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
"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."
Does it feels somewhat liberating to wallow in prehistorical religious visions of Sun-Gods and the likes? I mean, fantasy is good, provided that it is does not want to replace objective facts and scientific proofs.
Fantasy novels are popular. One can write those instead of starting religions, or learning about religions.
Some people feel hurt by the fact that, more and more, scientific evidence come out that cast ridicule on religions. Therefore they react with rage, and... regress to "the old ways" of loyalty to authority, blind faith, unquestioning, and the comforting atmosphere of a childhood of forced gullibility.
As someone who frequently and publicly criticizes Robin for his treatment of UU bloggers, I feel obligated to come to his defense here. Religious revelation is not something one weighs on a triple beam balance, or measure with a micrometer. It is about why we live, not how. No truly important human question can be answered by science; if you haven't discovered that yet, you've led a charmed and fortunate life- and one that has never been troubled by examination or introspection. I am one of those who feels that an unexamined life is not worth living.
Faith is not the exclusive reserve of the ignorant and childlike: My lowest score of the three times I've taken an IQ test is 142, I attended Purdue, the cradle of astronauts- and I'm a Pagan. Sharing his revelation is the most laudable thing in Robin's life- my major complaint is not that he talks about it, but that he doesn't talk about it enough!
Actually Joel religious revelation, especially the prophetic kind, is as much about how we live as why we live. I am surprised that you haven't figured that out yet. . .
BTW I am still waiting for Montreal U*Us like Val Bourdon and many other U*Us, including U*U clergy like Rev. Ray Drennan, Rev. Victoria Weinstein, Rev. Diane Rollert and top-level UUA officials like Rev. Dr. John A. Buehrens, Rev. Bill Sinkford, Rev. Dr. Tracey Robinson-Harris and the two Rev. Millers. . . to responsibly examine how they have lived their lives in their far from right relations with me and other people. As this post shows clearly *demonstrates*, if U*Us insist on behaving like asses (or indeed outright assholes. . .) towards me and other people I am not beyond poking a little bit of fun at them. You have indeed frequently and publicly criticized me for my treatment of U*U bloggers, U*U bloggers who thoroughly deserve any public criticism or indeed ridicule that I not so graciously bestow on them, but I have yet to see you similarly publicly criticize any of the aforementioned U*Us or obnoxious U*U bloggers etc.
Sharing my revelation, even after being repeatedly crapped all over by U*Us may be amongst the most laudable things I have done in my life. If you don't think that I talk about it enough it just might have something to do with not enjoying being crapped all over by U*Us and other people when I do talk about it and also having to reserve an inordinate amount of my time to dealing with the attackers. I seem to recall you saying or implying that you would defend your pagan religious beliefs from the pouint of a gun. Too bad that you coulnd't even be bothered to write a few letters, or post a few blog posts, that might have persuaded U*Us to do what is necessary to resolve this ludicrously drawn out conflict. No, au contraire, you had to write this piece of DIM Thinking U*U BS that only encourages U*Us to continue to Deny, Ignore and Minimize the very real U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy that I am fighting against.
Here are a couple of quotes from the very links you provided: "Don't give me that crap, Robin. Who has been speaking on this issue on beliefnet, CFUU, etc.for as long as he's been on the internet? Who was it that said in "The Tragedy of Robin Edgar" that he believed you had been treated unfairly, even without knowing the people involved? That was me, Robin. I've been protesting anti-theism consistently, even stridently, and I've been doing it under my own name from day one. I have written to Rev Sinkford on the subject, and taken that stance both in forums and in real life in my own congregation. Don't insult me because my methods are different- I have every reason to believe they're more effective.", and "...Wherever they do not welcome you, as you are leaving that town shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.” They departed and went through the villages, bringing the good news and curing diseases everywhere. [Luke 9: 1-6]
Jesus didn't say, hang around in the villages that reject you haranguing them until they admit how churlishly they have behaved. He said, shake the dust off your feet and move on."
If you were more focused on your revelation, I could guide you to Pagan sites with hit counters in ten digits, all over the world. But they wouldn't tolerate attacks on the UUA- their "no attacking other religions" policy is part of why the have tens of millions of hits.
Shake the dust off your feet, Robin, and find new villages to share your vision with- they are out there. Take the leap of faith.
Anonymous said…
JOEL says: "Religious revelation is not something one weighs on a triple beam balance, or measure with a micrometer"
I believe some proper measure should be established in order to distinguish acceptable and verifiable discourses from unacceptable claims or even psychotic ramblings. "Revelations" to me often fall in some psychological category.
Sorry but why should one stating that a "solar eclipse" is the "eye of God" be granted more credibility of one stating he is the reincarnation of Napoleon?
If no clear measure is set between a verifiable claim and an unwarranted/fanciful statement, the world is going to be (and it is) a confused land of people each captive of their own madness and arbitrariness, and not caring for others enough to come out with some common sense, acceptable words.
:Here are a couple of quotes from the very links you provided: "Don't give me that crap, Robin. Who has been speaking on this issue on beliefnet, CFUU, etc.for as long as he's been on the internet? Who was it that said in "The Tragedy of Robin Edgar" that he believed you had been treated unfairly, even without knowing the people involved?
Only a moron would believe that I have not been "treated unfairly" by U*Us. Characterizing the unjustices and abuse that I have been subjected to by outrageously hypocritical U*Us as being "treated unfairly" is part and parcel of your DIM Thinking Denial, Ignorance, and, you got it. . . *Minimization* of the very well-documented injustices and abuses that I have endured.
:That was me, Robin. I've been protesting anti-theism consistently, even stridently, and I've been doing it under my own name from day one.
But for some bizarre reason you have failed to use an egregious example of U*U anti-theism to advance your arguments from day one. . .
:I have written to Rev Sinkford on the subject,
Let's see the letter(s) and President Bill Sinkford's response(s), assunming that he ever bothered to do so. . .
:and taken that stance both in forums and in real life in my own congregation. Don't insult me because my methods are different- I have every reason to believe they're more effective.",
I am not insulting you because your "methods are different." I am criticizing you for doing nothing, or next to nothing, to see to it that the egregious anti-religious intolerance and bigotry that I have been exposing and denouncing for over a decade now is responsibly addressed and adequately redressesd by the UUA and the Unitarian Church of Montreal.
:and "...Wherever they do not welcome you, as you are leaving that town shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.” They departed and went through the villages, bringing the good news and curing diseases everywhere. [Luke 9: 1-6]
:Jesus didn't say, hang around in the villages that reject you haranguing them until they admit how churlishly they have behaved. He said, shake the dust off your feet and move on."
The last time I checked I am not a Christian, and in any case Jesus failed to practice what he preached himself. The day I shake the dust off my feet and move on a whole lot of U*Us are going to choke on the dust. . .
