The Emerson Avenger

The Emerson Avenger is a "memory hole" free blog where censorship is scorned. This blog will "guard the right to know" about any injustices and abuses that corrupt Unitarian Universalism. Posters may speak and argue freely, according to conscience, about any injustices and abuses, or indeed hypocrisy, that they may know about so that the Avenger, in the form of justice and redress, may come surely and swiftly. . . "Slowly, slowly the Avenger comes, but comes surely." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

My Photo
Name:
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada

In 1992 I underwent a profound revelatory experience of God which revealed that the total solar eclipse "Eye of God" is a "Sign in the Heavens" that symbolizes God's divine omniscience. You may read about what Rev. Ray Drennan of the Unitarian Church of Montreal contemptuously dismissed as my "psychotic experience" here: http://revelationisnotsealed.homestead.com - This revelatory religious experience inspired me to propose an inter-religious celebration of Creation that would take place whenever a total solar eclipse took place over our planet. You may read about what Rev. Ray Drennan and other leading members of the Unitarian Church of Montreal falsely and maliciously labeled as a "cult" here: http://creationday.homestead.com - I am now an excommunicated Unitarian whose "alternative spiritual practice" includes publicly exposing and denouncing Unitarian*Universalist injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy. The Emerson Avenger blog will serve that purpose for me and hopefully others will share their concerns here. Dee Miller's term DIM Thinking is used frequently and appropriately on this blog. You may read more about what DIM Thinking is here - http://www.takecourage.org/defining.htm

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

L'hypocritie du Mouvement Universaliste et Unitarien au Québec

L'hypocritie du Mouvement Universaliste et Unitarien au Québec est presque sans pareil. La propagande du MUUQ presenté ici sur leur site web est tellement faux que c'est quasiment fraudulente. Les "points de vue" religieuses, et les "points de vue" religieuses de plusieurs autres gens qui croient en Dieu (peut être surtout les Chrétiens) ne sont pas de tout "respectés" par Rev. Ray Drennan ni par d'autres membres de sa "communauté". Rev. Ray Drennan preche que Dieu est "un être non-existent". Il insulte tous les gens qui croient en Dieu en prechant que "ca semble primitive" de croyer en Dieu... Actuellement, les "points de vue" anti-religieuses faux, hostiles et abusives de Rev. Ray Drennan et d'autres athées fondamentalistes qui sont membres de son "Église" Unitarien nuisent non seulement à ma croissance spirituelle mais à la croissance spirituelle de plusieurs autres gens.

Lisez le "point de vue" hostile et abusive de Rev. Ray Drennan clairement exprimé dans son éditorial insultant concernant l'enterrement catholique de Pierre Elliot Trudeau pour voir comment il nuisent à la croissance spirituelle des catholiques et d'autres gens qui croient en Dieu...
('Wrong Message' Montreal Gazette le 9 Octobre 2000)

Voir aussi les lettres au redacteur du Gazette qui etait provoquées par le "point de vue" arrogant, insultant, hostile et abusive de Rev. Ray Drennan.


Propagande MUUQ - La vérité avec un "v" minuscule

Vérité MUUQ - Plusieurs mensonges avec un "M" magiscule


Propagande MUUQ - "J'accepte d'être surpris..."

Vérité UU - Les UUs refuse obstinament d'être surpris par la Vérité avec un "V" magiscule. Pour Rev. Ray Drennan, et plusieurs autres UUs du type "athée fondamentaliste", l'expérience véritable "d'un Dieu qui surveille les mouvements de l'univers" est un "expérience psychotique" parce-que, pour eux, Dieu est "un être non existente"... Rev. Ray Drennan et plusieurs autres UUs refuse de garder l'esprit ouvert à Dieu et à ceux qui croyent en Dieu. Ils croyent que c'est "primitive" de croyer en Dieu.


Propagande UU - Nous, assemblées membres de l'Association unitarienne universaliste, sommes vouées à la reconnaissance et à la promotion des principes suivants:


1. La valeur et la dignité intrinsèques de toute personne.

Verité MUUQ - Rev. Ray Drennan, et plusieurs autres UUs, sont intolérant, hostile, et abusive envers moi et d'autres personnes qui croient en Dieu.


2. La justice, l'équité et la compassion comme fondements des relations humaines.

Verité MUUQ - Plusieurs UUs, incluant les "leaders" du MUUQ et l'UUA a Boston refuse obstinament de pratiquer la justice veritable, l'équité veritable, et la compassion veritable envers moi et envers d'autres victimes de leurs "pasteurs" abusives et autres members.


3. L'acceptation mutuelle et l'encouragement à la croissance spirituelle au sein de nos assemblées.

Verité MUUQ - Rev. Ray Drennan, et plusieurs autres UUs, ont fait leur possible pour décourager ma croissance spirituelle. Comment est-ce que ca "encourage" ma croissance spirituelle de me faussement accuser d'etre "psychotique" et d'etre "malade" et "foux" etc. etc. etc.??? Comment est-ce que ca "encourage" ma croissance spirituelle de faussement décriver mais activitées religieuses comme une "culte" (sect) "manipulative et secretive"? D'insinuer malicieusement des liens possibles entre 'Creation Day' et le Temple Solaire? En plus, les membres de "l'Eglise" Unitarien de Montréal m'ont injustement et inéquitablement expulsé permanemente de leur "église" parce-que j'ai "refusé d'accepter" leur "réjection" injuste et arbitraire de mes plaintes completements légitimes et trés sérieuses causées par le comportement intolérant, abusive, et extremement hypocritique de leur "pasteur" Rev. Ray Drennan et d'autres UUs.


4. La liberté et la responsabilité de chaque personne dans sa recherche de la vérité, du sens de la vie et de la signification des choses.

Verité MUUQ - Les UUs sont remarquablement irresponsables dans la recherche de la vérité spirituelle et religieuse en generale et dans la recherche de la vérité et du "sens" de mes plaintes contre Rev. Ray Drennan en particulaire...


5. La liberté de conscience et le recours au processus démocratique aussi bien dans l'ensemble de la société qu'au sein de nos assemblées.

Verité MUUQ - Rev. Ray Drennan et plusieurs autres UUs sont trés evidament contre ma propre liberté de conscience et contre la liberté de conscience d'autres gens qui croient en Dieu, comme Pierre Elliot Trudeau et d'autres Catholiques juste pour une seule instance... Les UUs manipule dans un façon cynique, hypocritique, et abusive le processus démocratique ici à Montreal et ailleurs...


6. L'aspiration à une humanité où règneront la paix, la liberté et la justice pour tous.

Verité MUUQ - Les UUs, ici a Montréal a Boston et ailleurs, sont tres evidament completement incapables de travailler pour la paix, pour la liberté et pour la justice véritable dans leur propres "églises"... Actuellement des UUs ont formellement, hypocritiquement, et repetitivement refusées la véritable justice pour moi et pour d'autres victims des "pasteurs" UU abusives et d'autres injustices causées par les UUs.


7. Respect du caractère interdépendant de toutes les formes d'existence qui constituent une trame dont nous faisons partie.

Verité MUUQ - Plusieurs des UUs que je connais démontre une grande et déplorable manque de respect pour moi, pour d'autres êtres humains (surtout ceux qui croyent en Dieu), et pour Dieu lui même, le Créateur de la "trame" dont nous faisons partie...

