Google+ Followers

Tuesday, 11 September 2012

An Open Invitation To Mark Rabich

Bill's virginal favourite Mark Rabich comments of this blog that:

I’ve been aware of some of that stuff for ages, but in my experience most of them don’t even have the courage of their convictions enough to use their real name. That says enough right there. What a waste of time it would be to engage with these haters online. They could have someone rise from the dead in front of them and they would not believe! And when faced with an (intellectual) battle, they send a sock puppet or a remote control robot instead.
You tell me what kind of person you would rather have influencing culture – ones who want to have a civil debate and discuss evidence to get closer and closer at truth, or ones resorting to obsessive personal-attack websites hiding behind anonymous web-identities and promoting hateful speech and even death threats?
Death threats! Are you such a paranoid Xtian that you perceive people taking the piss out of you and your nasty beliefs as "death threats". Perhaps you can, for clarity Rabich, point out a "death" threat, or a threat of physical violence of any kind, on this blog.

As for your assertion that you can offer an "intellectual battle", come and discuss with us, Mark! In complete contrast to your buddy Bill I promise I won't censor you. If your reasons for believing are so watertight, let's have them!





Are you on?

Now Muehlenberg Even Savages Fellow Xtians...

 Until recently I laboured under the misapprehension that it was only non-Christians, gays and atheists that were the victims of Muehlenberg's bullying and general nastiness. Then yesterday I had the most extraordinary comment left by a gentleman called Alan Rowe, saying that he's a Christian who had posted on Bill Muehlenberg's Culturewatch website and quickly found himself banned, blacklisted, and the victim of an abusive attack by Bill and his rottweilers.

His offence? Staunch atheism? Is he gay? No.

So what did he do to earn the wrath of Muehlenberg? Did he swear? Name call?

None of the above.

Alan has kindly allowed me to reproduce his comment for this article:

I'm not the sort of person you would expect or even welcome here. I'm a Christian and always have been. My wife and I regularly attend church, though not as much as we probably should. Politically I'm fairly conservative - or "centre right" as I like to call myself.
Alan, anyone who wants to can post here. I don't hate Christians, I get on with the vast majority of them I work with and even have a few in the family! I only loathe Bill Muehlenberg because he is a bully who is impervious to reason, who resorts to censorship and shouting because he doesn't know how to debate rationally. This blog attacks Muehlenberg and his beliefs, not your average Xtian believer.

A friend of mine who will rename nameless as their name is probably mud in these parts, since they regularly visit Mr Muehlenberg's site, recommended Culturewatch to me, and although I found a few articles I read through more aggressive in tone than I generally care for, I nevertheless found much to agree with.
Hmm. OK, Alan, we'll let that go...
I decided to test the water by posting a comment on an article about abortion [Another Wolf, Alas] and being new I didn't want to rock the boat, but I couldn't help but notice that there was nothing in the article [ed - a piece about a priest called Father MacLeod who had actively protected women seeking an abortion from protestors outside an abortion clinic] that said that Father MacLeod held a pro-abortion stance. I read it simply that he saw it as his Christian duty to protect women, whether or not they were acting in accordance to his own principles. Things then got very quickly out of hand. Mr Muehlenberg quickly posted a reply that was aimed at putting me in my place, possibly because I was new. Others took it as their cue to follow, and I felt like I had set off a pack of wolves. I posted further comments aimed at calming the situation. You can see the comments for yourself. I was attempting to calm everyone down, telling them in no uncertain terms that I am staunchly anti-abortion and that I would join them in condemning Father MacLeod if it turned out that he was pro-abortion. All I pleaded for was that we exercise caution and acquire evidence against Father MacLeod before condemning him out of hand.
As you can see from Mr Muehlenberg's reaction, my plea for a bit of cool-headedness resulted in me being banned from his website. I was desperately upset. What had I done to upset them? I hate upsetting people. In fact my wife came home from work to find me in tears about it all. I've barely been able to sleep I'm so shaken by it. You should see the comments Mr Muehlenberg allowed to be posted about me. It's like something out of Orwell's one-minute hate. I wasn't allowed to reply, even to the posters who had written directly to me.
    