:If you were more focused on your revelation, I could guide you to Pagan sites with hit counters in ten digits, all over the world.
I am pretty sure I could find them myself if I decided to look for them. What makes you so sure I am not already aware of them?
:But they wouldn't tolerate attacks on the UUA-
The UUA is thoroughly deserving of any and all "attacks" I make on it. If these pagans won't tolerate people criticizing the UUA for the various injustices and abuses that it perpetratres and/or perpetuates I am not sure I want much to do with them.
:their "no attacking other religions" policy is part of why the have tens of millions of hits.
It is debatable as to whether the UUA can even be considered to be religion Joel. . .
:Shake the dust off your feet, Robin, and find new villages to share your vision with- they are out there. Take the leap of faith.
I *am* sharing my vision with other "villages" Joel. That does not mean I won't stop giving outrageously hypocritical U*Us a good virtual slap upside the head every now and then. . .
Well, anonymous, even atheists can agree with "by their fruits you shall know them". You have used words and phrases such as "wallow in prehistorical religious visions", "fantasy", "cast ridicule on religions.", "loyalty to authority, blind faith, unquestioning,", "a childhood of forced gullibility.", "psychotic ramblings", "some psychological category", "reincarnation of Napoleon?", "unwarranted/fanciful statement", and "madness and arbitrariness,".
To me those do NOT sound like "some common sense, acceptable words." They do not sound like the words of a compassionate or caring individual. They sound like the words of someone who looks down on his fellow man with arrogant contempt. They sound like the words of a man who enjoys hurting people, who would prefer bullying them into submission over convincing them. They sound like the words of a man who would use police run mental hospitals to control dissidents, as the communists did. Of the three of us in this conversation, YOU are the one presenting a clear and present danger to liberty, democracy, and yes, sanity.
Make no mistake here. My beef with Robin is over a specific issue: how he is dealing with UU bloggers who had no association with his original injury. But as a man, I would trust him with my money or my wife. He is a good man. Yes, his pain has caused him to strike out in ways that have hurt others- but through everything, he has never ridiculed another's core beliefs, never tried to strip them of their joys and comforts that their religion brings. He has found something to fill the God shaped hole in the human heart, and you would cut that out of him- and everyone else.
Robin and I may never resolve our argument, may never walk hand in hand- but we are walking in the same direction. You would destroy both our paths.
I shan't post the letter, as it did not mention you by name- the subject of both the letter, and the quote referring to it, was my defense of faith in the face of aggressive atheists in the pulpit. I did, however, print out before and after versions of the official UUA "Language of Reverence" forum, showing how all of your posts, and many of mine and others', had been deleted while highly offensive atheists' post were allowed to stand, and gave them to my minister (who was shocked) to take to GA- I mentioned this some years ago on the AUC forum, you may recall.
I have not done "next to nothing" about anti-theism THAT I HAVE PERSONALLY WITNESSED. I have not written to Sinkford of your fight with Drennan and the UCM- how would such a letter be received? "Some guy I don't know from Adam says that some guy HE doesn't know from Adam attacked someone ELSE he doesn't know from Adam, and his evidence is the word of one of those guys he doesn't know from Adam!" That's not a hill I'm willing to die on. On the other hand, I have verbally supported your protest of the UCM; the only other thing I could in good concience do is buy you a box of chalk- which I will, if you ask.
But I have spoken against attacks on faith in all forums I am a member of, and vigorously- the old AUC forums, the CFUUForum, many Beliefnet forums, and my own blog are full of such defences of faith and you know it. I just don't do so on heresay evidence.
I haven't written the UUA over the abuse you've received from UU bloggers because you've frankly earned some of it. your comment spamming can be very irritating, and i don't blame people for getting angry over it. Your choice of words is frequently far more hurtful than you realize- at least I hope so, because I'd hate to think you can hurt people that badly intentionally. Yes, many of the responses have been disproportionate- but you're in the position of baiting a pitbull and then complaining because he bit harder than you thought he would. The real cure is to stop baiting him.
How do I know you haven't found the sites I speak of? Only because they would welcome essays on your vision with open arms, and I haven't seen them.
As to the scripture about shaking dust, you don't have to be a Christian to recognize good advice when you see it. I'm not a Christian either, and yet many Biblical quotes have found their way into my book of shadows. Here's another quote for you: "You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar."
Anonymous said…
Joel writes: "To me those do NOT sound like "some common sense, acceptable words." They do not sound like the words of a compassionate or caring individual. They sound like the words of someone who looks down on his fellow man with arrogant contempt."
I see your point. But the truth of the fact is that while you think that my words are unacceptably mordacious, I see that a large number who claim to be "compassionate or caring individuals", because of their religion and because they deem they possess the ultimate, unquestionable truth (which to them does not even require proof, and indeed it does not have any truth), they wage wars, conflicts, promote intolerance towards those who do not comply with their views, and the result, overall, is far more heinous than any lively debate.
I, personally, would never endorse any law prohibiting religion (though I would gladly welcome laws that protect, for instance, children's right not to be indoctrinated, and not to be exposed to visions, including religious visions, that are psychologically unhealthy, and unrespectful of their integrity and nature), but would - or do - religious people even wonder what the effects of their arbitrary views could be?
What's the general effect, in the world of, say, condemning premarital sex, contraceptives, condoms, bashing gays, preaching eye for eye, treating other religions as "lesser paths to truth", treating atheists as "instruments of Satan", not accepting the results of science (and thus spreading ignorance) if they clash with the the views of books written thousands of years ago by sheperds or the like, who did not even know if the world was round?
And how many wars, and millions of people, have died because of religion, rather than because of its lack?
Compared to all the above, incisive tones in a debate are a little thing.
Now my point is the following. Science and rational, verifiable arguments are the most democratic thing you can have, or at least the closest thing to criteria of democratic debate. On the other hand, Whenever you have people talking about a "God", there you have some who boost their assertions with a claimed "something" that they do not even care to prove, and that is indeed a factor of conflict. That's were the problem lies.
A problem that, as I said above, is responsible of far crueller and brutal outcomes than lack of etiquette.
Lastly, I would like to add that any source of improvement of the human condition is welcome, including "old books". But provided they are considered what they are, the result of an entirely human, thus fallible, activity.
Bible, Qran, etc. etc. should be simply seen as books which may have some good parts that are inspiring, and many others that are utterly wrong. I am prepared to get what the good from any source. But I am not prepared to blindly accept, nor to encourage anyone to blindly accept, opinions that claim to be "divine", perfect, unquestionable and right by definition, as this spreads intolerance and ignorance.
I would surely encourage proper thinking and expression of arguments that are verifiable, rational, based on evidence, and true only as long they are not proved false.