Things Will Shetterly Hates About Unitarian Universalism

Will Shetterly has posted a list of things he hates about Unitarian Universalism on his 'It's All One Thing' blog.

Here is what I posted in response to his list -

2. The common nickname, UU, is stupider than the name.

And it's a homonym for ewe-ewes. . .

3. Some Unitarian Universalists are far more interested in joining a social club than making a better world.

4. Um, sometimes the coffee’s weak.

Um, sometimes the "democracy" is weak.
To say nothing of the morality. . .

5. Some congregations can be so busy talking among themselves after services that newcomers may feel excluded.

6. Did I say the name is stupid?

Yes ewe did. . . ;-)

:Okay, I can’t get the list to ten.

I am sure that I can get it quite a bit higher. . .

:Here’s why: Unitarian Universalists are human.

And some UUs, "Humanist" or otherwise, are just a tad inhuman. . .

:They’ve had bad ministers and bad members.

:UUs can be short-sighted and self-indulgent and intolerant, just like any other religious group.

Here is my experience of UUs at their worst. . .

:When you read the history of every great social movement in North America in the last two hundred years, you find Unitarians and Universalists. You can’t write about social justice in this land without mentioning people who are part of our tradition.

:And if you don’t like what UUs like? Fine. If your faith helps you live in peace with others, UUs will be happy for you.

Ya right. . .

:But if your faith doesn’t help you, try ours.

I did and UUism didn't do much to help me at all.
Au contraire. . .

:If you believe that people should help each other and respect each other’s spiritual ways without seeking to impose those ways on others, try a few of our gatherings. One of them might suit you.

And plenty of others might not. . .

Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Shadow of Diogenes Quotes Ralph Waldo Emerson On Civility and Morality. . .

Just by "coincidence" Paul's Quotation of the Day for November 28, 2005 on his Shadow of Diogenes blog is an excellent quote by Ralph Waldo Emerson himself about the interconnection between civility and morality.

Here it is -

Paul's Quotation of the Day

" There can be no high civility without a deep morality."

Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
American Philosopher, Poet, Lecturer and Essayist.

Emerson knew a thing or two about civility and morals . Unfortunately a lot of people today either do not know or do not care about civility or morality and, for those reasons, we are the worse for it as a culture.

end quote

And here is my response to it with embedded hyperlinks as I like them. . .

Excellent quote Paul!

One that I must keep handy for some judicious use by The Emerson Avenger! ;-)

Needless to say I have just about had my fill of Unitarian Universalists who display abysmally low civility and shamefully shallow morality.

The Emerson Avenger knows a thing or two about civility and morals too.

Monday, November 28, 2005

PeaceBang "Memory Holes" UU ugliness and incivility

PeaceBang said -

Maybe it's the ugliness and incivility of America lately that has hardened me and made me stiff and defensive and ruined the romantic world for me.

The Emerson Avenger commented -

Maybe it's the ugliness and incivility of UUs lately that has hardened me and made me stiff and defensive and ruined the UU World for me. . .

PeaceBang "memory holed" it. . .

Sunday, November 27, 2005

UU Santa Claus Is Comin' To BeanTown

Following a Thanksgiving feast in New England Peregrinato and assorted friends including PeaceBang exegeted "Santa Claus Is Comin' To Town".

Without further ado here is the Emerson Avenger version. . .

"Santa Claus Is Comin' To BeanTown"

UUs better watch out
UUs better not cry
UUs better not spout. . .
I'm telling you why
UU Santa Claus is coming to Beantown
UUs Santa Claus is coming to Beantown
UUA Santa Claus is coming to Beantown

He's making a list,
Checking it twice;
Gonna find out UUs naughty or nice.
UU Santa Claus is coming to Beantown
UUs Santa Claus is coming to Beantown
UUA Santa Claus is coming to Beantown

God sees UUs when you're sleeping
God knows when UUs are awake
God knows if UUs have been bad or good
So be good UUs for goodness sake

Google is just w-a-a-y too much fun!

If God's not on my side. . .

Google sure seems to be! ;-)

SPAM or not SPAM? That is the question.

This comment was posted in response to the 'To Whom Much Is Given' sermon thread on David Soliday's 'Facilitating Paradox' blog -


This belongs to God.


The following notice was displayed immediately after I posted this brief comment -

Comments Pending
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

I will review your comment soon and, if suitable and appropriate (read: not spam), I will approve it and it will show up on Facilitating Paradox.

David

It will be interesting to see if David Soliday considers my concise four word comment to be SPAM or "not spam". . .

My Response To Call and Response

Here is my response to Call and Response Great quote! thread which said -

"Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof." -- John Kenneth Gailbraith

That saying certainly applies to a lot of the UUs I know. . .

Saturday, November 26, 2005

Blogthing Says The Emerson Avenger Is Somewhat Machiavellian

You Are Somewhat Machiavellian

You're not going to mow over everyone to get ahead...
But you're also powerful enough to make things happen for yourself.
You understand how the world works, even when it's an ugly place.
You just don't get ugly yourself - unless you have to!

Shadow of Diogenes On Morals

Shadow of Diogenes says on his Paul's Quotation of the Day thread for November 25, 2005 -

A lot of people have abandoned common decency and tossed morals onto the scrap heat and replaced them with an anything goes mentality. We see it all around us in today's world.

The Emerson Avenger says 'Amen'. . .

Here is my response to Shadow of Diogenes' post -

A lot of UU people have abandoned common decency and tossed morals onto the scrap heat and replaced them with an anything goes mentality. We see it all around us in today's UU World.

Friday, November 25, 2005

More Empty Words From So Cold Rev. Clyde Grubbs

Rev. Clyde Grubbs posted a Thanksgiving "meditation" on his A People So Cold! blog (typo intended) As usual it is a lot of fine words that are proven to be devoid of any sincerity, and thus little more than hypocritical dross, via Rev. Clyde Grubbs' and other hypocritical UUs' well documented words and actions.

Most ironically this "meditation" by Dwight Brown, is Mediation #1 from 'Exaltation; A Mediation Manual'. This mediation manual was compiled by Rev. David B. Parke who just happened to be the genuinely welcoming Christian Unitarian minister of the Unitarian Church of Montreal when I joined it in 1993. If it had not been for the genuinely welcoming behaviour of Rev. David B. Parke I might not have joined the Unitarian Church of Montreal because I got a very unwelcoming cold shoulder from the fundamentalist atheist 'Humanist' members of this so-called Unitarian Church from Day One.

Here is what I posted to Rev. Clyde Grubbs' carefully censored blog in response to that effectively hypocritical meditation -

Forgive us our negligence and our transgressions.

To paraphrase Ovid.

If you want to be forgiven,

Be forgiveable. . .

You can start by admitting your own negligence and your own transgressions and seeking forgiveness for them.

What's the Definition of UU clergy? ( Using the Cranky Cindy method. . . )

One of my initial posts to her Cranky Cindy Changes The World blog that Cranky Cindy "memory holed" was a post to her 'What's the Definition of "Failure"?' thread of October 20, 2005. Cranky Cindy's post mocked U.S. President George W. Bush because, for inexplicable reasons, the number one site in Google for a search on the word "failure" is President Bush's official White House biography page. Doh!

