Robin Edgar had promised to deliver a “point-for-point rebuttal” of our recent post, “What Really Happened at the Montreal Church?” Among the slew of recent posts on “The Emerson Avenger” (which we will address further down) we find yet another rage-filled rant in response to the allegations posted here.
So how many “points” did he “rebut”? One. That’s all. Nothing else.
Consider that the main issue being addressed is whether Robin Edgar’s outlandish behaviour was “provoked” by what he claims Reverend Ray Drennan told him in a private meeting, or whether this pattern of behaviour was the very reason Drennan met with him. Consider further how we treated the allegation which was brought to our attention — not as solid fact which completely refuted Robin Edgar’s assertions, but as an allegation which at best gives reason to consider his version of events with a grain of salt.
Does Robin Edgar address this main issue? No, he does not. Instead, he goes on a lengthy, histrionic rant about the minor allegation that he threw a chair. He goes on and on and on, denying over and over again that there was ever a “chair-throwing incident,” even putting forward the fallacious argument that, since you can’t find it in any Google search, then it could never have happened.
As for the main point, or any other point in our reader’s account? He does not address this at all.
Not that this is surprising, as Robin Edgar has been known for avoiding questions asked of him, especially when it demands that he be held as accountable for his language and behaviour as anybody else. No, he would rather nit-pick and fixate on minor issues rather than address the all-important issue of why he must lash out, insult, berate and belittle UUs, while he himself accomplishes nothing except the making of himself into a clownish caricature.
Take how he has responded to the participation of UUs in the recent “Day of Non-Compliance” in Phoenix, Arizona. Amongst UU bloggers there has been healthy and thoughtful debate on the impact of these protests, both for the immigration issue and for the public perception of Unitarian Universalism. Contrast this against Robin Edgar’s juvenile and tasteless posts on “The Emerson Avenger”. He calls any given online disagreement, even when done in a civil tone, as a “kick in the balls”. He tries to ridicule UUs in handcuffs with snide remarks about “bondage and domination”. Yet in none of his feeble attempts at humour is there anything constructive or even entertaining. It is nothing more than yet another pathetic display of Robin Edgar’s tendency to fixate on things which are relevant only to Robin Edgar.
Perhaps why he has wasted so much type on the minor question of whether or not he threw a chair. To him, it is more important that he win that argument, even if only in his own mind, than ever dare to consider how his own nearly monomaniacal and rage-filled behaviour and language has not only cost him support, but annoyed and even frightened so many around him.