Otherwise you will have a world in which some people may think that it is reasonable to believe that earth is 6000 years old only because it was so stated 2000 years ago in a book "inspired by god", and even that that should be taught at school (as if science and religions were on the same level). Or a world in which some will think they will be "saved" if the bash (or even physically hurt) this and that.
:I shan't post the letter, as it did not mention you by name-
That is totally beside the point Joel.
:the subject of both the letter, and the quote referring to it, was my defense of faith in the face of aggressive atheists in the pulpit.
So let's see it and let's see just how President Bill Sinkford responded to it, assuming that he responded to it at all. . .
:I did, however, print out before and after versions of the official UUA "Language of Reverence" forum,
'of' or 'in'? Are you saying that versions of the letter are already available online? Please provide URLs if so. Please also let us know how President Bill Sinkford responded to your letter.
:showing how all of your posts, and many of mine and others', had been deleted while highly offensive atheists' post were allowed to stand,
Par for the course for U*Us. . . I seem to recall demanding that President Bill Sinkford should take steps to responsibly deal with egregious UUA censorship and suppression of legitimate criticism and dissent but, to my knowledge, he has not done so.
:and gave them to my minister (who was shocked) to take to GA- I mentioned this some years ago on the AUC forum, you may recall.
No I do not recall that. How about providing a URL? What, if anything, happened at GA? Just how "effective" were your efforts?
:I have not done "next to nothing" about anti-theism THAT I HAVE PERSONALLY WITNESSED.
You have PERSONALLY WITNESSED exactly how the Unitarian Church of Montreal, the UUA and its very aptly named Ministerial Fellowship Committee, have responded to my grievances about U*U anti-religious intolerance and bigotry aka anti-theism. You have seen blog post, verbatim copies of letters and email correspondence between me and U*Us in positions of responsiblity in this matter, online news reports and other reliable information. You have done nothing or next to nothing to be of any help in resolving this conflict but have most definitely been a hindrance in this conflict.
:I have not written to Sinkford of your fight with Drennan and the UCM- how would such a letter be received? "Some guy I don't know from Adam says that some guy HE doesn't know from Adam attacked someone ELSE he doesn't know from Adam, and his evidence is the word of one of those guys he doesn't know from Adam!" That's not a hill I'm willing to die on.
Actually what you just posted above is a hill of U*U BS Joel. There is more than enough available evidence for you to know that Rev. Ray Drennan said what I am accusing him of saying and that both the UUA and the Unitarian Church of Montreal not only did nothing to provide any just, equitable or compassionate redress for my serious grievances, but responded to them with egregious institutional stonewalling and denial and outright punitive expulsions. You know very well that U*Us have even had me falsely arrested on trumped up crinminal charges that I was rightly acquitted of but yet you have not only maintained complicit silence about these outrageously hypocritical U*U injustices and abuses but have condescendingly criticized me for standing up gfor myself and other victims of U*U injustices and abuses.
:On the other hand, I have verbally supported your protest of the UCM; the only other thing I could in good concience do is buy you a box of chalk- which I will, if you ask.
You can do a lot more than that Joel. I have all the chalk I need right now. You'd be surprised at just how much sidewalk chalk you can buy for ten bucks or so. . .
:But I have spoken against attacks on faith in all forums I am a member of, and vigorously- the old AUC forums, the CFUUForum, many Beliefnet forums, and my own blog are full of such defences of faith and you know it. I just don't do so on heresay evidence.
More DIM Thinking U*U BS Joel. You know perfectly well that what I have posted to the internet goes well beyond hearsay evidence.
Does this look like hearsay evidence to you? How about this or this or indeed this? I could go on and on and on. . . but I think that I have already more than adequately made my point. Come to think of it your rather tragic blog post about me contains a fair bit of your own "hearsay evidence" in it. I had better get around to finally rebutting your U*U BS Joel.
:I haven't written the UUA over the abuse you've received from UU bloggers because you've frankly earned some of it.
Oh really Joel? Perhaps you can explain how I earned Rev. Victoria Weinstein's abuse months before I even became aware of the U*U blogosphere. . . There is plenty of U*U abuse of me and other people evident here and elsewhere on the internet but that is not what I am referring to. I am referring to the fact that you did nothing at all with respect to my trials and tribulations with the Unitarian Church of Montreal and the UUA. . .
:your comment spamming can be very irritating, and i don't blame people for getting angry over it.
As a rule my alleged comment spamming is on topic to the themes of the posts that I comment on. It is usually only those U*Us who censor and suppress my comments who get spammed by me.
:Your choice of words is frequently far more hurtful than you realize- at least I hope so, because I'd hate to think you can hurt people that badly intentionally.
Be assured that I am perfectly aware of just how hurtful my carefully chosen words can be and that I usually only direct hurtful words at those U*Us who have used hurtful words against me and/or other people first.
:Yes, many of the responses have been disproportionate- but you're in the position of baiting a pitbull and then complaining because he bit harder than you thought he would.
Actually I would say that you have that U*U backwards Joel. . . U*Us have been baiting this little pitbull and then have been complaining because he bit harder than they thought he would. N'est-ce pas Joel?
:The real cure is to stop baiting him.
Indeed it is. Perhaps you should inform your U*U friends about that. . .
:How do I know you haven't found the sites I speak of? Only because they would welcome essays on your vision with open arms, and I haven't seen them.
Well I guess they haven't found my essays either then. It's not like they were hard to find with appropriate Google searches when they were available online and received more than a million page views all told.
:As to the scripture about shaking dust, you don't have to be a Christian to recognize good advice when you see it.
As I said. Even Jesus, to say nothing of his follwers. . . failed to heed his own good advice. Had he heeded his own advice he might not have been crucified. . .
:I'm not a Christian either, and yet many Biblical quotes have found their way into my book of shadows. Here's another quote for you: "You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar."
I tried using honey on U*Us, more than once, but unfortunately I got shit on by anti-theistic U*Us and all my U*U "friends" stood by and let it happen. I think that a high colonic is in order now Joel. . .
Anonymous said…
You know, posting pictures of Val that make him look like a sad, lonely old man only makes you look like a bully.
:You know, posting pictures of Val that make him look like a sad, lonely old man only makes you look like a bully.
I am aware of that possibility and I expect that Val Bourdon is something of a sad, lonely old man. . . That doesn`t change the fact that he is also an U*U and is fully capable of being a bit of an S.O.B. Val Bourdon is one of the more objectionable fundamentalist atheist "Humanist" U*Us at the Unitarian Church of Montreal, and he is very much responsible for perpetrating, perpetuating, escalating, and aggravating the injustices and abuses that I have been subjected to by Montreal Unitarian U*Us. Poking a little bit of fun at Val by pointing out what an U*U he is, is mild compared to the crap that I have had to put up with from him. Val Bourdon is certainly guilty of aiding and abetting the bullying that I have been subjected to by Rev. Ray Drennan and other Montreal U*Us, indeed he may be considered to be something of a bully himself in that he has supported the bullying. If I give him an embarrassing public spanking am I really being a "bully" myself?