I posted a parody of her post that had a Google 'I'm Feeling Lucky' button search going to UU minister Davidson Loehr's 'Living Under Fascism' sermon that is posted on Al-Jazeerah's web site. . .

I recently ran a Google search on the term - UU clergy - to see how well my Emerson Avenger blog was situated in Google rankings. I had no expectation that the Emerson Avenger blog would rank number one in Google for that very general search on UU clergy and indeed it does not. Surprisingly however, another UU blogger's blog entry does and it is a rather unflattering one to boot. . . So I have just sent the following follow-up comment to Cranky Cindy's censored blog. I have good reason to believe that Cranky Cindy will censor her UU World as it were so I am posting the commemt here as well -


"Moderate" this Cranky Cindy. . .

What's the Definition of UU clergy?

According to Google, it's ... well, I don't want to spoil it for you.

Go ahead. Google UU clergy. Click either Google Search or I'm Feeling Lucky.

Seriously. Do it.

BTW It works almost as well for UUA clergy albeit in a slightly different way.

Thursday, November 24, 2005

Cranky Cindy's Transcendentalist Super Hero. . .

In spite of the fact that pretty much all of my comparatively few posts to her Cranky Cindy Changes The World blog had everything to do with the illogical, inhumane, irresponsible, and unscientifically stupid things" that certain UU people (now including Cranky Cindy I'm afraid) have done and said, and quite regrettably obstinately continue to "do and say". . . Cranky Cindy has seen fit to "memory hole" all of my posts to her Cranky Cindy Changes The World blog and to request that 'The Emerson Avenger' aka 'The Transcendentalist Super Hero' should stop commenting on her blog.

I will honour her request for the time being and will post the "memory holed" posts here in the coming days.

It turns out that Blogthings has a 'What's your Superhero Name?' "thing" and, as much as I am happy with 'The Emerson Avenger', to say nothing of the really quite flattering 'Transcendentalist Super Hero' alias. . . I decided to give the Blogthing a whirl. The really quite interesting results are posted below. . .

Your Superhero Profile

Your Superhero Name is The Nuclear Prime
Your Superpower is Witchcraft
Your Weakness is Kittens
Your Weapon is Your Solar Ring
Your Mode of Transportation is Dinosaur

Well I Guess I Can Be A Little Saucy At Times. . .

You Are The Cranberry Sauce

A little sweet, a little sour - you've got the flava!
Though, you do tend to squish in people's mouths...

UUism hates clarity too Will. . .

The following parody was posted in response to the 'capitalism hates clarity' thread on Will Shetterly's 'it's all one thing' blog -


Unitarian Universalism hates clarity too. . .

From the "Religious" Left's Vaporware: Unitarianism and Universalism have merged under a new moniker, "Unitarian Universalism", or in their officially-sanctioned shorthand UUism™. Yes, the trademark symbol is part of the abbreviation to remind people that they're not that "Unitarian" nor "Universalist" anymore. And in case you get any funny ideas about exposing and denouncing any of UUism™'s intellectual dishonesty, every UU web site is accompanied by a "moderator" aka "UU-Thought Police Person" and a mouseclick or two to the UUism™ "memory hole". . .

The jury may still be out on whether or not UUism™ is a thinly-disguised atheist "Humanist" circlejerk, one thing is already clear. They're not really "Unitarian" nor truly "Universalist". I've always considered the intentional misuse of English words to be a 1984™ phenomenon, but the guys in UUism sure are quick learners. . . It's actually rather hard to find the true meaning of "Unitarian Universalism". Google the definition, and you get a whole lot of misleading gobbledygook and false advertising. Typically programmed by volunteers from "Humanist" organizations, the "source code" of the Unitarian Universalist religion is free and available to fundamentalist atheists who would like to use it or modify it for their own purposes. . .
But Unitarian Universalists hate dictionary definitions of good English words. "Honesty" in UUism apparently means "Hypocrisy". "Welcoming" means nothing more than "Gay-friendly." "Minister" can mean "atheist bigot". "Principles" can mean "you won't feel good when you gullibly buy into this "Fox News"!"

This isn't new, of course. Atheist Unitarians won't admit that truth in advertising laws came about because Unitarians in the late 19th century thought putting atheists in a "Church" and claiming it was "Unitarianism" wasn't dishonest; it was just good business. To UUs, words, like everything else, have one purpose: to make the "Church" richer.

Beacon Hill "theology" on Dan Kennedy's Media Nation blog

I posted the following comment to Beacon Hill theology thread on Dan Kennedy's Media Nation blog. So far Dan Kennedy has been pretty good about not "memory holing" any of my problematic posts to his blog. Thanks Dan and a Happy Thanksgiving to you.

I wonder what the position of the UUA is on this matter? Who is to say that the finances of the UUA or individual UU churches are squeaky clean? There is actually some evidence that the past financial practices of the UUA and CUC bear might not stand up well to an examination by forensic accountants.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

Bill Baar Don't Listen Either It Seems. . .

The following post was made to the Don't listen to what the Presbyterians say either' thread on Bill Baar's West Side blog. I guess Bill didn't want to listen to a post that hit rather too close too him since it would appear that he has "memory holed" this particular Emerson Avenger post. . .


Surely you mean don't listen to what the Unitarian Universalists say either. . .

Especially the 'Paraphrase Found' part that fraudulently asserts that - We jealously guard the right to know", to speak and to argue freely, according to conscience, within our own church and in society at large. We are opposed to censorship by church, state, or any other institution. We believe that truth emerges more clearly under conditions of freedom.

Or the effectively fraudulent "covenants" of UUism's Seven Principles -

We, the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association, covenant to affirm and promote

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;
The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all; Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

Radical Hapa asks UU ministers about Civil Disobedience

Radical Hapa aka Joseph Santos-Lyons posted a query about UU ministers and civil disobedience on his blog. I am not a UU minister and, believe it or not. . . I have not yet engaged in any genuine "civil disobedience" in terms of my ongoing public protest activities in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal. My response to Radical Hapa's query is reproduced below.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Joseph Santos-Lyons for, unlike rather too many other UUs. . . being so radical as to not "memory hole" or otherwise censor any of my posts to his blog. Happy Thanksgiving Joseph!

As far as I am concerned those other UUs who unjustly and hypocritically "memory hole" or otherwise censor and suppress my pertinent posts to their blogs (to say nothing of elsewhere on the internet) are a bunch of turkeys who should all go get stuffed. . . ;-)

Without further ado -

Interestingly enough I have not yet found it to be either necessary or desirable to engage in any genuine "civil disobedience" to protest some Unitarian Universalist evil. Although I have in the past been falsely arrested in December 2000 on flimsy trumped up criminal charges brought against me by perjurious Montreal Unitarians. I was acquitted from those dubious criminal charges in 2003 after a few educational, and even quite entertaining. . . court appearances.

