle"?

Thankfully the Pacific Northwest District UUA Trustee, Rev. Elizabeth Greene, put Rev. William Saunders in his place by saying,

"As an individual, I would have said different things. I would have said, Welcome! If you have a different vision than I have, let's talk about it and work together."

Perhaps more significantly, and hopefully quite sincerely, UUA Moderator Gini Courter said,

"Yes, let's do the welcoming thing. It's good to have you here."

According to the UU World blog report the UUA Board of Trustees will be "talking about its new relationship with the president under the new governance system" this evening. U*Us might want to enter into a free and responsible search for the truth and meaning of exactly how "the new governance system" affects the relationship of the President of the UUA with the UUA Board of Trustees.

Source - UUA Board gathers with newly elected president posted by Christopher L. Walton

UUA President Peter Morales Should Firmly And Forthrightly Address The Major Problem Of The Anti-Religious Intolerance Of Fundamentalist Atheist U*Us

if he wants Unitarian*Universalism to have any hope of becoming "the religion of our time", as per his rather optimistic UUA presidential campaign slogan. If he fails to do so, as former UUA President Bill Sinkford did over the eight year term of his UUA presidency, then Unitarian*Universalism aka The U*U Movement is likely to remain the "tiny, declining, fringe religion" that Rev. Peter Morales bluntly acknowledged it is *today* in his stump speech announcing his candidacy for president of the UUA. I will be directly sharing this and other serious concerns with UUA President Peter Morales in the coming days and weeks but for now I have publicly shared this concern in a comment posted to The Salt Lake Tribune article titled 'UUA elects Colorado pastor as president' which announced the results of the 2009 UUA presidential elections today -

I congratulate Rev. Peter Morales on successfully competing against the UUA's "chosen one" "establishment candidate" Rev. Dr. Laurel Hallman for the position of President of the UUA or what I like to waggishly refer to as President of *The* Tiny Declining Fringe Religion which obviously references Rev. Peter Morales own description of what Unitarian*Universalism is today in his stump speech announcing his candidacy for UUA president in January of 2008. Quite frankly Rev. Morales has his work cut out for him if he wishes to transform Unitarian*Universalism from the "tiny, declining, fringe religion" that he bluntly but quite justifiably acknowledges U*Uism is today into "the religion of our time" within *our* time. I repeatedly asked Rev. Peter Morales to provide a realistic 25 year plan for transforming Unitarian*Universalism from a tiny, declining, fringe religion into "the religion of our time" but he declined to directly answer my questions that were posted to his 'Along The Campaign Trail' blog and other U*U blogs or online forums.

I have publicly shared my concerns about Rev. Morales' belittling and maligning of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, to say nothing of other "old religions" no doubt including Mormonism. . . as "obsolete religions, created for another time" and that are only contributing to "the darkness" of fear, prejudice, and hatred etc. etc. in his stump speech but he has yet to address those concerns either. Anti-religious intolerance and bigotry on the part of the "fundamentalist atheist" subset of U*U Humanists is one of the major problems of the U*U Movement and is a major, if not primary, contributing factor to why U*Uism is in fact a tiny, declining, fringe religion today. . . I hereby call upon Rev. Peter Morales to firmly and forthrightly address this major problem of Unitarian*Universalism in the coming weeks and months so that God believing Americans can feel genuinely and fully welcome in each and every U*U "Welcoming Congregation".

Here is the screen shot of the actual comment that I just posted to The Salt Lake Tribune website -

UUA Election Results Are In And Rev. Peter Morales Has Been Elected As President Of The UUA aka *The* Tiny Declining Fringe Religion. . .

It's official. According to the UU World General Assembly Blog post titled 'Morales wins UUA presidency decisively', posted by UU World Editor Christopher L. Walton, UUA Presidential candidate Rev. Peter Morales has decisively won the 2009 UUA presidential election.

UUA President-elect Peter Morales won the UUA presidency decisively with 59 percent of all votes. He won 55 percent of the absentee vote (1,020 to 827) and 61 percent of the on-site vote (1,041 to 654). His margin of victory is 580 votes. Seven ballots were disqualified for discrepancies; one vote was cast for "No."

With any luck 25 Beacon Street won't reek of privilege and hierarchy quite so much in the coming months and years. . .

Fundamentalist Atheist Unitarian*Universalists aka U*Us Repel Yet Another Spiritual And/Or Religious Unitarian*Universalist. . .

