Google+ Followers

Friday, 16 December 2011

Bill finally gets to use his Christopher Hitchens obituary

With unseemly haste Bill has tapped out an article on the death of Christopher Hitchens, an intellectual giant and in a different league to petty theocratic bullies like Muehlenberg and bloggers like myself.

Or could it be that he wrote it after the diagnosis of stage 4 cancer came in June 2010? Surely Bill wouldn't be so cynical? Interestingly, in the second comment after the article Bill claims to have written it just now, which I suppose is possible, given the prolific rate at which extreme-right diatribes appear on his blog.

The point is that Bill tries to pass it off as a fair and balanced obituary, and he almost succeeds in describing Christopher Hitchens as a human being, but when you get to the last few paragraphs the real Bill comes out in force.

So now the author of God is Not Great is standing before a great God, and will have to give an account of himself. He will be missed, and it is hoped that in the end he renounced his pride and admitted that he was not in fact the centre of the universe.


What absolute drivel is this, Bill? When did Hitchens claim to be the centre of the universe? Why does not believing in your deity make that true?

The reality is the opposite, of course, but it's not like Bill to twist the truth upside down. Hitchens thought of himself as a mere mortal, who would become entirely extinct at the moment of his death. He did not expect to outlive his brain. He knew the reality that he was a member of an evolved species, a primate, and that his origins in every respect were humble.

The believing Christian (or other religionist) on the other hand believes that their god created the entire universe specifically with their existence in mind, and cares what they do and what they think, and will punish or reward them accordingly.

Sorry, Bill. Atheists just don't have the arrogance to buy into such bullshit.

The universe is indifferent to our fates.

More tastefully yet, Muehlenberg speculates about what his angry god will do now that Hitchens "must make an account of himself".

But we can still pray for the other atheists – both well known and not well known – that they will not die and face a Christless eternity. We can pray for Dawkins and others that they will see the light, as so many countless of millions of others have over the centuries.


Thus proving Hitchens right. Hitchens often said that the religionists aren't content with believing in their little god. "They won't be happy until you believe it too." How right he was.

Muehlenberg writes with the arrogance of certainty, that his version of a particular deity is the definite "truth" and that anyone who doesn't share his barking mad views is "the enemy" and "not seeking after truth".

That's also a strong indicator of a bully.

Christopher Hitchens fought for freedom of speech and the intellect and engaged in rational debates. Muehlenberg is a censorious propaganda peddler. The irony is, that even if there was a god, and it turned out to be the Xtian one, it would be far more likely to think favourably of the intellectual heavyweight of Hitchens than it ever would of a creepy little bully like Bill.

EDIT: An update. Bill has just commented, "one thing is certain: Hitchens is no longer an atheist."
And to think Bill calls atheists arrogant! Way to gloat over a greater man's death, whilst smugly, and without a shred of shame (let alone evidence) suggest he now knows that Bill was right all along, if only Hitch had listened.

Bill sums up in just a few words why religion is so truly loathsome, poisonous, intolerant of dissent, childish in thought and for idiots.

I await without holding my breath a steady stream of Xtians dissociating themselves from Bill's comments.

Tuesday, 6 December 2011

So exactly how is belief in Christianity supposed to make gays straight, Bill?

Bill’s latest tirade against gay people is about as nasty as he gets. After the Australian Labor party considers legalising gay marriage, Bill accuses them of being “aligned with the powers of darkness”. He sounds every bit like his theology – something from the Dark Ages.

“It has decided that the most important thing this nation needs is homosexual marriage, and to hell with ordinary Australians and workers who dare to stand in their way,”
he rails. Actually, no, Bill. There’s nothing ordinary about you, you deranged bigot.

Bill points out the deep theological reasons as to why equality should be denied gay people:

There are not only huge political and social ramifications concerning all this, but spiritual ones as well. The Bible makes it quite clear what this is all about:
Proverbs 14:34 – Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people.
Proverbs 29:2 – When the godly are in authority, the people rejoice. But when the wicked are in power, they groan.


Oh, well there you go then. A couple of cherrypicked bible passages that prove what Australians really want is for Bill and his fellow-nutjobs to wield political power...

Bill is utterly bamboozled as to why he’s pissing in the wind about gay marriage, though. As he writes:

Where are the Christians who have faithfully stood up about this? I have been telling Christians for months now they must contact their local MPs before this Labor conference. Yet I would be very surprised indeed if even 5 per cent of them did. We are so engrossed in our own selfishness and trivial pursuits that we are fully happy to see the entire nation be destroyed around us.


Note, “the entire nation destroyed”. Hmm, yes, I’m sure that the day after Australia legalises gay marriage the whole continent will be nothing other than a burnt cinder. Never shy of gross hyperbole, our Bill.

Our apathy and indifference is ... killing the church.


Hurray! About time too...

And don’t get me started about all the so-called Christians who actually support Labor, the Greens, and the radical homosexual agenda. The truth is, we have traitors in our midst, even in the pulpits. One pastor after another has sold his soul in order to be popular, receive the praises of men, and not rock the boat.


