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
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: - 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: - 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 -

Friday, July 27, 2007

Rev. Peter Boullata Goes Back To The Future At First Parish Weston?!

I know from direct personal experience, as well as observation of the greater U*U World, that U*Us have a shameful proclivity for Stalinistic revision of history however this is the first time that I have seen U*Us refer to events that may occur in the future in the past tense. . . Then again maybe it's just a typo and Rev. Peter Boullata, a former member of the Unitarian Church of Montreal and its interim minister between the totalitarian regimes of Rev. Ray Drennan and Rev. Diane Rollert, actually joined the staff of First Parish Church Weston, Massachusetts, on September 1, 2006 or something.

Peter Boullata
Associate Minister

The Rev. Peter Boullata, after parish assignments in Michigan and Ontario, Canada, joined the First Parish Weston staff on September 1, 2007. He previously served a student internship at FPCW and is well-known to FPCW parishioners.

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

So Just How Does Peacebang Extinguish The Chalice Flames Anyway?

U*U minister and blogger Berry`s Mom asserts in this blog post that reading PeaceBang, aka Rev. Victoria Weinstein, somehow reminds her of the U*U religious practice of ending every Sunday service by extinguishing the chalice flames. . .

Here is the comment (dare I say "flame"?) that I just posted to that rather unfortuitous blog post -

Reading Peacebang`s salty language* reminds me that she has suggested a very unusual way to extinguish the flames of the Statue of Liberty`s torch. . . ;-)

*aka "insulting and defamatory language"

The Dangerous Fantasies Of Rev. Diane Rollert And Other U*Us. . .

The following eminently quotable words of wisdom, courtesy of U*U blogger Shelby Meyerhoff on her Looking For Faith blog, have had appropriately revelatory hyperlinks added in the inimitable manner of The Emerson Avenger. . .

"Fantasy becomes dangerous when it moves us too far from the real, and therefore, too far from one another."

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Rev. Victoria Weinstein Bitch*Slaps U*U Blogger Jamie Goodwin Upside The Head. . .

On his All Parts of Us Deserve to be Celebrated thread -

Rev. Victoria Weinstein aka PeaceBang said...

Furthermore, this post is obnoxious, hostile and ageist. And that's really what you set out to do, isn't it? You just wanted an opportunity to heave a gob of spit as some folks. What you've written contributes nothing but venom to the conversation. It asks no interesting questions nor does it even pretend to respect the validity of those with whom you disagree (and I mean THEIR validity, not just their position). The swaggering arrogance and nya-nya-nya tone here are something I would expect to see from an 8th grader. What you've written is illogical and full of projections (eg, those who strongly disagree with you about polyamory must be natural bigots who had to be dragged unwilling to the enlightened position you now hold).

What a low point.

end quote

Makes you wonder just who is "full of projections", to say nothing of full of sh*t. . . doesn't it?

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

How Much Is U*U Silence Worth?

Sexologist and U*U minister Rev. Debra W. Haffner, who is the Director of the Religious Institute on Sexual Morality, Justice, and Healing, asks How Much Is Silence Worth? on her Sexuality and Religion: What's the Connection? blog. You can catch her drift on her blog. Here is my response to her post that I submitted as a follow-up comment. Hopefully Rev. Debra W. Haffner will not censor this response -

:How Much Is Silence Worth?

How much is silence worth to the UUA?

:Well, in the case of the Vatican, apparently 660 million dollars.

How many dollars have the UUA and/or individual U*U congregations paid out to buy the silence of victims of U*U clergy sexual misconduct?

:That's how much it's going to cost the Roman Catholic Church to settle a case brought by 508 people who were sexually abused by priests over the past fifty years.

How many U*Us have been victims of clergy sexual misconduct committed by U*U ministers over the past 46 years?

U*U minister Dan Harper says -

"In my Unitarian Universalist tradition, some experts estimate that over fifty per cent of all Unitarian Universalist congregations have experienced an incident of clergy sexual misconduct since the 1960’s. . ."