Robin- no my personal correspondence has never been online. As to the "Language of Reverence" forum, I had actually printed out our posts; then, when I went back, they had been deleted- so I printed that out, too. If there is any way of retrieving it online, I wouldn't know how. The same goes for the old AUC forums- I don't know how to access those, only the new forum comes up.
As to your evidence- yes, it IS hearsay to ME. Be sensible- what kind of evidence is "I read in a blog a retyped copy of a letter that spoke about an incident, the exact details of which are known only to the principals?" Yes, I've read the newspaper stories about you being arrested- and those stories contain no first hand evidence, because the reporter is relying on your words and their words. I've already said I believe you, but I cannot take my belief to a hearing as proof. Nothing I could say would be in any way meaningful.
As to whether those Pagan sites could find your essays if they Googled for them, well duh- but if they've never heard of you, why would they be Googling for you? And the reason they've never heard of you is that you're spending all your time doing this rather than fulfilling your mission.
Anonymous: Don't talk about fundamentalist Christians- you posted your comment HERE, not at some anti-evolution site. Robin is not a Christian, and neither am I. My beliefs are on record in my blog; use the "My Pagan Beliefs" search label. If you can find anything there resembling anything you wrote about, let me know. Otherwise, go abuse someone that you think you have the wisdom to decide deserves it.
:As to your evidence- yes, it IS hearsay to ME. Be sensible- what kind of evidence is "I read in a blog a retyped copy of a letter that spoke about an incident, the exact details of which are known only to the principals?"
You are the one who is being rather less than sensible Joel. You don't need to know the "exact details" to have a very good idea of what happened between me and Rev. ray Drennan but, in any case. . . you know what happened as a result of my filing a complaint against him. Do you really think that I would post fabricated or seriously altered letters and emails to the internet? They are not retyped at all. They are either carefully proof-read and corrected OCR scans of actual letters on paper or they are copied and pasted emails strings straight out of my sent and/or received email folders. You and any other U*U can read exactly how UUA officials and/or representatives of the Unitarian Church of Montreal have responded to my serious grievances. Do you really think I in any way misrepresented what Rev. Drennan said to me? It should be perfectly obvious from all of the circumstantial evidence that is readily available to you, including his sorry excuse for an apology. . . that he said what I accused him of saying. Let's face it. Rev. Diane Miller did not even dispute that he said what he said, she just whitewashed Drennan by proclaiming that Rev. Ray Drennan's obviously intolerant and abusive attack on me, as I had described it in detail in my initial letters of grievance. . . "seemed to us to be within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadership." What more evidence do you need Joel?
:Yes, I've read the newspaper stories about you being arrested- and those stories contain no first hand evidence,
ROTFLMU*UO What? No first hand evidence that deeply misguided DIM Thinking U*Us had actually had me arrested on trumped up criminal charges in order to force an end to my protest? No first hand evidence that Rev. Charles Eddis, minister emeritus of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, condoned that misuse and abuse of the Canadian Criminal Code in a futile U*U attempt to over-ride my constitutional right to peaceful public protest. This in spite of teh fact that he claims in a U*U tract that he wrote that U*Us "are opposed to censorship by church, state or any other institution" yadda, yadda, yadda? There is no shortage of hard evidence that Montreal Unitarians and the UUA have repeatedly made a total mockery of pretty much every pertinent principle, purpose, and ideal that U*Us purport to "affirm and promote".
:because the reporter is relying on your words and their words.
And we're both talking through our hats? My picket sign slogans are based upon psychotic delusions? We both imagined that I had been arrested? What version of reality do you live in Joel? Do you believe *anything* you rewad in the newspapers, see on TV, or hear on the radio? Or is it all just "hearsay evidence" until you actually experience it yourself?
:I've already said I believe you, but I cannot take my belief to a hearing as proof.
Who said you had to do that Joel? Heck you and other U*Us could easily hedge our bets by writing to the UUA and saying that you don't know exactly what is going on but there is clearly an injustice occurring and demanding that the UUA respionsibly investigate the matter and then take appropriate action to ensure a genuinely just, equitable and compassionate resolution to the dispute. But no. . .
:Nothing I could say would be in any way meaningful.
Hmmm. . . Come to think of it, based on your own "heresay evidence" in your tragic blog post about me, yuou may be right. . .
:As to whether those Pagan sites could find your essays if they Googled for them, well duh- but if they've never heard of you, why would they be Googling for you?
They might be Googling for any number of other things Joel and find my eclipse lore web sites. They all had very high Google ranking for appropriate keywords like "Eye of Horus" and "Eye of God" etc.
:And the reason they've never heard of you is that you're spending all your time doing this rather than fulfilling your mission.
Wrong again Joel. I am hardly spending all my time doing this. Abnd just what is my "mission" anyway Joel? Please be so kind as to tell me all about what my "mission" is. Need I remind you that one of the main reasons that I am "doing this" is because the slanderous damaging lies told about me by Rev. Ray Drennan and other U*Us, as well as the unjust punitive responses of Montreal U*Us harms my ability to undertake ANY religious mission. How do I successfully undertake any "mission" when I have all this U*U shit sticking to me that outrageously hypocritical U*U assholes refuse to clean up? Pray tell. . .
I don't know what your mission is, but I don't think the Divine sends visions for no reason at all- and I cannot believe the Divine sent you to out Peacebang, or to irritate British Unitarians who aren't even affiliated with us.
As to how to undertake a mission with all that UU stuff hanging all over you, just let go. Nobody would have ever heard of the UCM if you hadn't talked about them. Nobody is keeping this alive but you- they're not picketing your house, they didn't start a blog for the express purpose of harrassing you, they don't comment-spam every UU blogger and/or forum with links about you. Without you, no one outside of that congregation would have ever heard of Drennan. Had you walked away ten years ago, nobody would have ever heard of the squabble, and your wit would have made you a big man in the blogosphere. Even now, you could walk away- UUs are only 1/10th of 1 percent of the population, and only a tiny percentage of that blogs- the world at large still hasn't heard of you or the UCM, and could hear your message without prejudice.
You prove my point most eloquently, Robin. Every one of the links was YOU keeping the fight going, not the UCM. You posting off topic on UU blogs from places like Croatia, where they are not affilliated with the UUA. None of the first couple pages worth of links were posted about you by Drennan, or a Montreal congregate- they were all YOUR posts and comments. Had you let it go, none of those posts would exist. The UU stuff isn't sticking to you, you are hugging it to yourself.