Alas, Alan's experience is nothing new but all par for the course over on the aggressive and vigorously censored Culturwatch. As I have repeatedly documented on this blog before, the last thing Muehlenberg is interested in is open and honest debate, truth and evidence. All he cares about is aggressively pushing his agenda. Hence his absurd "four strikes and you're out policy". This amounts to saying: "You have four chances to entirely agree with me and kiss my ass or I'll ban you from my website." So much for openness and debate, Bill!

Alan saved the last comment that he posted on Culturewatch, only part of which Bill allowed to be published, and only then to try to show Alan in a bad light. Alan hasn't (and even now won't!) said anything bad about Bill. This is what he posted:

My wife came home from work and found me in tears.

I showed her the comments from you on this site and she was appalled. "You're making it clear you're totally anti-abortion, all you're saying is you want to be sure the priest definitely has a pro-abortion stance before condemning him." She couldn't believe the level of personal abuse directed at me simply for urging caution that you allowed to be published.

Your site was recommended to me by a friend of mine, and they too have changed your opinion of you following the events of last night. In fact, they had told me they were considering making a financial donation to your ministry at Christmastime. Now they will donate elsewhere.

You may be interested to know that I Googled your name to find out more about you. One of the suggested searches was "Bill Muehlenberg bigot" and halfway down the first page was a link to a blog, seemingly run by rabid atheists, criticising you. They may be God-haters but they certainly have the measure of you, Mr Muehlenberg.

Unlike you, I am not one for mud-slinging, name-calling and twisting other people's words to serve my own agenda. I have however left a comment on the atheists' blog simply stating my experience of posting here. It remains to be seen whether atheists are more receptive to having a polite and temperate discussion than you evidently are.

You are a horrible man, Mr Muehlenberg. Sadly I would go so far as to say that. You deeply upset me last night, and so unnecessarily since on the key issue of abortion we wholly agree. But alas with bullies like you acting as spokespeople for Christ, it is no wonder young people are turning their backs on the Church all over the West. You think I'm the problem not the solution?

I'd say the same of you.

Have a really great day.

Yours sincerely,

Alan Rowe, Christian and staunch anti-abortionist.

Compare this to what Bill allowed to be posted:

You may be interested to know that I Googled your name to find out more about you. One of the suggested searches was “Bill Muehlenberg bigot” and halfway down the first page was a link to a blog, seemingly run by rabid atheists, criticising you. They may be God-haters but they certainly have the measure of you, Mr Muehlenberg.

Unlike you, I am not one for mud-slinging, name-calling and twisting other people’s words to serve my own agenda. I have however left a comment on the atheists’ blog simply stating my experience of posting here.

Have a really great day.

Alan Rowe
So much for distortion of the truth in order to push an agenda. Bill hides behind half truths, lies, and deliberate distortion of other people's words. Alan Rowe has done his bit in exposing Muehlenberg for the bully and manipulator he really is. It's time other Xtians woke up and recognised Muehlenberg for the fraud and bully he is too.

Monday, 3 September 2012

He Still Writes, Sanctimoniously...

Dear old Bill's latest piece de resistance is He Still Stands, Waiting... in which he claims that anyone who disagrees with him, or takes the time and trouble to leave a comment on his blog pointing out the manifold ways in which he is mistaken, it is really because:

I realise that so many of these folks are deep down really quite unhappy and messed up, and they are lashing out as a way to cope.

That's right: Bill believes that even people who dare to disagree with him are really, actually, deep down agreeing with him! He seems to think it's absolutely impossible for anyone to hold a contrary view to his vile theocratic one.

He also seems to think that maintaining a blog in which he daily pours hatred and scorn upon all non-extremist Xtians (gays and atheists in particular suffer torrential abuse from Bill's poisoned pen, and Muslims and liberal Xtians, though less often attacked, fare no better) in which he proposes the implementation of extremist views - gays should either "convert" or hide themselves away from polite society - atheists, Muslims and those of other faiths are wrong and should be happy to be dictated to by the "correct" faith - shouldn't result in any criticism.