Maybe U*Us should think for a moment about how those 500 (or more) people and their wives, husbands, partners, and children have suffered.

Think how much the UUA doesn't want UUA leaders to have to testify in public about why U*U ministers were simply moved to another U*U parish rather than being removed from service completely. . . If you don't believe that the UUA has done this I suggest that you have a chat with uugrrl. It is my understanding that the U*U minister who was found to have committed clergy sexual misconduct against her and several other women in her U*U parish was not defellowshipped by the UUA, and that he is still presiding over a U*U parish somewhere else in the U*U World. I have treason to believe that he is by no means the only U*U minister guilty of clergy misconduct to be shuffled off to another U*U parish either.

:The Vatican said on Monday that they are now committed to ending this problem.

The UUA said in 2000 that they are now committed to ending this problem but there is little evidence that they have done very much to redress past abuses or deal responsibly with current ones. Of course secrecy and lack of transparency in the guise of "confidentiality" makes it difficult to assess just how well or how poorly the UUA is living up to its pledge that its own failures will be remedied and that the UUA will "bend toward justice" in this "untended area".

:They also said in their release that other institutions have this problem as well.

So did the UUA in its apology to U*U victims of clergy sexual misconduct. . . Interestingly enough the UUA admitted that - "Other denominations have done better." I hate to have to say so but, at least when it comes to publicly acknowledging cases of clergy sexual misconduct and providing financial compensation to victims of clergy sexual misconduct the Roman Catholic Church seems to be well ahead of the U*Us. . .

:It reminds me of the child who says, "But everyone is doing it" when their parent discovers cigarette smoking. Perhaps the Vatican forgot that the book of Matthew tells us to take the log out of our own eye first.

Perhaps you and other U*Us forgot that the book of Matthew tells us to take the log out of our own eye first. . .

:I understand why each of these survivors would want a million dollars, why it would feel justified. But I can't help but think it means we'll never really know how this abuse of power and patriarchy was allowed to go on for decades...or if it has really ended now.

I could say the pretty much the same thing about the U*U abuse of power that has gone on for decades and which I have good reason to believe has not really ended now. . . I doubt however that any victims of U*U clergy sexual misconduct have ever received anything approaching a million dollars in compensation for the damage that U*U clergy did to them. Then again. . . Who knows how just much the UUA has paid out to buy the silence of U*U victims of clergy sexual misconduct?

U*U Churches and UUA Institutional Interventions - Or Lack Thereof. . .

Here is the commentary (with additonal embedded links and correction of spelling errors and typos etc.) that I submitted to in response to U*U blogger BiddiesInMyBrain's post about Churches and Intitutional Interventions in which she criticizes the Roman Catholic Church's response to clergy sexual misconduct while remaining blissfully ignorant of, or in complete denial of. . . the failure of U*U Churches and the UUA to responsibly address and adequately redress clergy sexual misconduct committed by U*U ministers.

So far Laura has not seen fit to publish my comment.

Well you know what they say Laura. . .

If you are not part of the solution, you are part-of-the-problem.

Hopefully Laura will come around to being part of the solution sooner rather than later.

:I am not normally inclined to go about admonishing other demoninations and faith groups about their dirty laundry, but this could use a good old-fashioned intervention. And soon.

Well there is a fair bit of U*U dirty laundry that could use a good old-fashioned intervention. And soon. Including clergy sexual misconduct committed by U*U ministers.

:The Roman Catholic Church institutionally still just doesn't get it...

The same may be said about the Unitarian Universalist "church" and uugrrl is saying it -

:As you know, the RCC is paying more than $660 million to more than 500 individuals in the Diocese of Los Angeles who state they were sexually abused as children by clergy.