At the behest of Montreal Unitarians who make a complete mockery of stunningly hypocritical and effectively fraudulent Unitarian Universalist claims to be "opposed to censorship by church, state or any other institution". . . two incompetent, overly-aggressive, and Charter rights challenged. . . Montreal police officers recently seized and destroyed most of my picket signs citing a 1901 municipal signage and anti-pamphleteering bylaw that was abrogated in 1999. . . That hardly constitutes any "civil disobedience" on my part however because I had good reason to believe that I was within the letter of the law if not the spirit of the law. Come to think of it, in that in this case the two incompetent and aggressive police officers disregarded and even effectively broke the law, especially the civil rights and freedoms that are constitutionally guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the two police officers may well be "outlaws" guilty of a bit of unwitting "civil disobedience" themselves. . . ;-) I have even half-seriously considered having them charged with the theft of my picket signs if or when their seizure and destruction of my signs is found to have been outside of the letter and the spirit of the law. At present they will soon be facing a Police Ethics Commission complaint backed by Mouvement Action Justice and I will probably also file a complaint against them with the Quebec Human Rights Commission.

I may eventually get around to engaging in some bona fide "civil disobedience" however, so far, I have been able to publicly express my protest against Unitarian Universalist injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy, quite effectively while acting well within both the letter and the spirit of Canadian and indeed Montreal laws. In fact I must point out that my false arrest in December 2000 on trumped up criminal charges brought against me by Montreal Unitarians who misled the police and Crown Prosecutor and told plenty of lies while under oath in criminal court, and the much more recent (almost certainly illegal and unethical) seizure and destruction of my picket signs by two over-aggressive Montreal police officers are abberations and that, in general, Montreal police officers (to say nothing of Boston police officers. . .) have acted very professionally and have not only respected my right to public protest but have even shown support and approval for it in both Montreal and Boston when I protested in front of 25 Beacon Street in the spring of 2000. I have even publicly complimented the two Montreal police officers who arrested me one Sunday morning in early December 2000 for the professional and courteous manner in which they conducted my now quite evidently unwarranted arrest. . .

Hypocrisy Is Hip With UUs Too. . .

Here is my short, but not so sweet. . . response to the 'Hypocrisy Is Hip Again' sermon on Rev. Thom Belote's RevThom blog.

So far it has not been "memory holed" so I will take this opportunity to personally thank Rev. Thom for not censoring me so far. . .

Happy Thanksgiving Rev. Thom.


Hypocrisy is hip with Unitarian Universalists

Tuesday, November 22, 2005

November 22, 1999 - November 22, 2005

Today marks the 6th anniversary of my excommunication from the Unitarian Church of Montreal in a "guilty until proven innocent" kangaroo court "show trial" disguised as a "special congregational meeting".

I Feel Shawn's Pain

Shawn Anthony said elsewhere -

Most of the ministers I have come across online (listserves/blogosphere) have not been very friendly to me at all, and I'm a young, aspiring UU minister. It seems they prefer to be competitive and/or overtly hostile (read: insecure), forcing me to constantly defend myself rather than inquire of them and learn. I think it's so sad. It leaves one feeling quite alone in a place where one should feel everything but. . .

The embedded links are mine and they should make it abundantly clear that I feel Shawn's pain. . .

Monday, November 21, 2005

Toad-In-The-Memory-Hole? An E-rant Post to Errant Frogs blog?

The following very promptly "memory holed" post was made in response to the 'Lessons From Leaves' thread on Bret Lortie's Errant Frogs blog.


You said the house with the biggest pile wins. . .

Behold Leaves of Crass. . .

There are definitely some lessons to be learned from those raked leaves.

(All puns intended)

Saturday, November 19, 2005

A Unitarian Minister Features on The Oprah Winfrey Show

Mack "The Knave" Mitchell, Unitarian Universalist minister and convicted rapist gets his fifteen minutes of world fame on Oprah. . .

Sunday, November 13, 2005

Insane Again? Will UUs ever learn?

I believe that the following "memory holed" posts to Philocrites' Where, oh where are the Philocritics? thread deserves a special thread of their own here.

An anonymous poster attempted to disingenuously pathologize me by insinuating that my ongoing protest activities constitute "insanity". No doubt because in his or her sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid mind I am "doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

My response to Anonymouse reveals the fallacy of that logic, at least in terms of inappropriately applying it to my ongoing protest activities. Au contraire I actually demonstrate that the members of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, and indeed many other sincerely igorant and conscientiously stupid UUs. . . are in fact "doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results" by obstinately ignoring my ongoing protest activities and doing their damnedest to censor and suppress my legitimate protest rather than responsibly attempting to properly redress my serious grievances. . .

I can't help but wonder why this anonymous poster expected "different results" with respect to his or her thinly disguised attempt to pathologize me. . . ;-)

I can't help but wonder also why it is that Philocrites chose to "memory hole" not only my response to anonymouse but anonymouse's original disingenuous comment and all of the follow up posts as well. . . Just what is Philocrites trying to hide (aka cover-up and deny) via his repeated "memory holing" censorship and suppression of my own and others' "problematic" posts to his blog?

anonymous:
October 31, 2005 04:55 PM Permalink for this comment

Robin-

One of the conventional wisdom definitions of insanity is "doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." It seems like you've been pushing the same boulder for 10+ years with nothing to show for it. Is that insanity?

There is nothing wrong with starting a new religion, but most prophets find it useful to gather a few disciples before they martyr themselves. Your martyrdom seems pretty lonely.

And, I am confused about why Emerson needs to be avenged. Has Emerson been wronged? It seems that Emerson has survived quite well without your defending his honor.

It must suck for Emerson's transparent eyeball to get all the glory and oooohs and ahhhhs while your "eye of God" is ignored.


Robin Edgar:
October 31, 2005 05:50 PM Permalink for this comment

My Response to anonymouse

: One of the conventional wisdom definitions of insanity is "doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

Quite right and the members of the Unitarian Church of Montreal have been "doing the same thing over and over" for about a decade now and expecting different results. . . I am getting most, albeit not all, of the results that I expect in terms of my own "doing the same thing over and over". . .

: It seems like you've been pushing the same boulder for 10+ years with nothing to show for it.

Actually I have plenty "to show" for the UU "boulder" that I have been pushing 10+ years with even more "to show" in the next 10+ years. . .

: Is that insanity?

Is that a rhetorical question?

Because, if so, you just added yourself to the list of people who foolishly, and often maliciously, seek to pathologize me.

: There is nothing wrong with starting a new religion, but most prophets find it useful to gather a few disciples before they martyr themselves. Your martyrdom seems pretty lonely.

The rumours of my "martyrdom" are greatly exaggerated. . .

: And, I am confused about why Emerson needs to be avenged.

You are indeed confused. Think again.

: Has Emerson been wronged?

Have I made that claim anywhere?

: It seems that Emerson has survived quite well without your defending his honor.

Who ever said that I am defending Emerson's honor?

: It must suck for Emerson's transparent eyeball to get all the glory and oooohs and ahhhhs while your "eye of God" is ignored.

Actually it is God's symbolic "Eye of God", not mine. . . It gets plenty of glory and and oooohs and ahhhhs every time that it is manifested during a total solar eclipse. . .

Half a million page views and counting is hardly "ignored". . .

Saturday, November 12, 2005

Lo-Fi Tribe! "moderation" in question. . .

This post to Lo-Fi Tribe thread 'My Unitarian Universalist Ministry 4' is "awaiting moderation". i.e. being withheld for censorship and suppression purposes by blog owner Shawn Anthony (aka userx).

It responds to Shawn's assertion -

Tolerance is a buzz-word. It also seems to represent a weaker personal position on difference and other. Acceptance is much more edifying. Acceptance is authentically inherent in each of the Seven Principles, but is not quite the point of the Seventh.