Yes, how dare these tolerant Christians not agree with Bill’s agenda and hate campaigns. Splitters! But wait, all is not lost:

Fortunately not everyone is living in gross, sinful compromise and rebellion. A pro-marriage rally was held this morning in Sydney to side against the evil at the Labor conference.


Note the word “evil”. In Bill’s twisted mind, anyone who tolerates, loves, or is quite comfortable with gay people is “evil”. Think about that for a moment. Bill doesn’t just think they’re wrong, he genuinely thinks they’re evil. And he scratches his head and wonders why people call him bigoted...

There should have been tens of thousands of Christians there – even hundreds of thousands. If Hillsong alone sent its flock there, it would have been massive. So where were they? Why do the bulk of believers seem to not give a rip about any of this?


NO BILL, THEY DON’T! Only you and a handful of other backward, intolerant theocrats do. The world’s moved on. Nobody else thinks gay people should be burnt at the stake any more. It’s a non-issue. That’s why your wretched book isn’t exactly flying off the shelves...

As if Bill couldn’t make himself out to be any more of a hateful idiot, he posts the following (unedited) comment by a contributor:

Michael Sutherland 4.12.11 / 7pm
I too am a christian and I used to believe that same as you, but just last year my own son, Jeremiah, took his life because he was gay and knew that none of his friends or me and my wife would accept him.
I have since then changed my position on the issue, I would have much rathered I have my son with me today and for him to be able to face gods judgement and have a chance to repent, than for him to have taken his own life and go straight into satans lair.
I’m sorry to see that you all feel that love is a bad thing. There isn’t much of it left in the world and I say we should promote as much love as possible, whether that be heterosexual love or homosexual love. You say that it will harm our children to know that it’s okay to be gay, in fact the opposite is true.
I hope that everyone here takes a good look at what they’re saying and how they speak to their own children. For me it was too late, but it’s not too late for you. Only God can pass judgement on others, it is not up to us to do so.
Michael Sutherland


Does anything leap out at you there as being an ad hominem against Bill? An attack on him personally? No, I thought not. It’s a measured, persuasive and deeply sad message.

Here’s how Bill chooses to respond:

Thanks Michael
We can all sympathise and pray for this, as it is a difficult matter indeed. But it is quite remiss of you to take a personal tragedy and seek to get political mileage out of it, to push an agenda, or to seek to lay a guilt trip on those who disagree with you.


WOW! Where the hell does Bill get that from? What political mileage? What “agenda”? What “guilt trip”?

It gets better. He instantly goes on to doubt Michael is even telling the truth:

I and my readers know nothing of your situation so of course we cannot comment on it. No one begrudges your concerns over what happened, but I for one must still call your bluff.


I.e., come on fellow bigots, back me up! And what the hell is he even talking about any more? Call his bluff? Nobody begrudges him mourning his dead gay son? Sheesh, how nice of him.

The biblical truth on homosexuality did not result in this sad situation.
Of course, Bill was there when the young man killed himself because of his guilt over his sexuality, so he’s entirely justified in making this assertion and carrying it off as fact.
So don’t seek to make us somehow responsible.


Of course, when like Bill you’ve given yourself licence to “do god’s work” you’re no longer responsible for your actions. How dare Michael suggest that vile bullies like Bill and his blog of hate are responsible even in part for driving young gay people to suicide.

If a loved one of mine embraced this lifestyle I would of course still love him or her, but I would also tell them the truth about this dangerous, high-risk and unhealthy lifestyle. You say you “did not accept him”. Again, I know nothing of your situation, so it is unfair to expect me to say anything on this, but one can accept and love a person while not approving of a dangerous lifestyle. I can love a drug addict or alcoholic while strongly disproving of the actions which are killing these people.


Bill loves the false comparison. To him, homosexuality is just another “addiction” or “behaviour” – he refuses to accept – despite the overwhelming scientific evidence (sure, what would those cranks know – they believe in evolution and insist on telling us that the world’s more than 6,000 years old, right?) that sexuality is an innate, immutable trait. If Bill’s right, then he could presumably choose to be gay for a while. Perhaps every other Tuesday. That make sense to anyone?

And here’s the root of why religionists like Bill are so idiotic when it comes to human sexuality. Bill insists on asserting that gays can be “healed” through “Christ” BUT NEVER, EVER GIVES ANY DETAIL AS TO HOW HE EXPECTS THIS MIRACUOUS TRANSFORMATION TO OCCUR!

Why not? Because he can’t. If he and his fellow gay-haters could publish a “recipe” (three hail marys after dinner, say) that would guarantee a change in sexuality then they might – might – be taken seriously on this subject. But they know it’s just bullshit and assertion, they have no facts to offer, no objective understanding of what sexuality even is.

Ex-gay “therapy”, which Bill roundly supports, has been shown to be fraudulent, useless, damaging, unnecessary and cruel. Every respectable psychiatric association in the West condemns it. It’s basically superstitious juju and about as effective as prayer. I.e. A total fucking waste of time.

