Google+ Followers

Sunday, 9 August 2009

Bill Muehlenberg = Bigot

Bill Muehlenberg, bigot?

That seems a pretty fair description to me. A working definition of a bigot, if you agree, might be: someone who holds strong political and/or religious views and opinions, and is intolerant of anyone who disagrees.

I think that pretty neatly sums up Bill Muehlenberg, the theocratic bully whose blog "Culturewatch", a "commentary on the issues of the day", bleeds fundamentalist christian bigotry from every article.

It's tempting to simply ridicule someone as simple-minded as Bill Muehlenberg. His arguments are ludicrously easy to tear apart as they contain no logic whatsoever. In a recent article entitled "So Who Exactly Wants Same-Sex Marriage?", he concludes that, because not all gay people think marriage is for them, it should not be made available to any of them. This is as absurd as saying that since not all straight people wish to get married, then marriage itself ought to be abolished.

Why would Bill Muehlenberg expect a large and diverse group of people, who happen to share sexuality in common, to agree on absolutely everything?

Why does Bill Muehlenberg not see the absence of logic in his arguments? He can string a cogent sentence together and seems to have some semblance of intelligence, even though he wastes it on non-subjects like theology.

The answer is that Bill Muehlenberg has an absolutist mind, and this is the greatest enemy to a free and democratic society, which is why bullies like Muehlenberg must be resisted, and I hope blogs like mine, which treat his views with the contempt they deserve, are important. To him, homosexuals are not people, with individual goals, desires and varying viewpoints. They are a homogenous whole, a "lobby", or as the Catholic bishop recently called them, for the same reason of a failure of mind, "the enemy".

He is unable to distinguish between what he sees as a "set of values", (as if sexuality has anything to do with subscribing to any set of values), and people who do not wish to be subjected to the falsehoods of his take on Christian theology. This is what Richard Dawkins has called "the tyranny of the discontinuous mind", and you spot this all the time with bigots. They are so sure that they can talk about "the gay" or "the Jew" or "the black" rather than "gay people", "Jews" and "blacks" that they see no inherent contradition in treating people who share something in common (like sexuality) with unquestioned contempt.

It is interesting to note that he speaks from a position of authority on "the gay lobby", or the "gaystapo", or "the gay mafia", or whatever other dehumanizing word of abuse he wishes to hurl at people he disagrees with on a given day, and I believe this is because he is himself homosexual. He talks a lot about gay people wanting to be "accepted" to "ease their guilt". I think he is talking about himself here. I knew a gay man at university who was bullied by three other boys at school when they found out his preference. Within four years of leaving school, all three of the bullies had themselves come out of the closet and apologised to my friend.

Bill, it's time to lose the beard and come out of the closet. You'll feel better about yourself. Your life will be far more productive than railing against what you hate and wish to suppress within yourself. No matter how many vile, bigoted and hate-fuelled articles you write denouncing and dehumanizing gay people (currently over one hundred and fifty), your god can apparently read your every thought, and I'm sure you're not fooling him. You're certainly not fooling me.


  1. I just tried to post what I thought was quite a reasonable comment on his website and, guess what? He didn't publish it. He's only interested in those weird, hate-fuelled nut jobs who always post on everything he writes. David Skinner, Mark Rabich, and the like. People whose whole lives revolve around hating gay people. And Bill Muehlenberg loves it when they kiss his ass. Weird old world. They're just a bunch of bigoted, frightened little cunts, basically.

  2. Thanks Stanley. Yes, I have heard from a number of people that they have had a similar experience. Worse, it seems that if Bill does allow a comment that disagrees with him to be posted, he will then follow it up with a ranting ad hominem attack full of straw men arguments, and claim that it is *he* who is under attack! He will then sanctimoniously offer to "pray" for the poster, as if their perfectly reasonable points are so immoral and deranged as to need some sort of divine assistance!

    If the poster then tries to respond to Bill and knock down his straw men - you've guessed it - the second comment is not posted; but Bill will then allow a string of his cronies to make further ludicrous and hate-fuelled attacks on the "apostate". This is why I am so keen to point out that he is a bully, a bigot and a theocrat, and his religious posturing is all a facade. He actually doesn't have a shred of moral or intellectual integrity, and his method of "dealing with" dissenters is proof of this.

    I do not intend my blog to be like that. If any Bill lovers want to come on here and defend the vile and shallow Bill Muehlenberg, or point out where I am mistaken, feel free. We can at least have a debate, unlike over on the intellectually dishonest Bill's way or the highway wankfest that is culture watch.