Somebody going by the name Shyloh made it abundantly clear that intolerant and abusive "fundamentalist atheist" "Humanist" U*Us still make plenty of Unitarian*Universalist "churches" anything but "Welcoming Congregations" to spiritual and/or religious people. Without further ado here are the comments that Shyloh submitted to Rev. Victoria Weinstein's 'What I’d Prefer To See' post on her Peacebang blog -

I left a uu church almost 3 years ago - in this particular church there was such a lack of respect for anyone with “spiritual” beliefs that were associated with religion. Any religion. I want to venture out again and am gathering up my courage to go to a church that is a little further away- but has a larger congregation and (at least on line) looks like it honors diversity of belief along with diversity in ethnicity, sexual orientation etc. I’m trying to talk myself into going tomorrow.

I like my spirit with a little edge. Unfortunately in the previous church it was all edge and no spirit. But I don’t want a church that smiles and smiles, avoids controversy and participates in what I call “token charity events”. I hope to find the church that mirrors the images you were suggesting for ads. Wish me luck.

Comment by Shyloh — June 26, 2009

After reflecting a bit on what I wrote I want to make something a bit clearer. When I wrote about the lack of respect for any kind of spirituality I meant contempt and ridicule*. Sometimes subtle, often overt. It was a small church* (Editor's note: What a surprise. . .) with, as I came to learn, a core group of what I would call “fundamentalist atheists”*. I welcome and enjoy respectful discussions, debates, disagreements. I’ve learned quite a bit from those kinds of conversations, at times even changing my perspective. I also never expected the church to cater to my particular beliefs. Among other things, I was attracted to the UU tradition because it didn’t cater to any one religious creed but instead offered principles that, in my mind, support the diverse whole.Tomorrow morning I hope to find a church that truly embraces diversity of all kinds.

Comment by Shyloh — June 27, 2009


* my emphasis

Are UUs Standing On The Side Of Love For Multicolored Tits Or Something?

Just asking. . . :-)

Full disclosure. When, in the wake of CUC Executive Director Mary Bennett's dU*Ubious U*Unilateral decision to modify the UU corporate identity by inserting famous U*U Kurt Vonnegut Jr.'s "picture of an asshole" between the two Us of what *was* UUism in order to symbolize the alleged "inclusiveness" of what is *now* The U*U Movement, I drew two UUs together like this - UU - and asked people if it reminded them of a part of the human body many people responded by saying "tits" or "breasts" etc. Needless to say, when I inserted famous U*U Kurt Vonnegut Jr.'s "picture of an asshole" (i.e. an asterisk aka * aka ass-to-risk. . .) between the two Us like this - U*U - people quickly changed their tune and said "ass". Still, UU does bring human female mammary glands to the minds of many people. Gotta love *those* 'Standing On The Side Of Love' T-shirts eh UUs? No? :-)

Rev. Ricky Hoyt Finds Out The Hard Way That U*U "Democracy" Isn't All That It's Cracked Up To Be. . .

I just dropped by Reverend Ricky Hoyt's excellent 'One More Step' blog and read his No Vote For Me blog post. It turns out that Rev. Ricky Hoyt will be unable to cast his vote for UUA Presidential candidate Rev. Peter Morales because on-site voting at the 2009 UUA GA is limited to a five hour period between noon and 5 PM, tomorrow, Saturday June 27 but he made travel arrangements months ago to leave Salt Lake City earlier in the morning on Saturday so that he can deliver a sermon at his U*U church on Sunday. Here is the comment that I submitted in response to his blog post that expresses his dis*illusionment. . .


Looks like you are learning about U*U "democracy" the hard way Rick.

On-site voting will only be allowed between noon and 5 PM on one single day? What a joke. . . Once again the UUA proves that its voting practices don't even come close to democracy at the municipal, state, and national level of secular politics. If I was you I would look into what the UUA's official bylaws say about this. Even I, jaded as I am with U*U "democracy", am rather surprised that there is only one five hour "window of opportunity" for delegates to cast their votes in an important presidential election UUA GA. AFAIAC on-site voting should go from 8 or 9 o'clock in the morning to 8 or 9 o'clock at night at minimum. At least 12 hours should be available for casting ballots on-site.

U*Us Are Thunderstruck By God's Divine Expression Of Displeasure With U*U Anti-Mormon Bigotry That Borders On The Hate Speech U*Us Pretend To Oppose

But don't take my word for it. . .