Which shows that they are finally addressing the problem of clergy sexual misconduct and providing very significant financial compensation to victims of Catholic priests. How much compensation has the UUA ever paid out to the victims of U*U ministers who committed clergy sexual misconduct?

:And somehow, that is just the tip of the iceberg... this is going on all over the country, and the detritus of dozens of years of clergy abuse can be measure in broken lives.

Indeed it can be measured in damaged lives within the so-called U*U World as well. . .

:That these abused folks have had to fight this battle against the recalcitrant and much more resourceful RCC is enraging enough stuff. But it doesn't stop there.

What about the abused folks (not necessarily sexually abused folks) who have had to fight battles against the obstinately recalcitrant and much more resourceful UUA and individual U*U churches?

:Bishop Mahoney apologized, not to those who were hurt by the abuse, but to those who were offended; - as though it were a tea-time breach of protocol. HELLO? They're not offended. They're HURT! They're SCARRED FOR LIFE by the experience.

As are victims of the clergy misconduct of U*U ministers. . .

:As a young survivor of rape (I was ten years old) I *know* all too painfully many of the psychological, social, and physical problems that can be caused by such an action. I shudder at what must have happened to some of these youngsters who endured repeated rapes and abuse.

I am sorry to hear that but similar things have happened within the U*U religious community. I was appalled when a particularly obnoxious U*U minister stridently criticized Roman Catholics over comparatively minor sexual abuse (alleged homosexual fondling) at a time when one of her own parishioners had just been convicted of forcibly raping a neighbour's daughter and a "female family member" both of whom were not much older than ten at the time the rapes took place. This U*U minister called upon her parishioners to pray for the rapist but there is no evidence that she made a similar call to pray for his victims. . .

:To call these actions something to be "offended" by is an insult to me and every other rape victim in the world and makes it patently clear that the Vatican is completely out of touch.

How do you feel about UUA Executive Vice-President Kathleen (Kay) Montgomery asserting that she does not feel any "guilt" about U*U clergy sexual misconduct in the UUA's official apology to victims of clergy misconduct? How do you feel about the fact that Kathleen Montgomery's "pledge" that the UUA's failure to responsibly redress clergy sexual misconduct "will be remedied" has been neglected, if not outright broken, and that the UUA continues to fail to "bend toward justice"?

Institutionally, the 46-year-old UUA still has some growing up to do before it becomes a responsible adult. I think that the UUA, and plenty of individual U*U churches that have failed to responsibly address clergy misconduct of various kinds, have made a total mockery of the Seven Principles of U*Uism and could use some lessons in lovingkindness, to say nothing of basic moral and ethical integrity, themselves.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Is This Who U*Us Want To Be CC? Seriously?

In a post titled Is this who we want to be? Seriously? U*U uber*blogger The ChaliceChick raises some interesting questions. Of course I have been raising pretty much the same questions for over a decade now.

Welcome aboard the U*U Ship of Fools CC. . .

For now I will just reproduce the two comments that I just left on CC's blog (with some typo corrections and additional embedded links) but I definitely have more to say on this issue and may add to this thread later.

CC said - "If they want to express their views in rude way that is not intended to represent the organization they can get personal blogs of their own and keep the organization's name off of it."

Oh, you mean like Rev. Victoria Weinstein? But doesn't she clearly identify herself as "a small town pastor serving an historic New England Unitarian Universalist congregation" on her Peacebang blog? As I pointed out to appropriate UUA administrators. . .

Quite frankly the UUWA posts were comparatively polite compared to Peacebang's insulting and defamatory, to say nothing of obscene. . . language.

And by the way, I strongly suspect that if the UUA was the sort of place that made it clear to everyone that nastiness against people who you disagree with is wrong and is totally not the UUA's mission, Rev. Ray Drennan, Rev. Victoria Weinstein, and no doubt plenty of other U*U clergy and UUA administrators. . . would have known what the boundaries were and known what they were saying was over the line.