Bill constantly asserts that “thousands of homosexuals have left the ‘lifestyle’” as if that’s a trump card – as if to deny that some people who have enjoyed gay relationships and have gone on to have straight relationships are traitors or liars. What Bill doesn’t understand, and refuses to understand, is that there is a fluidity of human sexuality. Somebody can be 70% gay, or 60% straight, which may mean that they have relationships with members of both sexes.

Bill never mentions that many gays repress their sexuality, enter into unhappy and doomed marriages until they can’t live a lie any longer. Such people are inconvenient to his propaganda.

Bill rounds out addressing a man grieving for his dead son with the following hectoring words:

none of us need to buy your unbiblical and unhelpful change of direction here.

Nice, Bill. What a lovely person you are.

The icing on the cake is a contribution by Bill’s longstanding admirer, Mark Rabich, who is as deranged, hateful and bigoted as Bill, and has also admitted that he’s in his 40s and has never had sex. This appears to be something he’s proud of. Yet he feels an authority on the subject of human sexuality and bullies others about what’s normal and what isn’t. Mark, you’ve had only your hand. I pity you. You know nothing. Go out and get laid. Put the bible down and get a life.

Rabich tells the grieving man,

attacking Bill and others will not salve your conscience, it will likely only make matters worse.


Note that he just asserts that Bill is “attacked”. And Bill doesn’t even bother to correct 40-something year old virgin Rabich about it!

No, Bill’s quite happy to let this ridiculous lie stand. After all, it aids his purpose if he can paint himself as the victim, a card he always plays. “Poor old me, writing a blog attacking gay people and atheists – can you believe it – people criticise me for it?”

Pull your head out of your arse, Muehlenberg. If you have some evidence that shows sexuality isn’t innate and that there’s a magic spell by which your crappy god can change innate human sexuality then STOP ASSERTING BULLSHIT and SHOW US THE EVIDENCE.
You can’t, because you’re a charlatan, as well as a nasty, cruel, bigoted and intolerant piece of shit.

Wednesday, 23 November 2011

Hands up who thinks Muehlenberg is a closeted self-loathing gay...?

...who just can't stand seeing other guys having fun and living their lives free from guilt and idiotic superstitions?

Muehlenberg claims gay people ought not exist.

In a recent article Real Acceptance? Bill Muehlenberg states the following:

Homosexuals like everyone else need to be loved. But they also need to be told the truth. Indeed, if you do not tell a sinner the truth about his condition, you do not really love him. And the most loving thing a Christian can tell a homosexual is that they do not have to be homosexual.

There are many thousands of homosexuals the world over who have left their lifestyle and have found new life in Christ. That is the good news that they desperately need to hear, not that they are born that way and must stay that way.


Bill is essentially saying that homosexuality is an "illness" that can be "cured" by belief in his brand of juju.

Does anyone find this anything other than genocidal, sinister, deluded and barking mad?

Is Ross going to defend Muehlenberg on this one?

Hitler had much the same idea. Round up all the gays and send them to the gas chambers, thus ridding the world of homosexuals and making it pure. Did it work for the Nazis? Why does Muehlenberg think such ideology should be embraced?

Thank goodness gay people are willing to live alongside the deluded worshippers of the Nazarene carpenter. With Skinner's edict that "we cannot both exist - one of us has to go" and Muehlenberg's idea that homosexuality must be wiped from the face of the earth (for entirely loving reasons, of course) there's nothing but hatred, violence, intolerance and bigotry coming from the fundie Xtians.

No wonder decent people are leaving churches in their droves. Not every juju worshipper is a malicious cunt like Muehlenberg.

One of us must go...

I tried posting again on Bill's website recently. As Richie Craze, I'm long since banned for speaking the truth, but I tried again as Dursley McLinden (which was the name of a very beautiful young British actor who sadly died of AIDS aged only 30).

I commented on Bill's article More MSM Activism after some bigoted old bint called Minge Fingers or something had posted saying that the sight of two men kissing made her want to vomit out her guts. I posted saying that it said more about her bigotry than about gay couples. Here was Bill's quick as a flash and typically ill-thought through response:




You'll note that I made a further post pointing out to Bill that as I don't find straight couples in the least nauseating then a tu quoque argument was fallacious. I also pointed out that most heterosexuals don't feel nauseous seeing gay people either.

Predictably, Bill didn't allow me to point out his stupidity and bigotry.

However, he allowed regular nutjob contributer David Skinner (whose email address, incidentally, is d.skinner@talktalk.net) to state, of gay people and straight Xtians, "We cannot both exist. One of us has to go."

Yeah, Skinner and Mewlenberg, Hitler had much the same idea. How are you planning the genocide of gay people (for the good of "the children", of course)?

I responded again:



If any of Bill's defenders such as Ross would care to point out quite how I overstepped the mark, other than telling the truth, and why those two comments should have been censored, please do let's hear the other side justify such censorship. Please let's hear the other side justify Skinner's call for violence against all gay people.

Ross?

Here's yet another posting "awaiting moderation":

Sunday, 20 November 2011

A Review of Bill's Book!