Take the word of whichever U*U blogger* wrote the 'God Speaks to the UUs' blog post on the UUA's official General Assembly 2009 blog. . .

I was covering comedian Kate Clinton’s performance in the Grand Ballroom when our cosmic comeuppance was finally delivered. In fact, I blame her. She was holding forth on California’s Proposition 8, which overrode a court order legalizing gay marriage in that state. Based on some bad polling interpretation, a lot of people came to believe that proposition lost because of the black churches. But Clinton was setting us, ahem, straight:

“It wasn’t the black churches. It was the white churches. It was the Catholic archbishops, who’ve never been married, pouring money into the campaign. And it was the Mormons, who know so much about marriage,” she announced, dropping her voice to a whisper when she said the M-word. “And by the way…that’s Mormon, with two Ms.”

At that precise moment that her last bit of wordplay was sinking in and the crowd was launching into a collective roar, fate struck. Or at least something did. The entire convention center rocked with a huge clap of thunder that sounded very much like the roof trying to come down over our heads. Moments later, we listened again as the sky outside cracked open with a ferocious rainstorm.

Kate paused while the sound echoed through the hall. Then she stepped back up to the mike, and in a very sweet and mild voice said: “I love Mormons!”

It was only as I made my way back to my hotel half an hour later that I found out just how close the call was. The crack we heard was lightening striking the convention center’s tower, which forms one of the two main entrances to the hall. The entry was cordoned off with police tape, pending a structural inspection of the roof, supports, and glass. Outside, a storm of truly Biblical proportions was turning State Street into a river.

Serves us heretics right, I guess. Never let it be said that UUs are afraid in the face of divine wrath.

Still, He can’t have been all that mad. Because 15 minutes later, the storm cleared — leaving us with a gorgeous double rainbow arcing right over the center.

end quote

I guess this Emerson Avenger blast from the not so distant past was quiet prophetic. . .


* Apparently it was the ever tactful and diplomatic U*U blogger Sara Robinson. . . I did not notice her "byline" at the bottom of the blog post when I first read it. Quite possibly because she only added it after I had read the post.

Here is the screenshot -

The Emerson Vandal? Yet Another Deeply Insecure Unitarian*Universalist Attempts To Criminalize The Criticism And Dissent Of The Emerson Avenger. . .

ROTFLMU*UO!

*This* is really *too* funny. . .

Here, verbatim, is how The Church of the Larger Fellowship (CLF) delegate to the 2009 UUA GA in Salt Lake City Sean Welsh, if not a few other paranoid U*Us behind the scenes. . . has grossly overreacted to a small handful of legitimate critical comments that I submitted to The Church of the Larger Fellowship (CLF) Delegates' Blog earlier today. . . It would be pathetically sad, in every sense of the word "sad", if it wasn't so rip-roaringly hilariously funny!

Comments are now moderated

Regrettably, we have had to turn comment moderation on due to vandalism on this blog.

To Mr. Robin Edgar:

Your permission to access this web site is hereby revoked. Any and all continued use by you of this site, including but not limited to the comment feature, reproduction of any site content elsewhere, or "hotlinking" of material on this site will be construed to be in violation of one or more of the following statutes:

• Title 18 U.S.C., §§ 1001 and 1030
• Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510(12)
• Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 2701-2710

I do not care to engage in a debate with you. This is the final policy of the administrators of this web site. Any violations will be reported to your Internet access provider as abuse, as well as to any relevant jurisdictional authorities for criminal action.

To everyone else: I apologize for this distracting diversion from our main focus here, and the resulting requirement for comment moderation.

end quote

Now *that's* what I call a Totalitarian Unitarian. . .

Here is the (im)pertinent comment that I just left for Sean Welsh on the pertinent blog post.

You really are *too* funny Sean.

ROTFLMU*UO!

Oh and here is the screen-shot proving that Sean Welsh is a Totalitarian Unitarian. . .

Be afraid U*Us. . . Be very afraid. . .

This is part and parcel of the "less than excellent" *ministry* of The Church of the Larger Fellowship, to say nothing of the increasingly *tarnished* public image of Unitarian*Universalism aka Totalitarian Unitarianism more generally. . .

Update: Oh dear. . . I can't help but notice that Totalitarian Unitarian Sean Welsh said,

"This is the final policy of the administrators of this web site."