Bill's problem is not only his utter failure to conceptualise the stark reality that somebody might actually disagree with him for valid reasons, but that he also perceives all criticism of his views as attacks upon his person. This is why he is so vicious in his denunciations of the mildest dissent.

In the early days when the hate mail poured in I just trashed it right away. I sure did not want the rest of my family to see this sick, perverted and diabolical stuff.... But the stark truth is, these guys tend to be the most intolerant, hate-filled people on the planet. And I have their comments to prove it. 

Oh, diddums. Want to avoid people using words you don't want to hear? Stop with the hate. My solution, dear old Bill? Talk to an atheist or a gay person instead of dehumanizing them and targeting them for abuse.

There, that's my example of "intolerant, hate-filled hate mail".

So convinced is Bill that he's right that he posts this little gem:

So I know that God waited patiently for me, and he is doing the same for all my many critics.

I'm not sure I've ever read anything more smug and sanctimonious. Bill actually thinks that those who disagree with him will sooner or later "see the light". It can't possibly be the case that we actually think his beliefs are ridiculous, unsubstantiated nonsense. No, we're just lashing out at Bill because we're unhappy, and jealous that he has it so right, and if only we listened to everything he said the world would be perfect.

The hope is many of these folks will one day come to see the love and grace of God, and recognise how bad the pigsty really is.

That's very presumptuous, Bill. You haven't seen my house. I keep it very neat and tidy I'll have you know. Seriously though: all non-fundies are living in a "pigsty"? Way to reach out to your "critics" Bill! You're really winning me over...

Thus if you are one of those who sometimes – or often – come to my site, leaving rather ugly and vicious comments, be forewarned: I am praying for you and God is still graciously waiting for you. And Jesus is still standing there, with his extended arms revealing his nail-scarred hands.

Well I'll sleep a lot sounder knowing that. And where's your evidence for the last bit? Sorry, more "abuse" from me there.

I posted a comment as Holly Hancock, pointing out that:

You receive what you perceive to be abusive comments (no doubt you’ll perceive this one in the same way) because you write with such utter disdain for anyone and everyone who doesn’t embrace your worldview, engaging in name-calling that you claim to find so hurtful when directed at you. Atheists are always “self-centred”, “arrogant” etc. Gay people are always “fascists”, “intolerant”. Your language is dehumanising.

and Bill replied that he only criticises the "militant" gays, you know the people who:

declared war on my faith, my freedom and my family

Yes, not a hint of overstatement there. I believe gays were round at Bill's house in a pink tank holding a revolver to his head and... christ in a canoe does the idiot know what "war" actually means? How insulting to people who've actually been involved in armed conflict. What he means is he can't tolerate knowing that other people do things with the backing of law and the support of society that he personally finds distasteful. That's what he means by "war". He is being forced to tolerate other people doing things he disapproves of. "War". Yep, not in any dictionary I've ever seen. 

I wrote back also pointing out that he made no defence of the accusation that he's always disparaging of atheists, but this awkward truth didn't see the light of day. I would have died of shock if it had.

The idiotic comment award goes to Mark Harrison (it barely needs pointing out, but his whole "argument" never applies in reverse). And Ursula Bennett is incredulous that anyone could find Bill "uneducated" when he reads "200 books a year at least". Ursula my dove pet, he's uneducated because the books are all on the same frigging subject! If I only ever read books about making plum jam I would be knowledgeable about the subject of plum jam but deeply ignorant and uneducated about everything else. I'd probably not believe in evolution, being uneducated and ignorant of the facts. I'd still be uneducated if I read 600 books a day on making plum jam.

I wonder how many people has Bill Muehlenberg converted to his extremist brand of Xtianity in all the years he's been ranting and raving? One? I doubt it. People see him for what he really is: a sanctimonious windbag who's deluded and full of anger and hatred. Only people who already agree with him from the outset will find anything worthwhile in his blog posts.



Pointing out that he's a vicious idiot is "abuse" and "war". Bill's lot distort language so much it becomes meaningless. Why not do something to tackle poverty, disease, child abuse? No, his little god created the universe so that Bill could rant and rave about people who have the temerity to not believe in his pathetic little fictions.




A likely story...