Here's my review of Bill's anti-gay book:

http://www.borders.com.au/book/strained-relations/25960956/


If you don't want to click on the link, here it is in full:

The author expected that when this book was released it would cause a sensation. The truth is, it has been completely ignored by all media. The reason is not that it’s too hot to handle, too controversial and too explosive; but simply that it’s a desperately poor book in every respect. It is poorly written, poorly researched and especially poorly argued.

The aims of the author (Bill Muehlenberg, who runs a fundamentalist Christian web blog) are encapsulated in the somewhat sinister sub-heading, “The Challenge Of Homosexuality”. The author sees homosexuality, and consequently gay people, as something that needs to be fought against rather than respected as human beings, and thus from the outset the book comes across as an off-puttingly angry, intolerant and disrespectful piece. His central thesis is that gay people ought not to exist as they should be forced to live a lie; and that all rights should be denied to gay people.

The problem Muehlenberg faces is trying to justify his fundamentalist and strident position (when all the evidence, that homosexuality is harmless and innate, and that gay people can make great parents) is providing any coherent argument whatsoever, and he repeatedly circles around the same old canards and shock tactics, especially the reprehensible suggestion he makes that homosexuality is the moral equivalent of paedophilia.

The fifth chapter wades especially into the territory of fantasy. It’s called “Once Homosexual, Always Homosexual?” and argues in favour of “ex-gay” “therapy”, the religiously-inspired “cure” for homosexuality that every responsible psychiatric association has condemned as cruel, needless, dangerous and ineffective. Muehlenberg ignores the inconvenient evidence that such “therapy” has never been known to work, and ignores the evidence that many thousands of victims of this “therapy” have been driven to serious mental health problems or even suicide through their guilt of failure. The book is more about what it doesn’t say than what it actually says in its 266 pages – and the overriding effect is that it reads as if the author is pushing propaganda for a radical activist cause in an attempt at social engineering rather than engaging honestly with his subject.

Muehlenberg strays further from the truth in chapters about same-sex marriage and adoption rights, arguing that such moves would bring about social anarchy and collapse. He ignores the fact that many Western countries have already adopted such liberal policies and the reverse of his predictions are true – it’s led to social harmony, which is why more and more countries are passing laws to allow equal rights to gay people. The “evidence” he puts forward to suggest homosexual couples oughtn’t to be allowed to adopt are especially flaky – but since every peer-reviewed scientific study (none of which is cited) has revealed that children have not been disadvantaged by being adopted by homosexual couples, a practice now common and socially accepted in much of the West, that is hardly surprising. That the author’s dire warnings of the consequences have wholly failed to manifest consigns the book to an outdated and factually inaccurate footnote in what was once a social issue.

It will come as no surprise to anyone who goggles at the inaccuracies and myths peddled in this book that Muehlenberg’s training is in theology, and not in science; let alone the social sciences. His understanding of what constitutes evidence for a position is consequently very weak, and the author is crying out for something other than the occasional cherry-picked quote from a gay person to make his argument. The fact that he quotes from “leading homosexual activists” is part of the inherent fallaciousness of the whole book. Muehlenberg is keen to treat homosexuality like a religion, with various spokespeople in charge and underlings who do as they’re told. If he started by treating gay people as individuals with different wants, needs, desires and views to every other person, gay or straight, he might be able to better engage with the facts. The overriding impression is that the author does not personally know a single gay person, and yet he writes as if he thinks of himself as an authority on the subject. It’s a bit like reading a book condemning the Russian people where you get the nagging suspicion that its author hasn’t ever even met a single Russian, and it’s another way in which Strained Relations is divorced from reality.

The sloppy writing style sees many sentences structured the same way, which makes reading the author tedious in the extreme after only a few pages. Literally hundreds of sentences start with the word “indeed”, and the book could have done with a decent proofreader before it was published.

Strained Relations will have very limited appeal, simply because the non-issue at the heart of it has moved on much further than the author realises, and his arguments are so out of date to have been refuted several decades ago. To anyone seeking a nuanced and well-researched book about the social implications of homosexuality, this tome will read like a propaganda piece pushing a particularly hard-line theocratic view. It’s likely to only reach an audience who already agree with the author’s dubious views and are similarly unwilling to engage in reality or polite, reasoned debate and respectful disagreement.

Wednesday, 2 November 2011

Bill Muehlenberg's Genocidal Campaign of Homophobia

Apparently a bible college, possibly of the type that brainwashes its unlucky students with Bronze Age juju, recently allowed a homosexual to give a talk there.

Yes, a homosexual gay man! Shock horror! Throw your hands up in outrage.

Bill's reaction is to pen an article entitled Can Hitler Speak Too? Yes, apparently allowing a well-adjusted gay man to talk to students in a college is the moral equivalent of the Third Reich, in Muehlenberg's twisted and diseased mind.

He clearly thinks that education should solely be about things that he approves of, and that schoolchildren should be shielded from unsightly things like gay people, Jews, atheists etc. and it's far better to pretend they don't exist.

Bill panics that:

this activist could get up to five full hours to indoctrinate the students.