Anonymous said…
Of course, being UU and paganism religions too, at least in some respects, it is not surprising that much vehemence emerges over nothing or less than nothing, however quaint, folkloristic or colourful that nothing may be.
Actually you are proving my point that for a guy who boasts about am IQ higher than 140 yopu can be a real idiot Joel.
:Every one of the links was YOU keeping the fight going, not the UCM.
What a joke. What links are you talking about Joel? There are few links in this thread so you must be talking about links elsewhere. The UCM has most certainly kept this fight going by unjustly, unequitably and uncompassionately threatening me with expulsion i order to silence me, by repeatedly expelling me, and by bringing trumped up criminal charges against me etc. If the Unitarian Church of Montreal wants this fight to end it has to acknowledge the injustices and abuses that it is clearly and unequivocally guilting of perpetrating and perpetuating.
:You posting off topic on UU blogs from places like Croatia, where they are not affilliated with the UUA.
They are still U*Us who may be copncerned about whaty happens in the U*U World beyond the confines of Croatia, or wherever else I may have posted, and you know very well that the vast majority of my posts are confined to North American blogs and forums.
:None of the first couple pages worth of links were posted about you by Drennan, or a Montreal congregate - they were all YOUR posts and comments. Had you let it go, none of those posts would exist. The UU stuff isn't sticking to you, you are hugging it to yourself.
Wrong Joel. The false and malicious allegations of Rev. Ray Drennan and other U*U BS are sticking to me because U*Us in positions of responsibility at the Unitarian Church of Montreal and the UUA obstinately refuse to do the right thing and acknowledge the wrongfulness and harmfulness of these insulting and defamatory allegations and clean up the mess they created.
:Anonymous said... Of course, being UU and paganism religions too, at least in some respects, it is not surprising that much vehemence emerges over nothing or less than nothing, however quaint, folkloristic or colourful that nothing may be.
Being labeled "psychotic" by a U*U monister and having that "diagnosis" deemed as being "within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadershiop" by top level UUA officials is not "nothing" oh so Anonymous asshole, U*U asshole or otherwise. . . Ditto for having one's religious events falsely and maliciously labeled as a "cult" and the various other injustices and abuses previously mentioned in this thread.
Comments
Does it feels somewhat liberating to wallow in prehistorical religious visions of Sun-Gods and the likes? I mean, fantasy is good, provided that it is does not want to replace objective facts and scientific proofs.
Fantasy novels are popular. One can write those instead of starting religions, or learning about religions.
Some people feel hurt by the fact that, more and more, scientific evidence come out that cast ridicule on religions. Therefore they react with rage, and... regress to "the old ways" of loyalty to authority, blind faith, unquestioning, and the comforting atmosphere of a childhood of forced gullibility.
Faith is not the exclusive reserve of the ignorant and childlike: My lowest score of the three times I've taken an IQ test is 142, I attended Purdue, the cradle of astronauts- and I'm a Pagan. Sharing his revelation is the most laudable thing in Robin's life- my major complaint is not that he talks about it, but that he doesn't talk about it enough!
BTW I am still waiting for Montreal U*Us like Val Bourdon and many other U*Us, including U*U clergy like Rev. Ray Drennan, Rev. Victoria Weinstein, Rev. Diane Rollert and top-level UUA officials like Rev. Dr. John A. Buehrens, Rev. Bill Sinkford, Rev. Dr. Tracey Robinson-Harris and the two Rev. Millers. . . to responsibly examine how they have lived their lives in their far from right relations with me and other people. As this post shows clearly *demonstrates*, if U*Us insist on behaving like asses (or indeed outright assholes. . .) towards me and other people I am not beyond poking a little bit of fun at them. You have indeed frequently and publicly criticized me for my treatment of U*U bloggers, U*U bloggers who thoroughly deserve any public criticism or indeed ridicule that I not so graciously bestow on them, but I have yet to see you similarly publicly criticize any of the aforementioned U*Us or obnoxious U*U bloggers etc.
Sharing my revelation, even after being repeatedly crapped all over by U*Us may be amongst the most laudable things I have done in my life. If you don't think that I talk about it enough it just might have something to do with not enjoying being crapped all over by U*Us and other people when I do talk about it and also having to reserve an inordinate amount of my time to dealing with the attackers. I seem to recall you saying or implying that you would defend your pagan religious beliefs from the pouint of a gun. Too bad that you coulnd't even be bothered to write a few letters, or post a few blog posts, that might have persuaded U*Us to do what is necessary to resolve this ludicrously drawn out conflict. No, au contraire, you had to write this piece of DIM Thinking U*U BS that only encourages U*Us to continue to Deny, Ignore and Minimize the very real U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy that I am fighting against.
Jesus didn't say, hang around in the villages that reject you haranguing them until they admit how churlishly they have behaved. He said, shake the dust off your feet and move on."
If you were more focused on your revelation, I could guide you to Pagan sites with hit counters in ten digits, all over the world. But they wouldn't tolerate attacks on the UUA- their "no attacking other religions" policy is part of why the have tens of millions of hits.
Shake the dust off your feet, Robin, and find new villages to share your vision with- they are out there. Take the leap of faith.
I believe some proper measure should be established in order to distinguish acceptable and verifiable discourses from unacceptable claims or even psychotic ramblings. "Revelations" to me often fall in some psychological category.
Sorry but why should one stating that a "solar eclipse" is the "eye of God" be granted more credibility of one stating he is the reincarnation of Napoleon?
If no clear measure is set between a verifiable claim and an unwarranted/fanciful statement, the world is going to be (and it is) a confused land of people each captive of their own madness and arbitrariness, and not caring for others enough to come out with some common sense, acceptable words.
Only a moron would believe that I have not been "treated unfairly" by U*Us. Characterizing the unjustices and abuse that I have been subjected to by outrageously hypocritical U*Us as being "treated unfairly" is part and parcel of your DIM Thinking Denial, Ignorance, and, you got it. . . *Minimization* of the very well-documented injustices and abuses that I have endured.
:That was me, Robin. I've been protesting anti-theism consistently, even stridently, and I've been doing it under my own name from day one.
But for some bizarre reason you have failed to use an egregious example of U*U anti-theism to advance your arguments from day one. . .
:I have written to Rev Sinkford on the subject,
Let's see the letter(s) and President Bill Sinkford's response(s), assunming that he ever bothered to do so. . .
:and taken that stance both in forums and in real life in my own congregation. Don't insult me because my methods are different- I have every reason to believe they're more effective.",
I am not insulting you because your "methods are different." I am criticizing you for doing nothing, or next to nothing, to see to it that the egregious anti-religious intolerance and bigotry that I have been exposing and denouncing for over a decade now is responsibly addressed and adequately redressesd by the UUA and the Unitarian Church of Montreal.
