Well, after about two weeks of silence, Robin Edgar has struck again.
July 30, with apparently nothing better to do, he lashes out at this blog, now making the baseless claim that it is being written by a minister he does not like, whom he now asserts has Multiple Personality Disorder. Woe unto anybody who dares to guess what is wrong with him, yet he proclaims the right to do so unto others (and not to help them, but to attack and belittle them).
In addition, Robin Edgar insists that the allegations presented to us (and recounted in our post “What Really Happened at the Montreal Church?”) are nothing more than “libelous” examples of “Big Fat U*U B S”, and insists that he will “rebut” them point for point. We have heard this before, and again Robin Edgar is engaging in yet more black-and-white thinking. As we said earlier, these allegations have not been proven; they merely open the question of what indeed happened which has set off so many years of obsessive and rage-filled attacks by this man. If he has demonstrable evidence of what happened, let him present it. If the other side can do so, we welcome that, too. But if his “point-for-point rebuttal” is to be nothing more than more hysterically angry name-calling, then we are inclined to ignore it, because that is simply not evidence.
August 1, after posting comments on other UU blogs, he lashes out at the hundreds of UUs who have chosen to go to Arizona to protest that state’s recently passed immigration law. No constructive criticism, either, which is par for the course for him. Just more insults, calling UU protesters “stupid”, and another tasteless attempt at humour declaring that UUs who wind up handcuffed must be “into bondage.”
At least when other UUs question whether such protests are morally appropriate, or whether they will have any effect, they do not stoop to personal insults against those involved in the protests. We have noticed a healthy debate among UU bloggers and their readers on the issue, with the sole exception of Robin Edgar. Then again, he does not want to debate. He wants to attack, to waste so much of his life and energy making Unitarian Universalism look bad, and to make himself the centre of attention.
If that is not bad enough, he has to whine yet again whenever even one of his numerous comments on other bloggers’ pages does not get approved. When will other UUs learn that trying to deal with him is a no-win situation? Since Robin Edgar thinks every word he types is important, how dare anybody decide that any of his comments is over the top? Not to mention the software for some blogs, which screen comment submissions with more than one or two links for administrator approval, as a way of controlling spammers, as this is a signature they have in common with him.
We do not expect Robin Edgar to grow up and finally realize that the UU blogosphere is not his personal sandbox, where he can bully everybody else into doing whatever he demands. We would hope, however, that more UU bloggers will recognize that there is nothing to be gained by allowing him to hijack their sites for spreading even more of his venom. Screening him (and others) is not a form of censorship, because it does not prevent him from posting whatever he wants on his own blog. It does, however, keep conversations on track, and will make a clear statement to him that, based on his prior behaviour, he cannot be trusted to engage in civil and meaningful discussion, and that he has nobody else to blame for this but himself.