What the heck. . . U*U blogger The Socinian aka Fausto can chow down on a slight reworking of his words too. . .

When you work for a religious organization, its objectives have to take priority over your own opinions whenever you are out in public. You especially shouldn't use the organization's resources to publish personal views that impair the organization's ability to promote its own views or objectives, or that bring disrepute upon the organization. An unfiltered personal-reflections blog sponsored by the UUA to allow its staff to express their personal opinions is begging for trouble in that regard. Even a personal blog that is unconnected to the organization can present conflicts if the blogger's identity is known, because the blogger still presents a public portrait of the attitudes held by staff of the organization and therefore can impair organizational effectiveness.

The larger problem here is not that (fill in the blank*) as a newcomer didn't understand those realities, but that nobody else at the UUA seems to understand them either.

* Rev. Ray Drennan was a newcomer to the U*U "church" after having been kicked out of the Presbyterian Church following what he calls a "heresy trial". . .

Rev. Victoria Weinstein is not a newcomer to being a U*U however. . . In fact Rev. Weinstein aka Peacebang is a life-long U*U.

Friday, July 13, 2007

If U*Us Want Peace U*Us Should Work For Justice. . .

The following is a classic Emerson Avenger riposte to this post on the blog of the UUA's Washington Office for Advocacy 'Inspired Faith, Effective Action' in response to the post's parting shot -

Recognize your micro, meso and macro conflicts and work on your micro, meso and macro peacemaking. Find what calls you and follow your passions. Because as Henry Louis Mencken said, "If you want peace, work for justice."

TEA responded -

I have been saying that for quite some time myself. . .

So just when *are* U*Us going to start waging peace with me by providing some justice for me and other victims of U*U injustices and abuses?

"The Church Of The Far Left" Gets More Ridiculous And Intolerant. . .

The following is a classic Emerson Avenger riposte to a post titled You can't make this stuff up on the blog of the UUA's Washington Office for Advocacy 'Inspired Faith, Effective Action' -

Just when you think "the Church of the Far Left" can't get any more intolerant and ridiculous. . . then they do. ;-)

end quote

U*Us really can and do make this stuff up. . .

Update: July 14,2007

I just added this second follow-up comment that plays off of the words of the Unitarian minister, Rev. Edward E. Hale, as quoted in the blog post -

U*Us should all pray for the U*U World when, in incidents like this one, U*Us are shown the ugly intolerance which is all too widespread among U*Us. . .

Are You Feeling Lucky U*Us? Go Ahead. Make My Day. . .

A couple of U*U bloggers sure picked a bad day to post a load of hypocritical U*U BS to their respective blogs. . .

I first came across the Socinian's blog post God Is Still Speaking in which "Fausto" (who no doubt jokingly suggests that he just might be the Anti-Christ in his blogger profile. . .) pretends that the slogan "God Is Still Speaking" "resonates" with U*Us. I responded by pointing out just how empty his rhetoric was, and it didn't take long for "Fausto" to start censoring my posts even though they were 100% on topic to his thread.

I then discovered that U*U hypocrite extraordinaire "Ms. Theologian" had posted the following to her blog -

Friday, July 13, 2007

Bigots in the Senate

When Jim and I saw this last night on the news, we couldn't quite believe what we were seeing: bigots yelling at a Hindu because they felt he shouldn't say a prayer in front of the Senate.

It's worth saying that Diana Eck of the Pluralism Project believes the United States is the most religiously diverse country on earth. Apart from the fact that I'm not particularly into prayers said outloud in workplaces, I think it's pretty awful that some people feel a non-Christian prayer needs to be shouted down. Pluralism seems to make Evangelical Christians extremely uncomfortable.

end quote

That's funny Ms. Theologian, so why is it that you apparently do not feel awful when bigots in the Unitarian*Universalist "religious community" not only "yell" at a Unitarian "church" member because they feel that he shouldn't hold an inter-religious celebration of Creation in their alleged "church"?