:and "...Wherever they do not welcome you, as you are leaving that town shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.” They departed and went through the villages, bringing the good news and curing diseases everywhere. [Luke 9: 1-6]
:Jesus didn't say, hang around in the villages that reject you haranguing them until they admit how churlishly they have behaved. He said, shake the dust off your feet and move on."
The last time I checked I am not a Christian, and in any case Jesus failed to practice what he preached himself. The day I shake the dust off my feet and move on a whole lot of U*Us are going to choke on the dust. . .
:If you were more focused on your revelation, I could guide you to Pagan sites with hit counters in ten digits, all over the world.
I am pretty sure I could find them myself if I decided to look for them. What makes you so sure I am not already aware of them?
:But they wouldn't tolerate attacks on the UUA-
The UUA is thoroughly deserving of any and all "attacks" I make on it. If these pagans won't tolerate people criticizing the UUA for the various injustices and abuses that it perpetratres and/or perpetuates I am not sure I want much to do with them.
:their "no attacking other religions" policy is part of why the have tens of millions of hits.
It is debatable as to whether the UUA can even be considered to be religion Joel. . .
:Shake the dust off your feet, Robin, and find new villages to share your vision with- they are out there. Take the leap of faith.
I *am* sharing my vision with other "villages" Joel. That does not mean I won't stop giving outrageously hypocritical U*Us a good virtual slap upside the head every now and then. . .
To me those do NOT sound like "some common sense, acceptable words." They do not sound like the words of a compassionate or caring individual. They sound like the words of someone who looks down on his fellow man with arrogant contempt. They sound like the words of a man who enjoys hurting people, who would prefer bullying them into submission over convincing them. They sound like the words of a man who would use police run mental hospitals to control dissidents, as the communists did. Of the three of us in this conversation, YOU are the one presenting a clear and present danger to liberty, democracy, and yes, sanity.
Make no mistake here. My beef with Robin is over a specific issue: how he is dealing with UU bloggers who had no association with his original injury. But as a man, I would trust him with my money or my wife. He is a good man. Yes, his pain has caused him to strike out in ways that have hurt others- but through everything, he has never ridiculed another's core beliefs, never tried to strip them of their joys and comforts that their religion brings. He has found something to fill the God shaped hole in the human heart, and you would cut that out of him- and everyone else.
Robin and I may never resolve our argument, may never walk hand in hand- but we are walking in the same direction. You would destroy both our paths.
I have not done "next to nothing" about anti-theism THAT I HAVE PERSONALLY WITNESSED. I have not written to Sinkford of your fight with Drennan and the UCM- how would such a letter be received? "Some guy I don't know from Adam says that some guy HE doesn't know from Adam attacked someone ELSE he doesn't know from Adam, and his evidence is the word of one of those guys he doesn't know from Adam!" That's not a hill I'm willing to die on. On the other hand, I have verbally supported your protest of the UCM; the only other thing I could in good concience do is buy you a box of chalk- which I will, if you ask.
But I have spoken against attacks on faith in all forums I am a member of, and vigorously- the old AUC forums, the CFUUForum, many Beliefnet forums, and my own blog are full of such defences of faith and you know it. I just don't do so on heresay evidence.
I haven't written the UUA over the abuse you've received from UU bloggers because you've frankly earned some of it. your comment spamming can be very irritating, and i don't blame people for getting angry over it. Your choice of words is frequently far more hurtful than you realize- at least I hope so, because I'd hate to think you can hurt people that badly intentionally. Yes, many of the responses have been disproportionate- but you're in the position of baiting a pitbull and then complaining because he bit harder than you thought he would. The real cure is to stop baiting him.
How do I know you haven't found the sites I speak of? Only because they would welcome essays on your vision with open arms, and I haven't seen them.
As to the scripture about shaking dust, you don't have to be a Christian to recognize good advice when you see it. I'm not a Christian either, and yet many Biblical quotes have found their way into my book of shadows. Here's another quote for you: "You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar."
I see your point. But the truth of the fact is that while you think that my words are unacceptably mordacious, I see that a large number who claim to be "compassionate or caring individuals", because of their religion and because they deem they possess the ultimate, unquestionable truth (which to them does not even require proof, and indeed it does not have any truth), they wage wars, conflicts, promote intolerance towards those who do not comply with their views, and the result, overall, is far more heinous than any lively debate.
I, personally, would never endorse any law prohibiting religion (though I would gladly welcome laws that protect, for instance, children's right not to be indoctrinated, and not to be exposed to visions, including religious visions, that are psychologically unhealthy, and unrespectful of their integrity and nature), but would - or do - religious people even wonder what the effects of their arbitrary views could be?
What's the general effect, in the world of, say, condemning premarital sex, contraceptives, condoms, bashing gays, preaching eye for eye, treating other religions as "lesser paths to truth", treating atheists as "instruments of Satan", not accepting the results of science (and thus spreading ignorance) if they clash with the the views of books written thousands of years ago by sheperds or the like, who did not even know if the world was round?
And how many wars, and millions of people, have died because of religion, rather than because of its lack?
Compared to all the above, incisive tones in a debate are a little thing.
Now my point is the following. Science and rational, verifiable arguments are the most democratic thing you can have, or at least the closest thing to criteria of democratic debate. On the other hand, Whenever you have people talking about a "God", there you have some who boost their assertions with a claimed "something" that they do not even care to prove, and that is indeed a factor of conflict. That's were the problem lies.
A problem that, as I said above, is responsible of far crueller and brutal outcomes than lack of etiquette.
Lastly, I would like to add that any source of improvement of the human condition is welcome, including "old books". But provided they are considered what they are, the result of an entirely human, thus fallible, activity.
Bible, Qran, etc. etc. should be simply seen as books which may have some good parts that are inspiring, and many others that are utterly wrong. I am prepared to get what the good from any source. But I am not prepared to blindly accept, nor to encourage anyone to blindly accept, opinions that claim to be "divine", perfect, unquestionable and right by definition, as this spreads intolerance and ignorance.
I would surely encourage proper thinking and expression of arguments that are verifiable, rational, based on evidence, and true only as long they are not proved false.
Otherwise you will have a world in which some people may think that it is reasonable to believe that earth is 6000 years old only because it was so stated 2000 years ago in a book "inspired by god", and even that that should be taught at school (as if science and religions were on the same level). Or a world in which some will think they will be "saved" if the bash (or even physically hurt) this and that.
That is totally beside the point Joel.
:the subject of both the letter, and the quote referring to it, was my defense of faith in the face of aggressive atheists in the pulpit.
So let's see it and let's see just how President Bill Sinkford responded to it, assuming that he responded to it at all. . .
:I did, however, print out before and after versions of the official UUA "Language of Reverence" forum,
'of' or 'in'? Are you saying that versions of the letter are already available online? Please provide URLs if so. Please also let us know how President Bill Sinkford responded to your letter.