What exactly is Bill worried about? That the students might have an opportunity to see through the brainwashing and think for themselves and see that gay people are just people too? Clearly Bill is terrified of the notion of bible students being allowed to think for themselves. What a terrible notion when a college

promotes and defends the opportunity for all people to engage in informed open debate


I hope you're appalled too?

Never one to let an opportunity for offensive ignorance slip by untaken, Muehlenberg then repeats his tired old canard where he attempts to lump homosexuals in with paedophiles and necrophiliacs. Nice.

In his usual generous-spiritedness, Bill Muehlenberg does acknowledge that there's one good reason to allow a filthy gay into a college, so that:

...the arguments of the pro-homosexual lobby can be explored, but hopefully only in order to refute them and affirm the biblical position. I can see no reason whatsoever to allow an activist in to push his deceptive and diabolical agenda.


A diabolical agenda of "please don't persecute me for who I am?" Truly shocking. What an infringement on Xtian rights.

Bill finds it odd that he sent two venemous emails to the principal of the college warning him of the dangers of the homos, and hasn't received a reply. Bill, it's because you're an utter bigoted cunt and most people don't wish to engage with and support your genocidal hate campaigns.

Genocidal? Is that a bit strong? Remember that Bill censors the comments he disagrees with; but on his article What Right to Abortion he's happy to allow contributor Barbara Murray Leach to suggest that homosexuals should be aborted in the womb.

Charming company you keep, Bill.

Thank goodness gay people don't try to spread intolerance, violence and hatred against the deluded. The venom is a one-way flow.

Friday, 28 October 2011

Mark Twain describes Bill Muehlenberg

No, really! I came across this passage in Mark Twain's book What is Man? recently.

He perfectly describes our dear friend Bill and others of his ilk who claim to know the truth...

We are always hearing of people who are around seeking after Truth. I have never seen a (permanent) specimen. I think he has never lived. But I have seen several entirely sincere people who thought they were (permanent) Seekers after Truth. They sought diligently, persistently, carefully, cautiously, profoundly, with perfect honesty and nicely adjusted judgement – until they believed that without doubt or question they had found the Truth. That was the end of the search. The man spent the rest of his life hunting up shingles wherewith to protect his Truth from the weather. If he was seeking after political Truth he found it in one or another of the hundred political gospels which govern men in the earth; if he was seeking after the Only True Religion he found it in one or another of the three thousand that are on the market. In any case, when he found the Truth he sought no further; but from that day forth, with his soldering iron in one hand and his bludgeon in the other, he tinkered its leaks and reasoned with objectors.

Wednesday, 28 September 2011

Photos from the Muehlenberg family album

Here's a picture of Bill delivering a speech at an "Australian Bigot Rally":




And here's another of Bill collecting his diploma in bigotry and delusion:




Awwww. Isn't he just adorable?

How to write your own Bill Muehlenberg article!

Hot on the heels of my Muehlenberg glossary, in which I explained the meaning of old Bill's favourite buzz-words, I bring you the do-it-yourself guide to creating you very own Muehlenberg article!

Please remember that the most important factor is to turn off your brain and to always use hyperbole over evidence. Avoid theology and instead churn out hate-mongering diatribes against gay people, atheists, non-Christians and anyone with centre or left-wing political views. But concentrate on those gays!

You need to adopt a tone of self-righteous hectoring, and as soon as you've made a point, start the next sentence with "Indeed". Repeat this tedious rhetorical device several times.

Describe anyone who disagrees with you and uses evidence to dismantle your arguments as "playing fast and loose with the truth". If they stand for anything that you don't like, label them a "zealot". If they're atheist, they're by default "a materialist zealot".

Remember to describe the actions of people with whom you disagree as happening "big time" and remind your readers that the "zealots" have "declared war on Christianity". Efforts to remove discrimination from society are to be declared "PC madness".

Blame all of society's ills on homosexuals who don't wish for weird religionists to "cure" them. Refer to any homosexual who wishes to get on with their life free from theocratic bullying as a "militant homosexual activist".

Refer to people who disbelieve in your particular juju up the mountain as "our atheist buddies" in a failed attempt at sarcasm, since you actually loathe anyone who doesn't believe your bullshit. There are people who do believe your bullshit, but interpret it in a more liberal way. Call them "useful idiots".

Remember to never admit when you are wrong, and to maintain that anyone who points out your idiocy is merely "agenda-pushing".

Don't bother with facts. Just claim that your arguments are watertight because you "have documented countless examples of this on this site". When concluding your 1,000 words of drivel, state: "There you have it, folks," to give the illusion that you've made a coherent point.

Play the victim card by suggesting that Christians will soon be imprisoned for worshipping their juju. When reporting instances of people who have been hounded to death by religious loons, claim that they are "playing the victim card". Maintain rank hypocrisy at all times.

When responding to someone who disagrees with you, be as impolite, hectoring and pompous as possible. Always use the phrase: "let me call your bluff".

Remember to be sneering and vicious to anyone who isn't a fundamentalist Christian, but then cry foul when the same tone is adopted in reverse.