The words "administrators" is the plural form of "administrator", which presumably means that at least one other member of the UUA's Church of the Larger Fellowship can be justifiably described as a Totalitarian Unitarian, unless of course administrators is a typo. Logically that would mean that Sean Welsh's partner in criminalizing dissent is Louise Hornor.

Apparently so. . .

Here is some recent "twittering" from this Totalitarian Unitarian twit -

Our #uuga2009 blog is our report to CLF Board. We didn't mean it as a forum for argument. Considering turning off comments. Robin annoys me.
about 11 hours ago from TwitterFox

Truth In U*U Advertising aka What The Ever So "Hard Core" Peacebang Probably Would Not Want To See In UUA Marketing Materials aka U*U Tracts. . .

In the proverbial "truth in advertising" department Rev. Victoria Weinstein aka Peacebang lets U*Us know what she wants to see in UUA marketing campaign materials in a blog post titled What I’d Prefer To See. I may deal with its rather dubious content in more depth later, but for now here is the comment that I expect that Peacebang, to say nothing of other U*Us, would prefer not to see. . .

How about an image of an inherently edgy and not "nice" U*U minister anally impaling a U.S. state senator on the Statue of Liberty's torch Peacebang?

Or maybe an image of an inherently edgy and not "nice" U*U minister kicking an alleged thief in the teeth?

Perhaps an image of an inherently edgy and not "nice" U*U minister trying to ward of some kind of Transcendentalist Super Vampire with a life-size crucifix that still is somehow unable to keep him at bay?

What does that little blurb over to the right say?

Oh ya. . .

Beauty Tips for Ministers -

"Because you’re in the public eye, and God knows you need to look good."

Such a shame that Rev. Victoria Weinstein apparently believes that this "need to look good" in the proverbial "public eye" applies only to the clothes that ministers wear and the mascara and/or other cosmetics aka "make up" they may apply to their two faces. . .

Update: Peacebang deleted aka "memory holed the above comment so I decided to repost the following "new and improved" version in honor of Mr. U*U BDSM Desmond Ravenstone, Rev. Mack Mitchell, and Rev. Victoria Weinstein's "ravishing" parishioner Richard Buell. . .

How about an image of an inherently edgy and not “nice” U*U minister anally impaling a U.S. state senator on the Statue of Liberty’s torch Peacebang?

(I bet Mr. U*U BDSM Desmond Ravenstone would find that particular image to be quite appealing, amongst others. . . Come to think of it, how about a U*U minister modeled on Rev. Mack Mitchell “ravishing” a helpless teenage Tibetan refugee tied to the bed in his U*U “parsonage”). If that’s a bit too “image tarnishing” of U*U clergy perhaps you could just show an aging U*U lay person “ravishing” a pre-teen “female family member” or a neighbor’s daughter. Or is that just a bit *too* “kinky” for “mainstream” public consumption?

The rest of the "song" remained the same. . .

Goodbye And Good Riddance. . . Rev. Dr. Tracey Robinson-Harris Is Leaving The UUA After Many Years Of Incompetence There. . .

At least that would seem to be what this little snippet from the 'Liveblogging Plenary 3' post of the General Assembly 2009 blog of the Unitarian*Universalist Association of Congregations aka UUA is more or less saying. . .

2:33 p.m. MDT

Kay Montgomery thanks the Rev. Tracy Robinson-Harris, who is leaving the UUA after many years of service there. The delegates applaud, but the entire staff of the UUA rises to give her a standing ovation.

end quote

I take note of the alternate spelling of Rev. Dr. Robinson-Harris' first name here. A Google search for Tracy Robinson-Harris indicates that Rev. Tracy Robinson-Harris *is* to be confused with Rev. Dr. Tracey Robinson-Harris being one and the same U*U AssHat and all. . .

The Church of the Larger Fellowship (CLF) Delegates' Blog Moderators Censor And Suppress Legitimate Criticism And Dissent. . .

Sean Welsh has seen fit to censor and suppress aka "memory hole" some perfectly legitimate critical comments that I submitted to some blog posts made by his partner Louise Hornor on the CLF Delegates' Notes blog. Here are the two comments that were posted to Louise Hornor's Thinking About Being Taken Seriously blog post which Sean Welsh "memory holed" twice. . .

2 comments:

Robin Edgar said...

:Hallman and Morales wrote eloquently of the need to challenge hate speech and hate actions in our world. The comments were very discouraging, effectively calling UUs "chicken little" and hypocrites.