Why is it Ms. Theologian, that you and no shortage of other "like-minded" Unitarian*Universalist U*Us, apparently do not think that it's "pretty awful" that some U*Us feel that a very pluralistic inter-religious celebration of Creation not only needs to be "shouted down" but outright banned from being celebrated in an alleged Unitarian "church"?

Why is it Ms. Theologian, that you and no shortage of other "like-minded" Unitarian*Universalist U*Us, apparently do not think that it's "pretty awful" that some U*Us feel that a claimed revelation of God of considerable significance needs to be "shouted down" by Evangelical fundamentalist atheist "Unitarians"?

Pluralism, to say nothing of revelation. . . seems to make U*Us (and not just those evangelical fundamentalist atheist "Unitarians". . .) extremely uncomfortable doesn't it Ms. Theologian?

I cannot post this comment on Ms. Theologian's hypocritical post because she banned me from commenting on her blog a while back, but I can't help but take note of the following comment that she did see fit to allow to appear on her U*U blog -

I saw that headline. Couldn't read it. Can't watch the video either. Because next thing you'd see me on the news being arrested, with the headline "Terror in the Senate Building."

GhostGirl | Homepage | 07.13.07 - 3:33 pm | #

end quote

I wonder if Ms. Theologian will bother to notify the FBI and/or the Secret Service and/or the Department of Homeland Security about that comment which would seem to indicate that maybe just maybe GhostGirl might possibly commit a "personal serious injury offence" to some US senators? It would certainly appear that Ms. Theologian has far more "reasonable grounds" to believe that GhostGirl just might commit a "personal serious injury offence" against US senators than Montreal Unitarian hypocrite extraordinaire Rev. Diane Rollert has to believe that I might commit a "personal serious injury offence" against her or other Montreal Unitarian U*Us. . .

Labels: , ,

Thursday, July 05, 2007

Can Rev. Dr. Frederick Wooden And Other U*U Clergy Spell C-R-O-N-Y?

The Rev. Dr. W. Frederick Wooden senior minister of the Fountain Street Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan, aka The Ranting Rev. just asked me if I can spell C-R-O-N-Y in response to a post on his Ranting Rev blog. Here is my terse response to his public query that I just submitted as a follow-up comment. It will be interesting to see if it actually gets posted to this thread of his "moderated" U*U blog.

Be assured that I can spell C-R-O-N-Y Rev. Wooden. ;-)

end quote

Can you and other U*Us say C-R-O-N-Y when it comes to glaringly obvious U*U cronyism Rev. Wooden? Or is it possible that you and your fellow U*U cronies, er I mean your fellow U*U clergy. . . are beholden to the cronyish UUMA Guidelines that encourage, if not outright enforce. . . cronyish complicit silence amongst U*U clergy?

Note: There appears to be some kind of technical glitch with Google. If the link from the word C-R-O-N-Y above provides this result -

Your search - Rev. Victoria Weinstein and Rev. Beth Miller and Rev. Dr. Tracey Robinson-Harris - did not match any documents.

Just refresh the page and it should provide the correct link to the appropriate Google Groups search page that provides links to Google Groups posts that expose some big fat U*U eh cronyism in the negligent and complicit responses of the Director of the UUA's Congregational Services Staff Group, Rev. Dr. Tracey Robinson-Harris, and the UUA's Director of Ministry and Professional Leadership, Rev. Beth Miller, to Rev. Victoria Weinstein's outrageous "sodomy fantasy" and other insulting and defamatory language that most people would consider to be quite unbecoming of a minister.