Remember to AVOID discussions on how old you think the earth is (perhaps make oblique references to "praying big time about this important issue").

Remember that scientific evidence only counts when you think it's on your side. For example, the overwhelming evidence in favour of evolution can be safely ignored.

Quote-mine from a scientist, or a "militant homosexual activist" and take their words completely out of context in order to deceitfully "back up" your argument.

Avoid awkward questions.

Use ready fallacies and debating tactics such as "no true Scotsman", tu quoque and the ad hominem when engaging in "debate".

Claim everything is unfair and you're right about everything.

Repeat ad infinitum.

For the complete makeover, grow a beard and look like a balding demented mule in specs.

Tuesday, 27 September 2011

A Handy Bill Muehlenberg Glossary

Ever bamboozled by the phrases Muehlenberg churns out over and over again?

I've compiled a little glossary to help you along.

Agenda-pushing - Bill's quick way to quickly silence anyone who disagrees with him in the comments section. He simply declares that they are "pushing an agenda" and invites them "to do so elsewhere". Way to debate, Bill!

Christophobia - any law or action that restrains Xtians from impinging upon the rights of others. (Also "anti-Xtian bigotry".)

Creeping sharia - not sure about this one. Seems to be some sort of weed that Bill has terrible trouble with in his garden.

Discrimination - to be unfairly prejudiced against someone, or a group. Of course, this only exists when asserting right to freedom from bigotry against Xtians.

Lobby - any group of non-Xtian people

Militant Homosexual Activist - a gay person who isn't totally ashamed of their sexuality and asserts their right to live their life free from bigotry and hatred from Xtian fundies.

Misotheist - someone who doesn't think Xtians are entitled to act like bigoted fuckwits with impugnity and who doesn't wish to live in a theocracy where Muehlenberg's interpretation of the bible decides on the laws.

Scientism - a word to use to try to make the evidence go away when the findings of science disprove the rantings of Bronze Age Middle Eastern illiterate goatherds that you've convinced yourself are the word of god.

I hope that helps. It's a start at least. Please let me know if you have any other words that should be added to the Muehlenberg glossary and I'll update it!

Wednesday, 24 August 2011

Muehlenberg equates homosexuality with paedophilia. Again.

Muehlenberg is your typical right-winger: high on self-righteous indignation, hubris and hate: low on intelligence, balance and reason.

In his latest article, Time For More Sexual Perversion, he once again whips his readers into a frenzy of concern by correlating homosexuality with paedophilia. His argument is that as soon as society starts tolerating homosexuality, it will tolerate paedophilia, bestiality, and his pet favourite, polyamory.

Apparently he’s developed his thesis of hatred towards gay people into book-length form. One has to marvel at the publisher that will touch such a toxic rant. I’m guessing it won’t be a best-seller or in the windows of many bookshops, but at least it’s the crowning achievement of Muehlenberg’s long career in wanting to subject homosexuals to his version of Xtian theocracy.

Muehlenberg even denies that there is such a thing as intrinsic homosexuality. The only “honest” homosexuals, as far as he sees it, are unsurprisingly the “ex”-gays, the poor unfortunates who have endured “conversion therapy” where witchdoctors “pray away the gay”. He’s quite happy to believe that they have converted sexuality, but not happy to believe any homosexual who points out that they did not choose their sexuality. Such are the blinkers that descend when the rot of religion takes hold of the mind.

He claims that “homosexual activists” (which is, in Bill’s deluded and paranoid world, any openly and unashamedly homosexual person who wishes to live their lives without reference to Bronze Age myths)
“successfully bullied and intimidates the American Psychiatric Association in 1973 to pull homosexuality off its list.”
To Bill, this is the only reasonable explanation. Ask yourself whether it’s credible that an institution like the APA would allow itself to be “bullied” into anything, let alone reassessing the natural and harmless nature of homosexuality. It is unthinkable to Bill that, as they have assessed homosexuality over the years, they have realised that it isn’t a psychiatric disorder, and have removed it. They sure could do with putting “religious nutters” in their own category, though.

But Muehlenberg, as ever, isn’t interested in facts. He knows damned well that his demagoguery will wash over his gullible readers. If they’re stupid enough to believe any religion, then they’ll be stupid enough to not question his vile, hate-fuelled rants. It’s exactly what they want to hear. After all, Muehlenberg screams hate at gay people more than he writes about anything else, most especially theology. His main source of income is foaming-at-the-mouth homophobia.

Think about that for a moment.

There is no live and let live in Muehlenberg’s world, yet he’s the one always crying foul whenever anyone tackles his idiocies. Everyone must bend to fit his narrow view of humanity, and that’s what makes him such a sinister, deluded and ignorant fool.
How many gay friends does he have? Ask him this question on his Culturewatch gay-hate site. You won’t get an answer. He can’t befriend any, or he’d lose all credibility amongst his bigoted followers. After all, homophobia pays his salary.

He’s the moral equivalent of an executioner. With all the gay teens being bullied into suicide by religious zealots like Muehlenberg, this is no exaggeration.