How much acceptance should one have? As much as you would like to be given, I suppose.

end quote

Since this critical post is quite unlikely to survive the "moderation" (dare I say "tolerance" and/or "acceptance?) of Shawn Anthony I will post it here as well -

Well I would have liked it very much if a certain unmentionable minister and other bigoted UUs had not intolerantly, to say nothing of outright maliciously, labeled Creation Day as "your cult". I would have liked it very much if an unmentionable "Humanist" UU minister had not intolerantly, to say nothing of contemptuously and abusively, labeled my profound revelatory religious experience as "your psychotic experience".

How much "tolerance" and "acceptance" should I have for such intolerance and contempt on the part of UUs. Zero I think. . .

Quite regrettably the record clearly shows that many UUs, including some top level UUA officials and various UU clergy, demonstrate a shamefully high degree of tolerance and acceptance for the blatantly obvious religious intolerance and bigotry that I have been subjected to by self-professed "Humanist" UUs. . .

Tuesday, November 08, 2005

The Philocrites blog "Memory Hole"

Philocrites aka Chris Walton has "memory holed" most of my posts to his blog.

In spite of his lame excuses and cynical rationalisation of his suppression of my posts he is clearly and unequivocally engaging in censorship.

This thread will be dedicated to posting most if not all of my posts that have been "memory holed" by Chris Walton aka Philocrites. The content of my "memory holed" posts and the context of the threads that they were posted to will show that Philocrites' assertion that - "

I've only "memory holed" comments that veer wildly off topic or that violate basic courtesy, Robin.

Is a falsehood aka a lie. . .

For starters here is a "memory holed" post that I made recently to his blog. Unfortunately it will have to be known as the "Unknown Post" because I forgot to record which thread I originally posted it to. . .

Philocrites you know very well that you yourself tolerate or look the other way or quietly agree with outrageous statements and causes in UU churches and larger religious movement.

Monday, November 07, 2005

I'm So Bored With The UUA. . .

The UU Enforcer confesses on his blog that he listened to too much Cr@ss in his youth.

I guess that I must have listened to way too much of The Clash in my own mis-spent youth. . .

Here is - 'I'm So Bored with The UUA' ;-)

Abusive UU Ministers
They wanna shoot some shit
They shot some in Canuckistan
But now they can't avoid a wit. . .

UUA Presidents talk
To the dictators of the UU World
In fact they're giving orders
An' they "memory hole" my words

I'm so bored with the UUA
But what can I do?

UU hypocrites
Have a lot of cheek
'Cos the hypocrites in the UUA
Work seven days a week

Never mind the Seven Principles
Let's podcast the "UU-Hate" Tapes
I'll Trudeau Salute the U.C.M.
And I hope nobody escapes

I'm so bored with the UUA
But what can I do? ;-)

Too much hypocrisy In the UUA

Suck on hypocrisy In the UUA

Finally A UU Who Hears, Listens and Understands. . .

The following email message arrived in my inbox today.

I am deleting the person's name to protect them from possible reprisals by their fellow UUs.


Hey Robin,
I have read and re-read your response to my blog...and
your negative experiences with Unitarian church. I was
surprised and a bit shocked to read what you had
experienced, and it's taken me some time to decide how
to respond. I am sorry that your experience with UUism
has been so negative. I know that is Not what the vast
majority of UU's are about - they wouldn't be
committed to the principles of understanding
everyone's worth and dignity and treating everyone
with compassion if that were true. So it's too bad
there is a UU minister there who is Not being true to
those ideals. And I would say they are hard to live up
to and live into every day. It is a continual
challenge to treating everyone I encounter with
dignity and compassion...but that is my practice.

At any rate, I hope that you have felt heard and
again, it is Not okay to be treated the way you were,
Especially by a minister.

in faith,
XXXXX

XXXXX


Here is my private email response to him or her, typos, HTML errors and all -


Hi Xxxxx,

Thanks for your private email response.

Thanks also for not "memory holing" my post to your blog.

You are in fact one of the very few UUs who have clearly acknowledged that I should not have been treated the way I was, especially by a minister.

Regrettably the vast majority of the UUs that I know do not seem very committed to the principles of understanding everyone's worth and dignity and treating everyone with compassion. "If that were true" as it were this ongoing conflict would have ended years ago in a manner that actually lived up to UU principles, especially that principle which calls for justice, equity and compassion in human relations.

This ongoing conflict is not just about a single UU minister that should not have treated me the way that I was treated by him.

It is about a Unitarian Church board and whole congregation that should not have treated me the way that I was treated by them.

Search - "Robin Edgar" Unitarian Church of Montreal

It is about at least one UUA President who should not have treated me the way that I was treated by him.

Search - "Robin Edgar" President Buehrens

It is about at least one Ministerial Fellowship Director who should not have treated me the way that I was treated by her.

Search - "Robin Edgar" "Diane Miller"

And it is about a whole lot of other abusive UUs who should not have treated me the way that I was treated by them in their insensitive and outright hostile responses to my online protest.

I do feel heard by you and I do feel that you have also sensitively and responsibly listened and understood what I have to say.

Unfortunately, as the above links clearly demonstrate, I have been most certainly been "heard" by many other UUs, including many UU clergy and some top level UUA and CUC officials, who have neither responsibly listened to, nor sensitively understood, what I had to say to them. These UUs, the vast majority of the UUs that I know, have willfully chosen not to take the responsible steps that are necessary to create peace. These UUs have chosen to deny me any justice, any equity or indeed any genuine compassion in their human relations with me. Sadly these UUs have inspired me to come up with the following saying -

Regrettably it is all to human to be inhuman. . .

Needless to say that "bon mot" has a much broader application but it is truly a shame that it was inspired by my being treated by most of my fellow UUs in a manner that was callous and insensitive at best and outright hostile and abusive at worst.

Thanks for hearing, listening, and understanding,

Robin Edgar

Sunday, November 06, 2005

A UU who agrees with my critique. . .

ms.squiggle said...

Hi Emerson Avenger,

I completely agree with you in terms of the fundamentalist Atheism that takes place within UU. That's why we have been so hesitant about joining. (We've been involved with the church off and on for 4 years and just recently decided to join.)

Read the rest of what ms. squiggle said here -

http://mysticsquiggle.blogspot.com/2005/11/christian-philosophies-and-belief-in.html#comments


Here is what I posted to her blog -

Perhaps UU Christians, to say nothing of other UU theists of various sorts, should get together and DO something about the intolerant and outright bigoted fundamentalist atheists in oUUr midst. . .

There is clearly a split in the the way theists and fundamentalist atheists come at UU-anity as it were. . . The two groups, seem quite unable to reconcile their differences. Intolerant fundamentalist atheists tend to believe there is only one way to believe in God - their way. . .

Theists of all kinds hold *some* beliefs that are philosophically in line with those professed by atheists but evidently not when it comes to the question of God.

: (I've actually known Catholic Priests who claim they are not theists, and are therefore technically a-theists.)

And thus technically frauds. . .

I fully expect that a certain percentage of the clergy in all religions are closeted atheists. I think they should display some integrity and get out of the closet and out of the "church". UUism is one of he few "religions" where outspoken fundamentalist atheists can be out of the closet and in the "church" to say nothing of preside over the "church". . .

