Google+ Followers

Wednesday, 2 January 2013

Muehlenberg's Position on Name-Calling

Selected quotes by Bill Muehlenberg from Culturewatch:

Always great to see how the secular left “argues”. Not a scrap of evidence, facts, data, reason, rational discussion, or informed debate; just heaps of mud-slinging, name-calling and ugly ad hominems. But thanks again for demonstrating to the whole world how your side has no intellectual leg to stand on, relying instead simply on nasty abuse, hate and intolerance.

The last thing the other side wants is truth – so they resort to name-calling and mud-slinging instead of actually dealing with the evidence.

Yes I know that is how your side “argues”: simply resort to name-calling and mud-slinging instead of engaging in evidence and fact.
This week, Bill has written an article "On Name Calling" in which he has this to say:
If a person regularly denounces God, berates him and vents his anger about God, then it is perfectly accurate and correct to refer to such a person as a God-hater. That is exactly what they are, and Paul knew all about such folks, and consistently called them what they were.

So many believers today think we have to live in some sort of sanitised cloud, never saying anything that might even remotely be considered to be offensive or harsh. But the Bible is full of harsh and offensive language.
So apparently name-calling isn't fine if you hold a different opinion to Bill. Name-calling is entirely justified if you're an Xtian extremist who thinks it's appropriate to label atheists "god-haters".

There's a word for that.

It starts with "Hyp" and ends with "ocrisy".

Muehlenberg is full of it. 


  1. What's your point?

  2. Thanks for admitting that Xtians don't have a problem with hypocrisy when it serves their agenda.

  3. Why is it wrong to call an atheist a God-hater? You're a half wit.

    1. Because it's inherently name calling - Mr. Meulenberg is using it as a pejorative term to describe and label a group of individuals he doesn't like or disagrees with and has fashioned it so that it is implied his brand of theology has some form of authority and that the group he is applying it to are somehow threatening. Both of these are incorrect assertions - Atheists don't hate god they simply don't believe that there is a god. By the same logic Mr Meulenberg could be called a god-hater for disagreeing or not believing/following the tenants of Islam or any other religion. Some Atheists may not like or will strongly disagree with some or all theological doctrines or people that preach them for many different reasons, in this instance because of those doctrines exclusionary and discriminatory positions of LGBTs.

  4. Thanks for your continued charm and good manners.

    Atheists don't "hate" what doesn't exist. We don't "hate" your conception of god any more than we "hate" Thor, the tooth fairy, unicorns, goblins, or any other things people have made up that don't actually exist.

    We may hate the way religious people use their faith as an excuse to defend their own bigotry or bully non-believers, but that's something else entirely.

    Glad to clear that one up for you.

  5. Haha. Nice try. Fail.

  6. Thanks for this blog exposing Bill Muehlenberg for the religious bigot he is.
    Since it is impossible to hold any sort of meaningful dialogue with him (comments are vigorously censored), we need a platform to expose his bigotry for what it is.

    He also seems to have an (possibly unhealthy) obsession about gay issues that certainly raises my suspicions!

  7. I'm sorry, Anonymous, but I don't quite follow. You are asserting that it is correct to call atheists "god-haters" and that my explanation as to why this is an erroneous position to take is incorrect. You fail to offer any explanation or validation as far as I can see as to why you justify your position on either proposition. Can I politely ask - are you just too young to understand how debate and reasoned argument work?

  8. Thanks very much for your kind comments, Axel. You are quite right about Muehlenberg's censorship, especially hypocritical since he's always bewailing that he's not given freedom of speech!

    His latest post, equating homosexuality with smoking will be the subject of my next blog. The guy genuinely seems baffled as to why he gets called a bigot!

    Yes, one always has to suspect those obsessed with homosexuality, as Muehlenberg clearly is as he writes about virtually nothing else. It's funny how he never rails against the "sin" of "gluttony". But then he's a fat bastard, so that "rule" obviously doesn't apply to him.