I was amongst those commenters. If I suggested that U*Us are hypocrites it is because I am a victim of what can be properly described as "hate speech" spouted by U*Us including intolerant and abusive U*U clergy. Yes, both Hallman and Morales wrote eloquently of the need to challenge hate speech and hate actions in our world but both conveniently left the U*U World out of that equation. . . Hate speech and various actions motivated by hate, or at least intolerance and discrimination of various kinds, take place in the so-called U*U World (i.e. the greater U*U religious community if that term may be used to describe what Rev. Peter Morales calls "a tiny, declining fringe religion. . .) on an ongoing basis yet little or nothing is done to confront hate speech and hate actions perpetrated and/or perpetuated by U*Us themselves. I see virtually no difference between Rev. Ray Drennan's bigoted and slanderous labeling of Creation Day as "your cult" and Jim David Adkisson's malicious labeling U*Uism as a cult as part and parcel of his self-confessed hate crime against U*Us yet when I complained about Rev. Ray Drennan's bigoted "hate speech" which arose out of his militant atheist anti-religious intolerance and bigotry the UUA pretended that his obviously intolerant and abusive behavior was "within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadership". . . To this day the UUA has not changed that untenable position and apologized to me for allowing Rev. Ray Drennan to get away with "murder" in the form of character assassination. I hold out some hope that Rev. Dr. Laurel Hallman or Rev. Peter Morales will do the proverbial "right thing" soon after being elected President of the UUA and start cleaning up the mess left by President Bill Sinkford's legacy of neglect and failure when it comes to this case and other cases of U*U clergy misconduct.

I think that it is worthwhile repeating the comment that I posted to Rev. Dr. Laurel Hallman's and Rev. Peter Morales' co-authored opinion editorial titled Changing the climate that's feeding hate crime in the Salt Lake Times. It is high time that U*Us responsibly acknowledged their own internal problems with "hate speech" that leads to actions motivated by intolerance, bigotry and hate even if those actions do not go quite so far as actually murdering people. I look forward to climate change in the U*U World. . . There is plenty of harm done well before anyone is ever killed as a result of "hate speech". Herewith my comment, please be so kind as not to cover up and hide this legitimate criticism of U*U involvement and implication in various kinds of "hate speech" by "memory holing" it -
6:27 AM

Robin Edgar said...

Some Unitarian*Universalists, including some intolerant and even outright bigoted U*U clergy, are themselves guilty of targeting people with oppression and exclusion based on identity. No shortage of God believing people and/or political conservatives find themselves to be considerably less than welcome in some U*U "Welcoming Congregations". Indeed, while serious physical violence may be rare amongst U*Us, psychologically abusive verbal violence, some of which can be justifiably described as hate speech, is tolerated and even condoned by U*Us, including top level UUA administrators. I look forward to the day when the UUA finally gets around to responsibly confronting the violence, oppression and exclusion that I and other people have been subjected to by Unitarian*Universalists including U*U clergy.

For the record I have been physically assaulted by U*Us and had threats uttered against me by U*Us for daring to confront U*U oppression and exclusion, and other U*U injustices and abuses, with peaceful public protest. For more than a decade the UUA has obstinately refused to respond to my serious grievances about the anti-religious intolerance and bigotry of Rev. Ray Drennan and other U*Us with anything even remotely resembling justice, equity and compassion in human relations. To its shame the UUA has allowed the cancer of anti-religious intolerance and bigotry and other oppression and exclusion within the so-called U*U World to go unchallenged for decades. Top level UUA officials, including UUA President Bill Sinkford, have obstinately maintained complicit silence in response to my own and other people's serious grievances about U*U oppression and exclusion, indeed some of them have actively participated in oppression and exclusion and/or expressly condoned it. . . The UUA has not only ignored oppressive hate speech spouted by U*U clergy but has even pretended that intolerant and abusive hate speech is "within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadership."

Believe it or not the Word Verification Cords for this comment is - wirds
6:27 AM

Here is the third comment that I posted prior to resubmitting the two above comments which Sean promptly "memory-holed" again. . .