:Or like the Greek Orthodox thinking, they may consider all of nature to be divine and God to be completely unknowable.

God is actually very "knowable" and can in fact be "known" to a considerable degree via purely rational thought. Rational contemplation of readily observable reality leads to considerable knowledge of "Nature's God". . .

: Or like the early Roman Catholic Church, they may think God is completely knowable through Jesus.

Even Jesus claimed not to know everything "the Father" knows. Jesus never said anything about this for example. . .

: You have to explain what you mean by your belief in God.

I was trying to once but a certain unmentionable minister of the fundamentalist atheist "Humanist" UU variety contemptuously dismissed my beliefs about God as being nothing but "silliness and fantasy". He preached Sunday sermons declaring that God is a "non-existant being" and that belief in God "seems primitive". . . He quite literally wrote off most religious rituals as being "meaningless".

So how are 1.2 hundred thousand or so UUs supposed to unify all of their differing ideas in order to do something about the bigoted fundamentalist atheist UUs in their midst? Should not ALL God believing UUs, and indeed ALL genuinely "humanist" atheist UUs. . . actually DO something about atheistic fundamentalism which is a philosophy that cuts down ALL religions?

: Anywhere there is a group of people claiming that they hold the only right ideas about God (including ideas against the idea of God), there is fundamentalism.

Amen to that!

: It's just plain old self-righteousness and that shows up everywhere! It's a part of humanity, not just religion.

Amen again. Fundamentalist atheism certainly shows up all over the place within UUism. . .

: If you want something done, then do something.

I'm doing more than my fair share. . . Unfortunately most of the other UUs I know prefer to do nothing. . . What are you going to DO about "it" pray tell?

: Quit telling other people it's up to them, because it's not.

I strongly disagree. Actually other UUs do have a moral and ethical responsibility to respond in genuine responsibility to the internal injustices and abuses that are perpetrated by intolerant and abusive fundamentalist atheist UUs and perpetuated by far too many other DO nothing UUs. It's up to all UUs, except the UU fundamentalist atheist bigots of course. . .

: Look inside yourself and see where you hold self-righteous ideas about the world. Start there. Get rid of those thoughts that tell you that the ideas you value are somehow more "right" than the ideas others value.

Sorry but a good number the alleged self-righteous ideas that I value, including the purported principles and purposes and other ostensible ideals of UUism. . . are in fact somehow more "right" than some of the ideas others value.

: There is no way fundamentalism can exist if it has nothing to define itself against.

True enough.

Maybe that's precisely why so many bigoted fundamentalist atheists choose to attend Unitarian Universalist "churches" on any given Sunday, so that they may so easily and indeed so sleazily "define" themselves against bona fide God believing Unitarian Universalists.

Friday, November 04, 2005

Abusive Clergy Misconduct In The UUA and CUC

Based on my own bitter personal experience I have very serious doubts about how responsibly the Unitarian Universalist religious community, especially the Unitarian Universalist Association and the Canadian Unitarian Council, responds to abusive clergy misconduct of various kinds including, but by no means limited too. . . clergy sexual misconduct. In spite of an official "Restorative Justice" UUA Apology to past victims of clergy sexual misconduct, a so-called Safe Congregations program, and various other UUA and CUC programs, official UUMA guidelines, UUMA Code of Professional Practice, "church" by-laws, and other "guidelines" and policies that at least try to give the appearance that Unitarian Universalists are ready, willing, and able to prevent abusive clergy misconduct, or deal responsibly with it when it actually arises there are clear indications that these fine words are effectively rendered meaningless when a UU minister actually abuses the trust, authority, and power invested in him or her.

Over the years I have heard various highly credible reports about how sexual misconduct and other forms of abusive clergy misconduct perpetrated by UU clergy, including clergy misconduct on the part of some "unmentionable" UU ministers who were, and even still are. . . top level UUA officials and publicly prominent Unitarian Universalist clergy, is tolerated, condoned, and even effectively endorsed while the victims are "left lonely, confused, afraid, angry and betrayed. Un-ministered to." In spite of all the fine words spoken and written in official apologies, UUA and CUC Safe Congregation policies and programs, and so-called Disruptive Behavior Policy, etc. etc. it seems clear that these fine words are often left by the wayside if and when abusive clergy misconduct actually occurs.

This is most certainly true of my own very well documented case that involved non-sexual psychologically and otherwise abusive clergy misconduct on the part of Rev. Ray Drennan of the Unitarian Church of Montreal. More about that later. . . Of course a free and responsible search for the truth and meaning of my own case of psychologically abusive clergy misconduct, and of course other forms of abusive clergy misconduct, in various internet search engines such as Google, Google Groups, Yahoo!, MSN Search, All The Web and other useful internet search engines will turn up no shortage of existing material in spite of ongoing efforts by various leaders of the Unitarian Universalist religious community, including but by no means limited to. . . UU clergy and UU WORLD editors, to cover-up and deny my own and other UUs' internet whistle-blowing by "memory holing" or otherwise censoring and suppressing our attempts to expose and denounce not only the abusive clergy misconduct itself but the negligent, effectively complicit, and at times outright punitive (towards he victim that is. . .) responses of the individual Unitarian Universalis churches involved, the Unitarian Universalist Association and its aptly named Ministerial Fellowship Committee, and the Canadian Unitarian Council etc.

A recent post on Rev. Scott Wells' 'Boy In The Bands' blog reassures me that my "obviously deep concerns" about ongoing UU tolerance of abusive clergy misconduct, inadequate or negligently and complicitly unenforced clergy guidelines such as the UUMA Code of Professional Practice and UUMA Guidelines for the Conduct of Ministry etc., "church" bylaws, Safe Congregations policies, and indeed Disruptive Behavior policies. . . and various other forms of protection of "sleezy (but non-criminal) clergy" (to say nothing of the possible protection of actually criminal UU clergy. . .) are well founded and need to be responsibly addressed by the Unitarian Universalist religious community.

Rev. Scott Wells says, "Current clergy guidelines and attitudes protect sleezy (but non-criminal) clergy with a veil of silence and fog of frustration." I must point out that it is not just clergy attitudes that protect "sleezy" and indeed abusive UU clergy (although I have encountered plenty of that kind of "bad attitude" from UU clergy including, most ironically, Rev. Scott Wells himself. . .) but the DIM Thinking bad attitude of UU lay leaders such as the Boards of the "churches" where the abusive clergy misconduct arises, the fellow congregants of the victim, non-clergy UUA and CUC officials and staff, such as CUC Presidents and senior editors of the UU WORLD magazine etc., who turn willfully deaf ears and willfully blind eyes towards the victims reports of abusive clergy misconduct but even attempt to actively silence the victims and ignorantly and even maliciously discredit their claims of clergy misconduct and abuse. Unitarian Universalists at all levels of the denomination, not just UU clergy but ordinary UU "church" members and UUA and CUC Presidents effectively protect "sleezy" and abusive UU clergy with a "veil of silence and fog of frustration." Unitarian Universalists from ordinary UU "church" members right up to at least one UUA President. . . engage in "victim blaming" and attempt to intimidate and threaten victims of abusive clergy misconduct into silence.