:showing how all of your posts, and many of mine and others', had been deleted while highly offensive atheists' post were allowed to stand,
Par for the course for U*Us. . . I seem to recall demanding that President Bill Sinkford should take steps to responsibly deal with egregious UUA censorship and suppression of legitimate criticism and dissent but, to my knowledge, he has not done so.
:and gave them to my minister (who was shocked) to take to GA- I mentioned this some years ago on the AUC forum, you may recall.
No I do not recall that. How about providing a URL? What, if anything, happened at GA? Just how "effective" were your efforts?
:I have not done "next to nothing" about anti-theism THAT I HAVE PERSONALLY WITNESSED.
You have PERSONALLY WITNESSED exactly how the Unitarian Church of Montreal, the UUA and its very aptly named Ministerial Fellowship Committee, have responded to my grievances about U*U anti-religious intolerance and bigotry aka anti-theism. You have seen blog post, verbatim copies of letters and email correspondence between me and U*Us in positions of responsiblity in this matter, online news reports and other reliable information. You have done nothing or next to nothing to be of any help in resolving this conflict but have most definitely been a hindrance in this conflict.
:I have not written to Sinkford of your fight with Drennan and the UCM- how would such a letter be received? "Some guy I don't know from Adam says that some guy HE doesn't know from Adam attacked someone ELSE he doesn't know from Adam, and his evidence is the word of one of those guys he doesn't know from Adam!" That's not a hill I'm willing to die on.
Actually what you just posted above is a hill of U*U BS Joel. There is more than enough available evidence for you to know that Rev. Ray Drennan said what I am accusing him of saying and that both the UUA and the Unitarian Church of Montreal not only did nothing to provide any just, equitable or compassionate redress for my serious grievances, but responded to them with egregious institutional stonewalling and denial and outright punitive expulsions. You know very well that U*Us have even had me falsely arrested on trumped up crinminal charges that I was rightly acquitted of but yet you have not only maintained complicit silence about these outrageously hypocritical U*U injustices and abuses but have condescendingly criticized me for standing up gfor myself and other victims of U*U injustices and abuses.
:On the other hand, I have verbally supported your protest of the UCM; the only other thing I could in good concience do is buy you a box of chalk- which I will, if you ask.
You can do a lot more than that Joel. I have all the chalk I need right now. You'd be surprised at just how much sidewalk chalk you can buy for ten bucks or so. . .
:But I have spoken against attacks on faith in all forums I am a member of, and vigorously- the old AUC forums, the CFUUForum, many Beliefnet forums, and my own blog are full of such defences of faith and you know it. I just don't do so on heresay evidence.
More DIM Thinking U*U BS Joel. You know perfectly well that what I have posted to the internet goes well beyond hearsay evidence.
Does this look like hearsay evidence to you? How about this or this or indeed this? I could go on and on and on. . . but I think that I have already more than adequately made my point. Come to think of it your rather tragic blog post about me contains a fair bit of your own "hearsay evidence" in it. I had better get around to finally rebutting your U*U BS Joel.
:I haven't written the UUA over the abuse you've received from UU bloggers because you've frankly earned some of it.
Oh really Joel? Perhaps you can explain how I earned Rev. Victoria Weinstein's abuse months before I even became aware of the U*U blogosphere. . . There is plenty of U*U abuse of me and other people evident here and elsewhere on the internet but that is not what I am referring to. I am referring to the fact that you did nothing at all with respect to my trials and tribulations with the Unitarian Church of Montreal and the UUA. . .
:your comment spamming can be very irritating, and i don't blame people for getting angry over it.
As a rule my alleged comment spamming is on topic to the themes of the posts that I comment on. It is usually only those U*Us who censor and suppress my comments who get spammed by me.
:Your choice of words is frequently far more hurtful than you realize- at least I hope so, because I'd hate to think you can hurt people that badly intentionally.
Be assured that I am perfectly aware of just how hurtful my carefully chosen words can be and that I usually only direct hurtful words at those U*Us who have used hurtful words against me and/or other people first.
:Yes, many of the responses have been disproportionate- but you're in the position of baiting a pitbull and then complaining because he bit harder than you thought he would.
Actually I would say that you have that U*U backwards Joel. . . U*Us have been baiting this little pitbull and then have been complaining because he bit harder than they thought he would. N'est-ce pas Joel?
:The real cure is to stop baiting him.
Indeed it is. Perhaps you should inform your U*U friends about that. . .
:How do I know you haven't found the sites I speak of? Only because they would welcome essays on your vision with open arms, and I haven't seen them.
Well I guess they haven't found my essays either then. It's not like they were hard to find with appropriate Google searches when they were available online and received more than a million page views all told.
:As to the scripture about shaking dust, you don't have to be a Christian to recognize good advice when you see it.
As I said. Even Jesus, to say nothing of his follwers. . . failed to heed his own good advice. Had he heeded his own advice he might not have been crucified. . .
:I'm not a Christian either, and yet many Biblical quotes have found their way into my book of shadows. Here's another quote for you: "You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar."
I tried using honey on U*Us, more than once, but unfortunately I got shit on by anti-theistic U*Us and all my U*U "friends" stood by and let it happen. I think that a high colonic is in order now Joel. . .
I am aware of that possibility and I expect that Val Bourdon is something of a sad, lonely old man. . . That doesn`t change the fact that he is also an U*U and is fully capable of being a bit of an S.O.B. Val Bourdon is one of the more objectionable fundamentalist atheist "Humanist" U*Us at the Unitarian Church of Montreal, and he is very much responsible for perpetrating, perpetuating, escalating, and aggravating the injustices and abuses that I have been subjected to by Montreal Unitarian U*Us. Poking a little bit of fun at Val by pointing out what an U*U he is, is mild compared to the crap that I have had to put up with from him. Val Bourdon is certainly guilty of aiding and abetting the bullying that I have been subjected to by Rev. Ray Drennan and other Montreal U*Us, indeed he may be considered to be something of a bully himself in that he has supported the bullying. If I give him an embarrassing public spanking am I really being a "bully" myself?
As to your evidence- yes, it IS hearsay to ME. Be sensible- what kind of evidence is "I read in a blog a retyped copy of a letter that spoke about an incident, the exact details of which are known only to the principals?" Yes, I've read the newspaper stories about you being arrested- and those stories contain no first hand evidence, because the reporter is relying on your words and their words. I've already said I believe you, but I cannot take my belief to a hearing as proof. Nothing I could say would be in any way meaningful.
As to whether those Pagan sites could find your essays if they Googled for them, well duh- but if they've never heard of you, why would they be Googling for you? And the reason they've never heard of you is that you're spending all your time doing this rather than fulfilling your mission.