Monday, 13 June 2011

Closing Down Culturewatch

Culturewatch is such a vile, hate-fuelled website that endorses homophobia that it goes beyond what's acceptable in terms of free speech. Muehlenberg and his bigoted cronies often endorse violence to achieve their ends. See Muehlenberg's essay, "Just What is Behind These Suicides" for an indication of what a twisted and sick individual with a pathological fear and loathing of gay people he really is.

I recently contacted Voxel, the hosts of Culturewatch, to draw their attention to the site. This is what I sent to abuse@voxel.net:

Hello,

I would like to draw your attention to a webblog hosted by Voxel that flagrantly disregards your Acceptable Use Policy. This is the address:

www.billmuehlenberg.com

It seems that by consistently posting blogs that are defamatory towards homosexuals, Muslims and atheists, the blog is extremely offensive and abusive and contravenes this section of the AUP:

Defamatory or Abusive Language: Using Voxel dot Net's network as a means to transmit or post negative, defamatory, harassing, abusive or threatening language.

Consider these articles:

http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2011/03/15/i-was-born-to-change/ (in which the author, Bill Muehlenberg, states that homosexuality is not only a choice, but gay people should be forced to change. Note the comment by Rodney Bewes: "It’s time this whole homosexual fraud was shut down" Threatening?)

and

http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2011/04/25/anzacs-and-political-correctness/

in which Muehlenberg repeats the same lie.

A quick look at the site will show that it's 5% Christian theology and 95% bigoted rants against gays, Muslims, atheists and anyone else Muehlenberg wishes to denigrate. That's the problem: it's clearly an abusive site where most of the comments beneath each article are full of hate and intolerance.

Thanks for your careful consideration of this matter.







Here's what they replied:

"billing@voxel.net"

To Whom it May Concern,

Voxel dot Net takes abuse and copyright issues extremely seriously. In order
to effectively comply with legal DMCA requirements and our responsibility for
due diligence to our customers, we have provided a detailed DMCA policy on our
website for submitting infringement requests. You may access it here:

http://www.voxel.net/about/policies#DMCA

Voxel accepts DMCA requests via fax or traditional mail only. Once submitted
in the requested format, we will take action accordingly.

Thanks,
--
Voxel dot Net
212 812 4190



Anyone with a fax machine or who lives in America or Singapore up for a challenge? If so, here's the addresses:

Voxel Dot Net, Inc.
29 Broadway 30th Floor
New York, NY 10006
Phone: 212.812.4190
Fax: 212.812.4195

Asia Headquarters
Voxel dot Net Pte Ltd
138 Cecil Street Cecil Court
#12-02 Singapore 069538

David Skinner - Prize Bigot

One of Muehlenberg's most frequent posters is an odious little man called David Skinner who throths at the mouth about all things homosexual.

I recently discovered how to contact him: d.skinner@talktalk.net

He's always up for an exchange about his bigotry, paranoia and homophobia.

Tuesday, 26 April 2011

Bill Muehlenberg's Censorship and Lies

Bill Muehlenberg's recent blog post, Anzacs and Political Correctness, attempted to put his own spin on Xtian Jim Wallace's recantation for a crass homophobic and Islamophobic remark on Twitter.

Wallace, Muehlenberh insists, only recanted because he was forced into it by pressure from the "gaystapo".

Here's what Muehlenberg says is his position on free speech:

Instead of living in a democracy where various points of view can be freely heard, we are instead living in a PC state where it is becoming increasingly risky to dare say anything that will rock the PC agendas. The homosexual lobby is clearly the most Stalinist in this regard. They will tolerate absolutely no dissent from their radical agenda.


He then goes on to shout down anyone who dissents from his radical Xtian agenda in his comments. Some, he doesn't even post. Here's the reason Muehlenberg cites:

Indeed, you will not see most of the activist comments here, either because they are too nasty and hate filled, lacking in any argument of substance, or they refuse to give their full names as my commenting rules require.


Here's something I found on Twitter, from a poster called Lawrence Meckan, who wrote a long, eloquent, balanced and polite challenge Muehlenberg. As usual, whenever anyone dares to tell the truth on his Culture Watch site, Muehlenberg censors and deletes the post, rather than risks having his foolish arguments blown out of the water by rationalists.



This proves that Bill Muehlenberg is nothing more than a liar and a propagandist, who censors his critics and refuses to engage in reasoned argument. It doesn't serve his agenda, after all.

Here's how he dismisses an earlier comment of Lawrence's:

It is not really worth replying to you, let alone even posting your comments.


What haughty arrogance! Anyone who reads Lawrence's "awaiting moderation" comment in the photo above will clearly see for themselves that there's a devastating and highly articulate challenge to Muehlenberg's usual bigoted rant.

And therein lies the problem. On his own website, where Muehlenber is god, he gets to just suppress and distort and censor anything that doesn't fit with his pathetic delusion and agenda.

Tuesday, 5 April 2011

Muehlenberg's Poison and his Poisonous Followers

In his latest tirade against gay people, Bill's article The Tolerance Brigade Strikes Again has, to date, attracted no fewer than 24 comments (and those are the ones from bigots who agree with him, of course...) all spitting bile about those nasty gays who should be strangled at birth.