Rev. Scott Wells writes - I’ve talked with other ministers about X who somehow escapes censure and keeps a good name by skirting the edge of the rule, and in this case, I suspect past it. Certainly past what most people would consider decent. But time, effort, and hard proof are wanting.

This may be so however in the case of Rev. Ray Drennan of the Unitarian Church of Montreal who somehow escaped censure at all levels of the denomination right up until his recent "early retirement". . . I have put in plenty of time and effort to expose and denounce not only his abusive clergy misconduct but the negligent and complicit responses to my complaint by the Unitarian Church of Montreal, the Canadian Unitarian Council, the Unitarian Universalist Association and its aptly named Ministerial Fellowship Committee. There is no shortage of "hard evidence" in this particular case, on the contrary it is very well documented and I have posted most of the hard evidence onto the internet over the years, yet Rev. Ray Drennan escaped censure and indeed accountablity because, to quote Rev. Brian Kopke of the First Unitarian Congregation of Ottawa. . . "Nobody did anything." Actually UUs did plenty but they "did it" to the victim, i.e. yours truly, for daring to live up to Rev. Charles Eddis' purloined words that proclaim Unitarians "jealously guard the right to know, to speak, and to argue freely, according to conscience, within our own church and in society at large."

Rev. Scott Wells says - "There seems to also be a double standard: the more conspicuous or famous a minister, the more "liberty" is given." Which justifies the following picket signs slogans that I have displayed in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, UUA "head office" at 25 Beacon Street in Boston, and at the 2002 UUA General Assembly in Quebec City -

THE UUA AND MFC AFFIRM AND PROMOTE ABUSIVE CLERGY

Rev. Ray Drennan was most certainly "promoted", in every sense of the word. . . within the Canadian Unitarian Council and the Unitarian Universalist Association long after UUA and CUC Presidents, and other officials such as directors of the Ministerial Fellowship Committee, were made fully aware of his abusive clergy misconduct which took place just days after he was officially invested as the new minister of the Unitarian Church of Montreal in November of 1995. In fact the "tin" (as in "tin-pot dictator" perhaps?) anniversary of his demeaning and abusive verbal attack on me is just days away. . . I will be celebrating the 10th anniversary of Rev. Ray Drennan's abusive clergy misconduct by picketing the Eastern Regional Gathering of Canadian UUs that is being hosted by the Unitarian Church of Montreal this weekend.

Rev. Scott Wells says - I don't welcome a libel case, so I won’t say more.

Which, along with "memory holing" my posts to his blog and some other things. . . makes him an active participant in the "veil of silence and fog of frustration" that continues to protect "sleezy" Unitarian Universalist ministers.

Unlike Rev. Scott Wells, I actually would welcome a libel case in order to validate the truth and meaning of my alleged "libelous" criticism of certain "unmentionable" Unitarian ministers and a certain "unmentionable" Unitarian "church" up here in Montrea. . . I have said plenty over the last decade or so and I most certainly will say much more later. . .

Wednesday, November 02, 2005

The Burly Bird Gets The Grubbs?

Here is my heavily "annotated" response to Fausto's (aka The Socinian) well meant but apparently quite unfeasable suggestion that I might be able to talk with Rev. Clyde Grubbs. Rev. Clyde Grubbs censored every single post that I made to his blog and then subsequently pejoratively labeled me as an internet "troll" even though most of my posts to his blog were pertinent to the topics and issues raised in the threads that I posted to.

Have fun with the hyper-links. . . ;-)


Hi Fausto,

I am afraid that I am going to have to respectfully disagree with much of what you said. The recent statements made by Philocrites and Rev. Clyde Grubbs that you refer to here are little more than lame excuses, and shameless rationalizations, for what most certainly constitutes censorship and suppression of legitimate discussion of serious issues.

My "memory holed" posts to Philocrites' and Clyde Grubbs' blogs were not simply "impertinent or distracting graffiti" as you suggest here. Most if not all of my censored and suppressed posts directly addressed the "topics", concepts, and issues that were being discussed in the blog threads that I posted to. My comments were "memory holed" because they named a certain unmentionable "Humanist" "Unitarian", a specific Unitarian "Church" (Don't you just love that one?), and top level UUA officials etc. and spoke and argued freely and openly about highly questionable behavior on their part.

Why should I "run afoul" of Rev. Clyde Grubbs, or any other UU blogger, if I attempt to "speak, and to argue freely, according to conscience" about matters that, although quite "image tarnishing", UUs have every "right to know" about and even have a moral and ethical responsibility to act upon, assuming of course that UUs genuinely aspire to actually practice the claimed principles and purposes and other ideals that UUism preaches? (Strike 2) (Strike 3) (You're out!) My posts were, for the most part, very "pertinent" to the specific "topics", issues or concepts that were being discussed in the threads that I posted to.

Let's submit Rev. Clyde Grubbs' 'Trolls don't post comments!
They post trash to be deleted.' thread to a genuinely free and genuinely responsible "search" for its actual underlying truth and meaning. . . The thread header alone suggests that I am nothing but a "troll" and that my posts to Rev. Clyde Grubb's blog were nothing but "trash" to be "deleted" aka "memory holed". . .

I beg to differ. . .

Rev. Clyde Grubbs' suggests that most of my posts to his, and indeed other UUs' blogs, "violate internet etiquette and standards of civil discourse". I put it to you that no matter how "polite" or "civil" I might be in raising the issues that I raised, and naming the names that I named, in my posts to his blog that Rev. Clyde Grubbs would very promptly "memory hole" them. In fact, according to his own "ungodly witness", he has made it impossible for me, and indeed ALL other bloggers. . . to post anything at all to his blog without it first being subject to censorship and suppression.

The "moderate comments switch on my weblog manager" is clearly a tool of internet censorship and suppression of posts and, so far, Rev. Clyde Grubbs has "memory holed" and, by activating his "moderate comments switch", censored and suppressed every single one of my honest and very "pertinent" posts to his blog. Without actually naming me Rev. Clyde Grubbs calls me a "troll", which is described as a pejorative term in the Wikipedia web page that he links to, and he claims to "resent" my alleged "violation of community". . .

Rev. Clyde Grubbs claims that he deleted my "comments" which, according to his own "ungodly" "witness" "had nothing to do with the post or conversation at hand, but rather boiler plate reiterations of long discredited accusations directed at one of our ministers and a liberal religious congregation that acted to guard its community against disruption." When were my accusations against the unmentionable minister in question, and my accusations against the unmentionable UUA Presidents and MFC officials etc. ever actually discredited? Not "long ago". Indeed not ever, because the vast majority of my accusations are very solidly supported by well-documented evidence. N'est-ce pas?

Rev. Clyde Grubbs' own "ungodly witness" is quite evidently (yes it has most certainly been saved and copied for future reference and appropriate use) trying to discredit me and my entirely legitimate accusations about UU injustices, abuses and hypocrisy. Rev. Clyde Grubbs, as "an elected member of the Unitarian Universalist Association Executive", is actively participating in the ongoing Unitarian Universalist "cover-up and denial" of the legitimacy of my serious grievances.