Wednesday, July 04, 2007

Rev. Diane Rollert Is Courting Disaster On Behalf Of The Unitarian Church of Montreal

Well I had my first court appearance today with respect to the latest spurious criminal charges that have been brought against me by outrageously hypocritical Montreal Unitarian U*Us. I had expected to simply plead not guilty to these dubious criminal charges and have a first trial date scheduled today however things did not quite work out that way. . . Prior to today's court appearance I had no idea who was behind the latest criminal charges against me, although it was pretty obvious that it pretty well had to be one or more Montreal Unitarian U*Us. It was unclear however if these spurious criminal charges, by which someone was claiming that they had "reasonable grounds" to believe that I would commit a "serious physical injury offence" against another person, were being brought against me by the leadership of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, or if they were the result of a U*U loose cannon going off. Most ironically, as it turns out, it is indeed the leadership of the Unitarian Church of Montreal AND someone who might be considered to be something of a U*U "loose canon" as it were. . .

Yes, believe it or not, it is no less a figure than the brand spanking new minister of the alleged Unitarian Church of Montreal, Rev. Diane Rollert herself, who is the primary complainant in this case; although it does seem that she has the full approval and backing of the Board of the Unitarian Church of Montreal and most likely its so-called "Legal Action Committee". . . To be honest I was quite surprised to learn that it was Rev. Diane Rollert who was responsible for bringing these highly questionable criminal charges against me, albeit not *that* surprised based on some things that I have heard about the rather questionable role that she has chosen to take on in this ongoing conflict. I was not "thrown for a loop" by any means and I took it all in stride.

I am getting a little ahead of myself here however since a few interesting things happened before I learned that it is Rev. Diane Rollert who is pretending in formal written complaints to the Montreal police force to have "reasonable grounds" to fear that I might commit a "serious personal injury" offence against her. As I said, I was expecting to simply plead not guilty to the spurious charges and have an initial court date set. This did not happen. Instead I was informed that the prosecution were requesting/demanding that I sign an "810" which is a promise to "keep the peace" for a year and is effectively a kind of restraining order that would prevent me from continuing my peaceful public protest in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal.

I made it clear to the court that I had little or no intention of voluntarily signing any such document but I was persuaded to at least have a look at what was being proposed before rejecting it. I am a reasonable person and agreed to sit down with a legal aid lawyer who would explain to me what the "810" was all about. We met in a separate private room across the hall from the courtroom and the legal aid lawyer proceeded to fill me in on what an "810" was. It was during this conversation that I was informed that Rev. Diane Rollert was the complainant. The lawyer spoke of "events" that had taken place in the fall of last year, specifically the emails that I had sent to Rev. Rollert and my personal encounter with Rev. Rollert on Sunday November 19th, 2006 which is described in considerable detail in this Emerson Avenger blog post. Apparently Rev. Diane Rollert is pretending that some of the words and phrases in my emails constitute threats. Maybe U*Us can skim through the emails and try to guess just which words and phrases Rev. Diane Rollert, the apparently not so settled minister of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, is construing as "threats" that give her "reasonable grounds" to believe that I might commit a "serious physical injury" offence against her person.

I made it clear to the legal aid lawyer that I considered the charges of "criminal harassment" to be unfounded and that I fully intended to contest the charges. She hinted at the possibility that I could potentially be found guilty of the charges and that it was better to sign the "810" than risk a criminal record. I made it clear that I had no expectation of being found guilty of the charges and that I did not even need the services of a lawyer in this case due to the highly questionable nature if these dubious charges. The legal aid lawyer then said that I should at least have a look at what the conditions were and I agreed to do so, however it seems that the specific conditions of the "810" were not immediately available to her in the documentation that she had in her possession. The legal-aid lawyer asked me to wait while she looked into what conditions the "810" might entail. I figured that, one way or another, they probably entailed not coming with several hundred feet of the Unitarian Church of Montreal for a year. She said it would take her about half an hour to look into the conditions. I said that I would wait for her to return back in the courtroom.