Anonymous: Don't talk about fundamentalist Christians- you posted your comment HERE, not at some anti-evolution site. Robin is not a Christian, and neither am I. My beliefs are on record in my blog; use the "My Pagan Beliefs" search label. If you can find anything there resembling anything you wrote about, let me know. Otherwise, go abuse someone that you think you have the wisdom to decide deserves it.
You are the one who is being rather less than sensible Joel. You don't need to know the "exact details" to have a very good idea of what happened between me and Rev. ray Drennan but, in any case. . . you know what happened as a result of my filing a complaint against him. Do you really think that I would post fabricated or seriously altered letters and emails to the internet? They are not retyped at all. They are either carefully proof-read and corrected OCR scans of actual letters on paper or they are copied and pasted emails strings straight out of my sent and/or received email folders. You and any other U*U can read exactly how UUA officials and/or representatives of the Unitarian Church of Montreal have responded to my serious grievances. Do you really think I in any way misrepresented what Rev. Drennan said to me? It should be perfectly obvious from all of the circumstantial evidence that is readily available to you, including his sorry excuse for an apology. . . that he said what I accused him of saying. Let's face it. Rev. Diane Miller did not even dispute that he said what he said, she just whitewashed Drennan by proclaiming that Rev. Ray Drennan's obviously intolerant and abusive attack on me, as I had described it in detail in my initial letters of grievance. . . "seemed to us to be within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadership." What more evidence do you need Joel?
:Yes, I've read the newspaper stories about you being arrested- and those stories contain no first hand evidence,
ROTFLMU*UO What? No first hand evidence that deeply misguided DIM Thinking U*Us had actually had me arrested on trumped up criminal charges in order to force an end to my protest? No first hand evidence that Rev. Charles Eddis, minister emeritus of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, condoned that misuse and abuse of the Canadian Criminal Code in a futile U*U attempt to over-ride my constitutional right to peaceful public protest. This in spite of teh fact that he claims in a U*U tract that he wrote that U*Us "are opposed to censorship by church, state or any other institution" yadda, yadda, yadda? There is no shortage of hard evidence that Montreal Unitarians and the UUA have repeatedly made a total mockery of pretty much every pertinent principle, purpose, and ideal that U*Us purport to "affirm and promote".
:because the reporter is relying on your words and their words.
And we're both talking through our hats? My picket sign slogans are based upon psychotic delusions? We both imagined that I had been arrested? What version of reality do you live in Joel? Do you believe *anything* you rewad in the newspapers, see on TV, or hear on the radio? Or is it all just "hearsay evidence" until you actually experience it yourself?
:I've already said I believe you, but I cannot take my belief to a hearing as proof.
Who said you had to do that Joel? Heck you and other U*Us could easily hedge our bets by writing to the UUA and saying that you don't know exactly what is going on but there is clearly an injustice occurring and demanding that the UUA respionsibly investigate the matter and then take appropriate action to ensure a genuinely just, equitable and compassionate resolution to the dispute. But no. . .
:Nothing I could say would be in any way meaningful.
Hmmm. . . Come to think of it, based on your own "heresay evidence" in your tragic blog post about me, yuou may be right. . .
:As to whether those Pagan sites could find your essays if they Googled for them, well duh- but if they've never heard of you, why would they be Googling for you?
They might be Googling for any number of other things Joel and find my eclipse lore web sites. They all had very high Google ranking for appropriate keywords like "Eye of Horus" and "Eye of God" etc.
:And the reason they've never heard of you is that you're spending all your time doing this rather than fulfilling your mission.
Wrong again Joel. I am hardly spending all my time doing this. Abnd just what is my "mission" anyway Joel? Please be so kind as to tell me all about what my "mission" is. Need I remind you that one of the main reasons that I am "doing this" is because the slanderous damaging lies told about me by Rev. Ray Drennan and other U*Us, as well as the unjust punitive responses of Montreal U*Us harms my ability to undertake ANY religious mission. How do I successfully undertake any "mission" when I have all this U*U shit sticking to me that outrageously hypocritical U*U assholes refuse to clean up? Pray tell. . .
As to how to undertake a mission with all that UU stuff hanging all over you, just let go. Nobody would have ever heard of the UCM if you hadn't talked about them. Nobody is keeping this alive but you- they're not picketing your house, they didn't start a blog for the express purpose of harrassing you, they don't comment-spam every UU blogger and/or forum with links about you. Without you, no one outside of that congregation would have ever heard of Drennan. Had you walked away ten years ago, nobody would have ever heard of the squabble, and your wit would have made you a big man in the blogosphere. Even now, you could walk away- UUs are only 1/10th of 1 percent of the population, and only a tiny percentage of that blogs- the world at large still hasn't heard of you or the UCM, and could hear your message without prejudice.
Actually you are proving my point that for a guy who boasts about am IQ higher than 140 yopu can be a real idiot Joel.
:Every one of the links was YOU keeping the fight going, not the UCM.
What a joke. What links are you talking about Joel? There are few links in this thread so you must be talking about links elsewhere. The UCM has most certainly kept this fight going by unjustly, unequitably and uncompassionately threatening me with expulsion i order to silence me, by repeatedly expelling me, and by bringing trumped up criminal charges against me etc. If the Unitarian Church of Montreal wants this fight to end it has to acknowledge the injustices and abuses that it is clearly and unequivocally guilting of perpetrating and perpetuating.
:You posting off topic on UU blogs from places like Croatia, where they are not affilliated with the UUA.
They are still U*Us who may be copncerned about whaty happens in the U*U World beyond the confines of Croatia, or wherever else I may have posted, and you know very well that the vast majority of my posts are confined to North American blogs and forums.
:None of the first couple pages worth of links were posted about you by Drennan, or a Montreal congregate - they were all YOUR posts and comments. Had you let it go, none of those posts would exist. The UU stuff isn't sticking to you, you are hugging it to yourself.
Wrong Joel. The false and malicious allegations of Rev. Ray Drennan and other U*U BS are sticking to me because U*Us in positions of responsibility at the Unitarian Church of Montreal and the UUA obstinately refuse to do the right thing and acknowledge the wrongfulness and harmfulness of these insulting and defamatory allegations and clean up the mess they created.
:Anonymous said... Of course, being UU and paganism religions too, at least in some respects, it is not surprising that much vehemence emerges over nothing or less than nothing, however quaint, folkloristic or colourful that nothing may be.
Being labeled "psychotic" by a U*U monister and having that "diagnosis" deemed as being "within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadershiop" by top level UUA officials is not "nothing" oh so Anonymous asshole, U*U asshole or otherwise. . . Ditto for having one's religious events falsely and maliciously labeled as a "cult" and the various other injustices and abuses previously mentioned in this thread.