Rev. Clyde Grubbs claims to be "very aware of the UUMA’s Code of Professional Conduct and the Guidelines for Ministry", as indeed he should be in his position, so how is it that he thinks the unmentionable minister's conduct, as described in detail by me, does not flagrantly violate the UUMA’s Code of Professional Practice" and the UUMA's evidently "over looked" Guidelines for Ministry? Does Rev. Clyde Grubbs, like the well documented words of Rev. Diane Miller, former director of the Ministerial Fellowship Committee, really believe that the unmentionable minister's contemptuous dismissal of my claimed revelatory religious experience as "your psychotic experience"; his deriding of my theistic religious beliefs, as informed by my alleged "psychotic experience", as nothing but "silliness and fantasy"; and his hostile, abusive, and outright malicious labeling of Creation Day as "your cult" is actually "within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadership" and that "his comments as quoted" by yours truly "do not warrant the description of "extremely unprofessional and demeaning" responses"?

There are really only a few possibilities here. Rev. Clyde Grubbs is badly misinformed, possibly deliberately misinformed by other UUA offials and the leaders of the Unitarian "church" in question etc., about the well documented "root causes" of my entirely legitimate accusations. Or alternatively Rev. Clyde Grubbs is NOT in fact badly misinformed at all but is knowingly and willfully participating in the UU religious community's ongoing institutional "cover up and denial" of my entirely legitimate "accusations" by willfully and knowingly telling falsehoods about me in his own "ungodly witness". Either way Rev. Clyde Grubbs is engaging in what Dee Miller (presumably no relation to Rev. Diane Miller) calls DIM Thinking, an insidious synthesis of Denial, Ignorance, and Minimization of the legitimate "accusations" made by, and the very real harm suffered by, the victims of various forms of abusive clergy misconduct.

I suppose the only other possibility is that Rev. Clyde Grubbs doesn't even know the meaning of the word "discredited". . . In fact it is very true of my situation, and actually works very much in my favor if we accept the 1s definition of the adjective "discredited" as - being unjustly brought into disrepute.

Rev. Clyde Grubbs indignantly exclaims -

"After deleting his comments, he accused me of censorship! Nonsense!"

I suggest that Rev. Clyde Grubbs would do well to enter into a genuinely free and genuinely responsible search for the truth and meaning behind that perfectly legitimate accusation by responsibly looking up the meaning of the word "censorship" in any number of good dictionaries. (That one's a rather amazing "coincidence". . .)

Rev. Clyde Grubbs rationalizes his flagrant censorship and suppression of my "pertinent" posts by proclaiming that - "Editorial discretion is not censorship, I am a publisher, not a government oversight agency."

Talk about a canard. . . I do seem to recall that Rev. Clyde Grubbs has publicly claimed to be a member of a certain religious "oversight" agency. . . N'est-ce pas?

I would say that Rev. Clyde Grubbs claimed anti-oppression work leaves much to be desired from my perspective, to say the very least. . .

In fact Rev. Clyde Grubbs is quite evidently actively participating in UU oppression of yours truly. . .

Rev. Clyde Grubbs wholesale "memory holing" of my early posts that actually made it onto his blog and his subsequent censorship and suppression of my later posts via his judicious use of his "moderate comments switch" goes well beyond what might be justifiably referred to as "editorial discretion." Ditto for Philocrites and other UUs who "memory holed" my pertinent posts or otherwise engaged in censorship and suppression of my attempts to "speak, and to argue freely, according to conscience" about the injustices, abuses, and outrageous hypocrisy on the part of UUs that are by no means just "perceived injustices", or "perceived" abuses, or "perceived" hypocrisy but actual very well documented injustices, abuses and hypocrisy perpetrated by certain unmentionable UUs and perpetuated by DIM Thinking UUs like Rev. Clyde Grubbs. . .

Rev. Clyde Grubbs said -

"Publishers are responsible for the contents of their publications, including the writing of guest commentators."

Yes. And?

Rev. Clyde Grubbs asserts -

"For me to tolerate trolling on my weblog would be condoning internet libeling and thus a violation of those professional standards."

What "professional standards" Clive? The UUMA "Guidelines" that apparently allow UU ministers to falsely and maliciously pathologize me?

Rev. Clyde Grubbs says -

I promise my readers that I won’t allow "commentators" to use my weblog in a way that violates professional relational standards."

I say to Rev. Clyde Grubbs that he, and far too many other like-minded UU clergy, CUC and UUA officials, and other "church" leaders, have "long ago" allowed a certain unmentionable UU minister to speak about me in a way that clearly and unequivocally "violates professional relational standards" as they are described in the UUMA’s Code of Professional Pracice and the UUMA Guidelines for the Conduct of Ministry and have yet to do anything to responsibly hold that unmentionable minister accountable for his demeaning and abusive words and actions.

Rev. Clyde Grubbs asserts -

"I feel strongly that a Unitarian Universalist on-line community can enrich our religious movement with honest and civil dialogue on matters of importance to our faith community."

I was, and still am. . . attempting in my own way to "enrich" the Unitarian Universalist "religious movement" with honest, and even comparatively "civil", dialogue on "matters" that most certainly should be "of importance to our faith community" but, quite evidently. . . are of litle or no importance to Rev. Clyde Grubbs, the Unitarian Church of Montreal, the Unitarian Universalist Association and its aptly named Ministerial Fellowship Committee and no shortage of other UUs.

Rev. Clyde Grubbs proclaims -

But in order to do that the webloggers must honor standards of that bring credit to Unitarian Universalism.

How does his own "ungodly witness" and other "like-minded" UUs' ongoing and remarkably shameless "cover-up and denial" and censorship and suppression of my legitimate criticism and dissent in any "honor standards" "that bring credit to Unitarian Universalism"? Rev. Clyde Grubbs asserts - others have recently stated more clearly how they expect visitors posting on their blogs to conduct themselves. By and large, I think their rules of "netiquette" are quite reasonable and fair.

Really? How is it in any way "reasonable and fair" for Rev. Clyde Grubbs and other "like-minded" UUs to engage in blatantly obvious institutional "cover-up and denial" of very real UU injustices, abuses and hypocrisy by willfully censoring and suppressing virtually every single one of my "pertinent" posts to their blogs by disingenuously, and more than a little bit hypocritically. . . appealing to the rules of "netiquette" as it were?

You said - Blogs are not really public forums, but are more in the nature of personal diaries. (Congratulations on launching yours, by the way.)

Blogs are most definitely "forums" and they are most definitely "public".

Philocrites asserts on his UU blogs page that he is "reluctant to list blogs by teenagers and college students -- although they abound! -- because I often can't tell whether the authors realize how public their posts really are."

You said - I don't think it would be impossible for you to talk to Clyde, at least not if you were to restrict your conversation on his blog to the topics that he wants to discuss. It's only when you try to direct his conversation in your own direction that you run afoul.

I was, and still am, very ready, very willing, and abundantly able to "discuss" the "topics" that Rev. Clyde Grubbs, Philocrites, and other "like-minded" UUs want to discuss. Why should I "run afoul" of them when I speak and argue freely, according to my conscience, about my own very well documented personal experience that is most certainly pertinent to the "topics" that they are in fact discussing?
Sorry but Rev. Clyde Grubbs, Chris Walton aka Philocrites and no shortage of other UUs are doing nothing more, and nothing less, than actively participating in shameless institutional "cover-up and denial" when they repeatedly "memory hole" or otherwise censor and suppress my legitimate criticism, dissent, and indeed online protest against well documented UU injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy.