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

Saturday, October 21, 2006

A Primer On Peacebang And Other DIM Thinking U*Us Pathologically Not Getting It. . .

Here it comes. . . here it comes. . . here comes your 19th "neurotic reaction". . .

PeaceBang said...

I'm discussing theological connections between Catholic doctrine and Catholic child molestation here. That's the topic, that's what I stayed with.
However,I think it would be interesting for someone to respond with reflections on how Universalist theological tradition could contribute to UU clergy misconduct. There is certainly a worthy column there, but I'm not choosing to write it. If you do, feel free to link it here.

The trick to not getting your comments deleted is to make them directly and specifically relevant to the subject at hand (as in a conversation, not an off-topic tirade), don't attack individuals by name, and just acccept that all comments on this blog are subject to the editorial trashcan.

4:21 PM

PeaceBang said...

whoops! make that "UNITARIAN AND UNIVERSALIST theological tradition might contribute to abusive sexual relations."(The "Unitarian" got accidentally deleted!)

4:23 PM

The Emerson Avenger said...

Well this Unitarian has repeatedly been knowingly, willfully and permanently deleted by "memory-holing" U*Us who choose to participate in U*U church censorship and U*U community denial of U*U injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy. . .

:The trick to not getting your comments deleted is to make them directly and specifically relevant to the subject at hand (as in a conversation, not an off-topic tirade),

My comment was by no means "an off-topic tirade" as you allege in an effort to rationalize and justify your knowing and willful *censorship* of my very pertinent commentary on your post. In fact, characterizing my terse and pithy commentary as a "tirade" is not only patently ridiculous but stunningly hypocritical. Your own angry and even "vitriolic" post is far more characteristic of a bona fide "tirade" than what I posted as a comment to it. . . Part and parcel of your own self-selected "subject at hand" in your own "tirade" was the issue of "community denial", thus my comment about the "community denial" of U*Us in the face of clergy mnisconduct and other injustices and abuses, including your own Denial I'm afraid. . . was in fact "directly and specifically relevant to the subject at hand" as you yourself presented that "subject at hand". N'est-ce pas Peacebang?

:don't attack individuals by name,

You and other U*U clergy directly or indirectly "attack individuals by name" on an ongoing basis. In fact U*Us, perhaps especially U*U clergy, are past masters at indirectly attacking individuals without actually coming out and "directly and specifically" naming them. Right Peacebang? You are thus exercising a stunningly hypocritical double standard by admonishing me not to "attack individuals by name". Your own "tirade" effectively attacked "the priest" by name and "the neighbor" by name in that it contained a link to the New York Times article in which they were named. Just to make my point I am going to repost the comment that you "memory holed" and describe a certain unmentionable U*U minister and a certain unmentionable MFC Director with their names replaced by their titles. The post will of course link to other material in which they are named but even the link will contain their titles rather than their names. I look forward to seeing just what lame excuses you may offer to try to justify that U*U "memory holing" *censorship and *suppression* of that comment again. . . I expect that post to remain in place Peacebang. If you censor it again you will be held accountable by the dreaded Emerson Avenger. . . ;-) :and just acccept that all comments on this blog are subject to the editorial trashcan. Sorry Peacebang but what you euphemistically refer to as "the editorial trashcan" is more appropriately referred to as the U*U "memory hole". An Orwellian "memory hole" that you and other hypocritical U*Us happily operate in order to *censor* and *suppress* my own and other people's perfectly legitimate exposure, denouncement, and criticism of internal U*U injustices and abuses including, but by no means limited, to clergy misconduct committed by U*U ministers whether it be clergy sexual misconduct or otherwise. . . So I am sorry to have to report that I will definitely not accept that comments on the blog of any U*U minister, not just yours Peacebang, are subject to censorship and suppression by U*Us who choose to participate in U*U "community denial" of U*U injustices, U*U abuses, and U*U hypocrisy etc. I will remind you and every other U*U minister that U*Us very publicly (and quite evidently quite fraudulently. . .) profess to be great defenders of civil liberties and freedom of expression etc. and to be "opposed" to censorship. In fact U*Us officially proclaim 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." I am only exercising my right, and indeed my responsibility. . . to speak and to argue freely, according to *my* conscience, "within our own church" (as it were) and in society at large, but you and rather too many other outrageously hypocritical U*Us, including other hypocritical U*U clergy. . . are quite evidently going out of your way to participate in flagrant "community denial" and perfectly obvious U*U church censorship of my own and other people's legitimate criticism, dissent and outstanding grievances. As a minister in the U*U religious community I expect you to set an example and make an effort to actually live up to U*U pronouncements made in U*U propaganda that (most unfortunately quite hypocritically and even quite fraudently) proclaim that U*Us are opposed to censorship. I expect all other U*U ministers to do likewise. Those U*U ministers who have actively participated in the DIM Thinking "cover-up and denial" of U*U "community denial" of my own and other people's legitimate criticism and dissent, and persist in U*U church censorship and suppression of my "right of conscience" will be named and shamed on The Emerson Avenger blog with directly and specifically relevant examples of their censorship and "community denial" provided as evidence wherever possible. I find it quite regrettable that, along with another female U*U minister, you have made yourself a not so new poster girl for U*U community denial. . .

5:55 PM

The Emerson Avenger said...

If at first you don't succeed. . .

Try, try again.

Let's make the female former MFC Director our new poster girl for U*U community denial. And let's make the unmentionable Unitarian Church our new poster church for U*U community denial. A decade of DIM Thinking denial, ignorance and minimization of obvious clergy misconduct, and various other U*U injustices and abuses, is a pretty shameful record of community denial. . .

6:12 PM

The Emerson Avenger said...

The above post meets your own stated criteria for what is acceptable to post on your blog Peacebang. It does not (directly) "attack individuals by name". It does however do exactly what you have done in your own post about "Catholic sexual abuse" and related "community denial". . . It replaces the names of the "individuals" who I choose to allegedly "attack" with other descriptors such as their titles and provides (indirect) links to web pages where these "individuals" are in fact named. It's a pretty pathetic roundabout way of "attacking" individuals but it is exactly how you and other hypocritical U*Us, including no shortage of unmentionable U*U ministers. . . choose to do it. I am thus choosing to comply with your cynical and hypocritical conditions for "not getting your comments deleted" in order to make a point. In future I expect to be able to name individuals, including you, who I have good reason to "attack" as you put it.

6:27 PM

Quite regrettably Peacebang chose to ignore all of the foregoing and promptly U*U "memory holed" all of the above comments. I thus nominate Peacebang aka U*U minister Rev. Victoria Weinstein, currently the U*U minister of The First Parish Unitarian Church of Norwell, Massachusetts, as the current poster girl for pathologically DIM Thinking U*U "community denial".

Wow! Yet more evidence that Google really IS on my side! My link to a Google search on - Unitarian "community denial" - was intended for future use but it is already usable right now since Google has already indexed and yes, Google cached. . . The Emerson Avenger posts that U*U minister Victoria Weinstein aka Peacebang so foolishly "memory holed" in her pathological desire to become an accessory after the fact in Rev. Ray Drennan's U*U clergy misconduct and a participant in the "community denial" that the Unitarian Church of Montreal, Rev. Diane Miller and other DIM Thinking UUA administrators', including former UUA President Rev. Dr. John Beuhrens. . . initiated over a decade ago.

9 Comments:

Blogger indrax said...

As an aside, you still need to deal with your lie, one way or another.

I think it would be interesting for someone to respond with reflections on how [Unitarian] Universalist theological tradition could contribute to UU clergy misconduct. There is certainly a worthy column there, but I'm not choosing to write it. If you do, feel free to link it here. The trick to not getting your comments deleted is to make them directly and specifically relevant to the subject at hand ...

You post failed the very first criteria for non-deletion.

and just acccept that all comments on this blog are subject to the editorial trashcan.

It also failed the third.

Deleting a post off a blog is not inherently censorship. There must be limits and rules to have a reasonable debate, peacebang chooses to have a reasonable debate on her blog, and your posts do not meet her standards.

This is sad for you because she was obviously inviting you specifically to contribute, and you chose not to. Why?
Do you have ANY insights on how UU theological Tradition might contribute to UU clergy misconduct?

Also, you rather missed the point of the 'naming names' rule, I think. While peacebangs post may have made a specific abusers identity more available, she was only using the story as a jumping off point to deal with broader issues. You took that broader issue and chose to just point right back to your standard tirades. This isn't about that priest or your ex-minister, this is about an issue.

Sunday, October 22, 2006 12:04:00 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You very frequently respond to criticism by saying that UUs have the same problem as if two wrongs make a right. If you've ever known a UU who had a bad quality, that apparently gives you carte blanche to have the same quality.

In this post alone you respond to two criticisms by claiming that if Peacebang does it, it must be OK for you to do it:


…Your own angry and even "vitriolic" post is far more characteristic of a bona fide "tirade" than what I posted as a comment to it. . .

… You and other U*U clergy directly or indirectly "attack individuals by name" on an ongoing basis…


Two wrongs make a right, N'est-ce pas?

Sunday, October 22, 2006 12:36:00 am  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

Actually you are wrong on both counts Anonymous so I guess that your two wrongs make you wrong. . . Right? aka N'est-ce pas?

:You very frequently respond to criticism by saying that UUs have the same problem as if two wrongs make a right.

Wrong. I have already stated that on those occasions when I do return abuse for abuse and/or offence for offence the whole point of the exercise is to educate U*Us to the fact that their wrongs are indeed wrong and not right. . . Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.

:If you've ever known a UU who had a bad quality, that apparently gives you carte blanche to have the same quality.

Absolutely not. I have had slanderous lies told about me by various U*Us but I have responded to those slanderous lies by telling some very unpleasant very well documented truths about U*Us. I have had my religious beliefs mocked and ridiculed by U*Us but have not responded by mocking and ridiculing U*U beliefs. I have had my property stolen, damaged and outright destroyed by U*Us but have never stolen, damaged or outright destroyed any U*U property. I have had false and even malicious criminal charges brought against me by U*Us of which I was righfully acquitted in a court of law but I have only brought perfectly valid criminal charges against those abusive U*Us who have uttered threats against me, who have physically assaulted me and who have stolen my property. These charges stuck and those who were charged were subjected to nonjudicial treatment for their criminal acts against me. I have never uttered threats against any U*U not have I ever assaulted any U*U even in self-defence when I was being asssaulted myself. I could go on but I think that I have adequately refuted you.

:In this post alone you respond to two criticisms by claiming that if Peacebang does it, it must be OK for you to do it:

Wrong. I never said that or even suggested that.

:Your own angry and even "vitriolic" post is far more characteristic of a bona fide "tirade" than what I posted as a comment to it. . .

It should be glaringly obvious here that I am asserting that Peacebang's post is angry and even "vitriolic" in contrast to my censored comment which was quite even-tempered in comparison to Peacebang's tirade.

:You and other U*U clergy directly or indirectly "attack individuals by name" on an ongoing basis…

The above statement is 100% true particularly when U*Us have a bad habit of characterizing perfectly legitimate criticism as as "attack" in order to try to deflect the criticism and play the victim. That being said I do not believe that it is in any way wrong to name those people that you are justifiably subjecting to strong criticism or, as U*Us would say, a "personally attack" if you are talking about a U*U. I was just pointing out Peacebang's outrageously hypocritical double standard that's all. Oh dear was that a "personal attack" on an unmentionable U*U minister who is beyond any strong public criticism? Perhaps so but, to paraphrase Gertrude Stein, a hypocrite is a hypocrite is a hypocrite. Sorry U*Us but I am just speaking readily verifiable truth to U*U weakness. . .

Sunday, October 22, 2006 5:39:00 am  
Blogger Chalicechick said...

If Robin percieves anything negative about anybody he can talk about it as much as he wants.

But if a minister percieves that Robin is crazy and says so, then that's abuse and Robin will whine about it for the rest of his life.

Sunday, October 22, 2006 7:06:00 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wrong. I have already stated that on those occasions when I do return abuse for abuse and/or offence for offence the whole point of the exercise is to educate U*Us to the fact that their wrongs are indeed wrong and not right. . . Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.


How does this differ from "two wrongs make a right?

Monday, October 23, 2006 5:19:00 am  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

You know what Anonymous? It does not in any way differ from "two wrongs make a right". You are absolutely spot on correct. I think that you finally understood and conceded my point that sometimes in war, even a war of words. . . it quite regrettably takes two wrongs to make a right. I can think of several cases where this is true. Thank you for acknowledging here that I am right about the fact that it is sometimes necessary to fight fire with fire and that, as unfortunate and deeply regrettable as it may be, sometimes two wrongs do make a right.

Tuesday, October 24, 2006 6:18:00 pm  
Blogger Chalicechick said...

(((it quite regrettably takes two wrongs to make a right. ))

You felt insulted by UUs, so you've insulted UUs.

You felt mistreated by UUs, so you've mistreated UUs.

You felt punished by UUs, so you've punished UUs.

You felt harassed by UUs, so you've harassed UUs.

You felt UUs treated you rudely, so you've treated them rudely.

So everything's right now, yes?

I mean, if two wrongs make a right and they hurt you and you hurt them, we're done here and can move on, correct?

You've had your wrongs and now things must be right.

But things don't feel right, do they? You're still hurting.

And wronging UUs over and over isn't making the hurt less. No matter how many times you insult UUs, the original pain is still there.

You've tried over and over and two wrongs just aren't making a right.

So maybe it's time to try something else.

CC

Wednesday, October 25, 2006 4:48:00 pm  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

Oh it definitely is time for U*Us to try something else CC. . . because until things are in fact set right with some genuine justice, equity and compassion I will continue to apply Peacebang's proverbial Chastening Rod to both cheeks of U*Uism. . .

Wednesday, October 25, 2006 6:33:00 pm  
Blogger Chalicechick said...

Then I guess two wrongs haven't made a right have they?

So why do you think more wrongs will do the job?

CC

Wednesday, October 25, 2006 11:21:00 pm  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home