His preceding article, A Review of Key Questions about Christian Faith: Old Testament Answers. By John Goldingay, is a book review. It's attracted a whopping 3 comments. A few articles further back, On the Relevance of Jeremiah, Part Two has attracted 5 comments, 2 of which are responses from Bill!

What does this show? The people who vent their spleens on Bill's site and in positions of power aren't remotely interested in theology or reading - they're only interested in whipping up bigotry and intolerance towards homosexuals and other popular hate-targets. Their "faith" is just a convenient excuse for the primary motivating factors in their lives - hatred and intolerance.

Bill knows full well that he makes most of his money from maintaining a constant stream of vile, homophobic rants; which is why there's more on that subject (on a supposedly Xtian blog) than on any other. Bit of theology, perhaps? Not when it has the bigots turning off in their droves...

Wednesday, 16 March 2011

Bill Muehlenberg’s most sinister article yet?


Muehlenberg shuffles the same cards over and over again, creating identikit articles over on his Culturewatch website. Often he sees the comments dry up when he posts about obscure Xtian apologists who even the faithful have never heard of; so to win back his fans and receive a deluge of comments, he’ll quickly follow these up with a juicy piece of bigotry, most often homophobia.

This is all part and parcel of the Modus Operandi of Bill Muehlenberg, and I’ve mentioned before about the priorities of his fans. Look how many comments homophobic articles get in comparison to ones to do with, um, theology. Bill knows that gay-bashing is his bread and butter, which is why it’s the agenda he keeps pushing.

Some of his regular posters, notably David Skinner, are even more frothing at the mouth about those damned gays than even Bill, and manage to turn everything into a rant about the evils of the “gay agenda”; which seems to amount to all of society’s ills being a direct result of Xtians not being allowed to persecute gays any more.

Bill’s latest homophobic article is the most telling yet though about the scale of his hatred towards anybody who doesn’t wholeheartedly embrace his Xtian agenda. It’s an attack on the Lady Gaga song, that seems certain to become a gay anthem, “Born This Way”, in which the provocative and eccentric artist lends credence to the truth that gay people can no more choose their sexuality than straight people.

The title of Bill’s article is “I Was Born to Change”.

Wow. How sinister. His point is not that he doesn’t accept that sexuality is not a matter of choice (which he doesn’t when it comes to homosexuality but does when it comes to heterosexuality!) but that gay people ought to be compelled to “change”. He should come right out and say that he lends his support to NARTH and other organizations seeking to “convert” homosexuals. He isn’t prepared to live and let live. In his mind, gay people are an abomination and not even entitled to share the planet with him.

What gives him this god complex and delusions of grandeur isn’t clear.
Look at the post from former Likely Lads’ star Rodney Bewes (assuming it’s one in the same) that he allows to stand: “It’s time this whole homosexual fraud was shut down.”

What does that even mean, Rodney? Do tell.

What can be noted about Bill’s clarion call for homophobic abuse and the genocide of homosexuals is that it contains a logical fallacy (only one, I hear you cry!) Under a pseudonym, I posted a very polite message under the article pointing it out. You can see the message I posted in the picture, because I took a screengrab, knowing full well that it would “await moderation” for a while before being deleted (if nothing else, Bill is predictable).

Bill puts all his weight behind believing the tiny minority of “ex”-gays – people who formerly identified as gay who have gone on to have a heterosexual relationship, as “proof” that those pesky gays could be straight like the rest of us if only they wanted to.

What he omits to point out is that only a tiny minority of “ex”-gay people, already part of a tiny minority of the minority of gay people who go on to live a heterosexual lifestyle, who claim that they no longer have any same sex attraction. The reality is that they’re still, in essence, gay, but happen to (for whatever reason) live heterosexually.

There’s also the undisputed fact that the overwhelming majority of gay people claim not to have made a conscious choice to be gay. Why should this surprise anyone? When did heterosexual people choose between homosexuality and heterosexuality? The whole argument is absurd.

Gay people can have straight sex, there’s no denying that. But look at all the failed marriages when gay people try to live as heterosexuals and live a lie. Nobody, and no unlucky spouse, deserves that.

Bill’s whole stupid argument is a bit like claiming it’s literally impossible for a Jewish person to eat a bacon sandwich. It’s not impossible, it’s just unlikely if they identify as Jewish that they’ll eat pork.

Which is precisely why a polite comment pointing out the glaring fallacy of his whole point is quickly censored into oblivion.

Commandment Number One of Culturewatch:

THOU SHALT NOT CHALLENGE BILL MUEHLENBERG’S DOGMA*

(*or be censored, howled down, told to “push your agenda elsewhere” or “set up your own website)

It says something about the stupidity of Bill Muehlenberg’s regulars that they don’t notice the stupidity of Bill’s arguments and happily go along with anything that agrees with their worldview.

A worldview in which homosexual people must convert or be sent to Auschwitz-like camps.

This is why deeply evil men like Bill Muehlenberg must be exposed for the ignorant, bigoted bullies that they are.