About a half hour later the lawyer returned to the courtroom but she had to deal with another case or two. I was then called up to the witness stand and there seemed to be some confusion about what conditions were attached "810". It seems that the lawyer was unable to discover what they might be. The upshot is that the judge then began to ask the prosecutor to answer some questions about my case and the prosecutor seemed to be unable to satisfactorily answer the judge's questions. At one point the judge made a statement that seemed to indicate that he had some doubts about whether the charges, or perhaps certain other elements of the case, were well-founded. I cannot however be sure about that. In any case I never learned anything more about the "810" and the judge decided to set a new date for a "pro forma" hearing at the end of August. So not only did I not even plead yet, but no date for an actual trial will be set before the end of August at the earliest.

Before leaving the courtroom I requested that the court provide me with the dossier of the prosecution's evidence against me and I was given the file. The file contained the reports of the detective assigned to the case, police officers who were called to the Unitarian Church of Montreal in late November of 2006, although for some reason there does not appear to be a report from the two officers who actually arrested me on Sunday May 6th of this year, and of course Rev. Diane Rollert's written declarations to the police in which she claims to be a "victim of harassment" from yours truly, that my emails to her constituted "threats", and why she is "afraid" of me (indeed even "very frightened" of me) and believes that I am "being threatening" to her personally. I don't want to go into any more detail than that for the moment but the police reports, and Rev. Diane Rollert's highly questionable testimony, make for interesting reading.

I look forward to this case going all the way to trial so that I can fully and completely defend myself against these spurious criminal charges but I have a feeling that for a variety of reasons this case will not actually ever go to trial. In fact I expect that once Rev. Diane Rollert and the Unitarian Church of Montreal realize that Rev. Rollert's highly questionable testimony can be, and will be, very thoroughly questioned under cross-examination in a free and responsible effort to determine the truth (or lack thereof) and meaning of her allegations, some of which are quite ludicrous, to say nothing of bordering on perjurious. . . that they will probably drop their spurious charges like the rather hot potatoe that they are.

Not a bad way to celebrate Independence Day is it?

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Peacebang aka Rev. Victoria Weinstein Bitch*Slaps U*Us Upside The Head. . .

Depressing isn't it U*Us?

:Theology is apparently too hard to deal with any more — especially in a RELIGIOUS movement that has so many vehemently anti-religious members in it. . .

You forgot the euphemistic quotation marks enclosing "RELIGIOUS" Peacebang. And don't forget the anti-religious U*U clergy. . .

:We (i.e. U*Us) seem miserable to me. We (i.e. U*Us) certainly look miserable. Why shouldn’t we?

Good question Peacebang.

:Even the two well-loved and respected preachers at our Service of the Living Tradition preached about how they couldn’t manage to write their sermon, and took us through a lengthy, poetic description of their own confusion.

:Friends, I am simply reporting facts here. You decide what it means.

:Look at us, six thousand strong, gathering in plenaries with grim determination and harsh condemnation of those who think the wrong thoughts or believe the wrong things.

:An earnest evangelical Christian was passing out pamphlets of some sort on the street corner, and a UU man still wearing his GA nametag took one and crowed “Jesus Saaaaaves” in the mocking tones before tossing his pamphlet into the trash.

Yes, we the tolerant. We the accepting. We the rational.

:What do we offer to those who hunger for God?

Insult and injury Rev. Weinstein and you and other U*Us know it. . .

Sunday, July 01, 2007

A U*U Blog Devoted To CRAP on Sundays. . .

I just came across this U*U blog titled CRAP on Sundays. Apparently CRAP is an acronym for Church Regular Against Politics (on Sundays). Needless to say, within the context of the so-called U*U World CRAP could just as easily serve as an acronym for Callously Rude Atheist Pastors or Completely Revolting Atheist Propaganda. . .

I would have to say that that CRAP acronym goes very nicely with Mary Bennett's not so brand spanking new U*U "corporate identity" for the U*U religious community.

Feel free to provide other suggestions for what the CRAP acronym might stand for in the U*U World. I am quite sure that I can think of a few more things.

Clergy Raping Asian People comes to mind. . .