In our last piece, we looked at who signed, and asked the question if any of them had read the book first, or at all. [The answer to that query: some read the book while the vast majority did not; it seems that all claim to be experts on the contents of the book, however.]
In the lists of those who signed the essential book ban and character assassination of Rev. Todd Eklof, there are some striking omissions. Given that to be fully, completely, irrationally on-board with the anti-racism
Why?
In the current hysterical atmosphere at the UUA not signing a popular petition makes one stand out. The ideal at the UUA that it wants all congregations to adopt is groupthink. It makes very little sense not to sign a petition.
It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to refuse to sign particularly if you have been one of the architects of the current situation.
Why for instance is Rev. William Sinkford not on either list?
He was our first "black" president. This was a fact screamed from the rooftops.
He was also brought back when Rev. Peter Morales was shit-canned to be part of a tripartite (trinity?) occupying presidency. This is not ancient history. The man is labeled a leader, is brought back to lead after the ousting of his successor, and yet, does NOT sign a letter denouncing the racism of a book that is being treated as if it came from Satan's bowels.
What's up with that?
Does Rev. Sinkford not find the book racist? If he doesn't find the book rayciss, maybe he should say so.
Does he not believe that Rev. Todd Eklof is racist? If he doesn't find Rev. Todd Eklof rayciss, maybe he should say so.
Rev. William Sinkford was a driving force for the "justice" of anti-racism work. In fact, he was one of the main pushers and beneficiaries of anti-racism in the UUA.
Why, when his colleague, friend, and campaign manager, the Rev. Rosemary Bray-McNatt signed the UUMA letter, would Rev. Sinkford not sign it?
Can you see how this is a big omission?
Is he having second thoughts?
Is he beginning to look at what he's wrought and questioning his role?
Nah... Rev. William Sinkford seems incapable of holding an opinion that hasn't been carefully handed to him. Ask any member of his congregation. [That's what some of them are saying.]
Is Rev. William Sinkford racist?
Maybe he did his part, helped to fertilize and plow the ground from which this harvest of toxic fungus grows, and having done his part, handed the reigns over to the useful idiots and true believers who will complete the process. He's no longer needed, he fulfilled his role as a key player in the anti-racism
And having done his part fades into the night. If you let him. Why are you letting him?
Or maybe people realize that trans-racial grandpa has nothing relevant to say anymore?
If this is true, he may simply never have been approached.
Another name that is noticeably absent from this list is that of Rev. Rob Eller-Issacs. Rev. Rob "Anti-Racism" Eller-Issacs is not a signatory?! What the fuck is up with that? I mean the man's been on the ground floor of this stuff since the candidacy of Rev. John Buehrens for president, and was part of the closed-door meeting that gave BLUU 5.3 million of the UUA's money... with no strings attached! And he didn't sign?
It's like he wants to be invisible. Well, I suppose cockroaches hate the light.
This one's getting long and will need to be continued... Just wanted to let you all know I haven't forgotten about these motherfuckers. And then there are those ministers who have connections to the Spokane church, none of whom signed. Yeah, there's more to come.
Your Old Pal,
Devilhead