Sean,

I am reposting my two comments that you censored and suppressed aka "memory holed" because, far from being "unrelated in any way to the content of the posts to which they were supposedly commentary" as you have falsely alleged they are very much on topic to this blog post. If you delete my comments a second time I will be blogging about your misguided attempts to cover up and hide the fact that A) some U*Us, including U*U clergy, are guilty of engaging in various kinds of "hate speech" and bigotry themselves and B) President Bill Sinkford himself, the UUA Board and UUA administration more generally, the UUA's very aptly named Ministerial *Fellowship* Committee, and implicated U*U congregations have responded in a grossly negligent and effectively complicit manner to my complaints about "hate speech" and other intolerance and bigotry that I and other people have been subjected to by U*Us, including intolerant, hostile, and abusive U*U clergy. If U*Us want to be "taken seriously" when they speak out against "hate speech" and other intolerance and bigotry the UUA would be very well advised to responsibly confront the "hate speech" and other intolerance and bigotry that U*Us engage in themselves. I repeatedly gave the UUA opportunities to do just that over the course of Rev. Bill Sinkford's 8 year term as President of the UUA but he and the UUA abjectly failed, if not obstinately refused, to address what President Sinkford himself once acknowledged as "obviously deep concerns."

For the record, censoring and suppressing legitimate criticism and dissent disregards and violates both explicit and implicit U*U principles and ideals. As far as I am concerned suppression of criticism and dissent is part and parcel of institutional stonewalling and denial and thus something that U*Us call *oppression*.
11:48 AM

Here are the two follow-up comments that I posted to Sean's Rules For This Blog post which is a rather lame attempt to justify aka rationalize his "memory-holing" aka "cover up" of the U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy that my legitimate comments exposed and denounced -

2 comments:

Robin Edgar said...

Sean,

I have resubmitted two of the three comments that you suppressed and have provided my reasons for doing so. I would urge you not to delete those two comments again. AFAIAC both comments were "legitimate commentary on this blog" and bu no means "unrelated in any way to the content of the posts to which they were supposedly commentary." In fact that statement can be properly described as a falsehood and, if it was a knowing and willful falsehood, it is what is commonly known as a lie. Prior to your "memory holing" of my legitimate comments on Louise's blog post, which quite frankly I resent being described as SPAM and just now note that you have once again deleted in spite of my suggestions that you should not do so. . . and your posting of this questionable blog post attempting to justify your "cover up" of U*U injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy I had no grievances with you personally but I do now. As I said I will be blogging about your censorship and suppression of my legitimate criticism and dissent on The Emerson Avenger blog soon enough.
12:26 PM

Robin Edgar said...

Here's the deal Sean. I will be blogging about your censorship and suppression of my legitimate comments on The Emerson Avenger blog as stated above. Still, I think that you would be well advised to responsibly reconsider your misguided decision to disregard U*U principles and claimed ideals about freedom of speech and become an active participant in U*U "cover up" of well-documented U*U injustices and abuses. I would urge you to reinstate the perfectly legitimate *on-topic* critical comments that you chose to hide from U*U eyes.

Sincerely,

Robin Edgar aka The Emerson Avenger
12:46 PM

Are The Seven Principles Genuinely Cherished By Unitarian*Universalists? My Experience And Observation Of U*Us Suggests That They Are Not. . .

Baltimore Unitarian Universalist Examiner Adrian Hilliard asserts that many U*Us have come to cherish the Seven Principles of Unitarian*Universalism in a blog post titled 'Unitarian Universalists gather in Salt Lake City for 48th annual General Assembly'. Needless to say my own experience and observation of the actual behavior of many Unitarian*Universalists calls into question just how many U*Us genuinely "cherish" the Seven Principles of Unitarian*Universalism and other claimed U*U ideals. Here is the comment that I just posted in response to Adrian Hilliard's blog post -

I don't see a whole lot of evidence of U*Us cherishing the Seven Principles of U*Uism. All too often I see U*Us, including U*U clergy and top level UUA officials, flagrantly disregarding the Seven Principles and even wantonly violating them. From what I have seen the Seven Principles aren't worth the paper they are written on or the breath that they are spoken with because too many U*Us make a complete mockery of them on an ongoing basis. For more information about how hypocritical U*Us disregard and violate the Seven Principles and other ideals U*Us supposedly "cherish" I suggest browsing thorough The Emerson Avenger blog or just Google - "Robin Edgar" and Unitarian principles. I look forward to the day when Unitarian*Universalists, especially U*U clergy and UUA administrators, will genuinely cherish their claimed principles and ideals and make a sincere effort to genuinely honor and uphold them rather than repeatedly disregard them and outright violate them.