an atheist viewpoint

thoughts from a non-theist

-@GodsWordIsLaw’s “Million March for Morals” Washout-

After weeks of triumphantly boasting about how successful his ‘Million March for Morals’ would be, ‘ Keith Roberts’ (or, to give him his full medical title, ‘Keith Roberts’) has reached the point of no return. Today is the day, today is the day when millions of people will descend upon Washington DC and show their support for raging homophobia and idiocy.

After a whole morning of mocking, Keith has posted an image of the march –

note the URL he links to from the tweet, just so no one can accuse me of faking this

Here’s a link to Keith’s picture –

It didn’t take long for twitter user Alephnaught to spot that the photo was nothing to do with Keith, and had been stolen from a Myspace page

….when confronted with this, Keith responded by admitting he’d lied

“Yeah OK i fucking lied about the photo big deal! Least I’m not a sodomite and God’s going to forgive me for one sin I apologized for #fags

Following this latest humiliation, can whoever is behind this Poe and Troll finally put the joke to bed? It’s well past the point when it ceased being even funny.


EDIT: Here’s what Washington was looking like in the early hours of Saturday, after a snow storm has passed through –

Single Post Navigation

20 thoughts on “-@GodsWordIsLaw’s “Million March for Morals” Washout-

  1. I think what’s worse about this was that if you look at the MySpace page it’s actually a mother whose daughter Stephanie was diagnosed with leukemia, and this picture is a march of family and friends in support of Stephanie.

    If this is Keith’s idea of a joke, it’s in very poor taste.

  2. As has been pointed out on Twitter, ‘Keith’ has royally fucked himself with this one

  3. Clearly he should rename his account to @godswordisforged

  4. Shit, I would not have caught that…good work alephnaught!

    • Thanks, Reynold! To be honest, a great deal of the credit goes to Google Image Search. After the “Dave Butts” fiasco, I’ve tended towards putting any piece of visual “evidence” of Keith through it to see where it really comes from.

      BTW I’ve noticed he’s deleted the tweet, but not the picture from Twitpic. Rather bizzarely, he’s still kept the tweet about admitting lying in the tweet that’s now deleted, and then some lame excuse about how God’s supposed to forgive him this one (ho ho) misdemeanour, as homosexuality or something.

      No word of course on what happened to the march.

  5. Pvblivs on said:

    It would appear that vanity is very popular among the internet christians.

  6. Liars for Jesus. Isn’t it awesome that you can do anything and good ‘ol Jesus will just forgive and forgive and forgive.

    I guess that’s why there are billion or two Christians, it’s like the McDonalds of religion, easy to get in, easy to understand (if you ignore most of it) and easy to get forgiveness.

    Very American I would say.

  7. Ydemoc on said:

    Hi Alex,

    I’m not exactly up to date on the topic of this particular thread. So, in lieu of anything substantive to offer, I just wanted to let know that I, too, have found my way over to your blog’s new residence .


  8. Ha ha, did a quick search for any “news” in Washington DC, and found that the main story was a whole load of snow and ice blanketing the area in the early hours of Saturday morning. ( )

    Even if Keith’s march existed, it wouldn’t be able to march because of weather conditions.

  9. Just for reference, here is a pic from yesterday morning of the Whitehouse lawn that Keith and his minions were supposed to be descending upon:

  10. This note is for Jim Gardener, Alex Botten and their ‘Fundamentally Flawed’ audience. Jim and Alex have been sending me personal emails and giving my replies some very interesting translations. Jim Gardener has been censoring my comments from his blog but maybe Alex Botten won’t.

    As noted in a previous comment at Jim’s blog, Jim stated,

    “Note: Rick has finally replied to my emails. He isn’t interested in anything. At all.”

    This is a very interesting translation of what I actually wrote in my email reply to Jim on January 18th, basically stating that Jim is free to debate the article at its original location, my blog, whenever he’d like to. An atheist at my blog, Reynold, has noted that the obvious location to carry on a text debate is at the location of the original posted article.

    For Alex Botten my answer translates into, “I have to agree with Jim – you’re clearly refusing to debate.”

    I usually don’t relay private email information, but I do not like being unjustly criticized and thought I should probably clarify the situation. The following are some of Jim’s comments from my Templestream Blogger blog:

    “Jim Gardner Templestream Blog comment – Jan 14, 2012: So, pretty please with a cherry on top, spare me the entry level “so you’ve decided to become a Christian apologist and argue with atheists on the internet” handbook, and talk to me face to face. You have my email address and you know how to get in touch with the podcast — where we can happily and freely talk about where you’re going wrong with your understanding of quantum electrodynamics.

    Blog reply from Rick Warden – Jan 15: Jim, Sorry to see you giving up so quickly on our debate. The subject of absolute truth was initially brought up in a previous comment by Hugo and is a valid subject for debate, as it is central to a transcendent understanding of truth. If you can’t seem to engage in a civilized Internet typing debate without constant cynicism, then why would I assume that an online Skype debate with you would have any value whatsoever?”

    Jim, You left our debate at my blog apparently for a reason outlined in an email: “Hey, Rick. I’m sorry if I don’t follow up via the comments on your blog, but to be perfectly honest I find the interface totally appalling.”

    However, I see a written debate format as the only possible medium in your case, Jim, and my blog as the most logical location where the original article is posted. Because you have a propensity to be cynical and to twist and distort what people communicate, I don’t believe a debate with you in any format would be productive. But, nevertheless, a text debate at least allows for a clear record of what is being communicated and forces people to try and communicate more carefully, clearly and honestly.

    Jim, You had also made the following comment, “Could you please make a note on your sidebar that I was happy to accept your challenge to a debate but you declined? Thanks.”

    – I would be happy to post a note on my sidebar for you, Jim. I’d like 2 things. An official answer to the following question and a photo to use along with it: Jim, It seems you gave up on our blog debate because you don’t like Blogger – Is that true? PS – If possible, try to keep your reply to one sentence so it may fit on a sidebar banner.


    Rick Warden

    • Rick, I am more than happy to take your challenge, just add ‘theealex’ on Skype, tell me when you’re available, and we’ll spend as long as you like on it, we will then make the whole, unedited, conversation available as a podcast for our many thousands of subscribers to download. As my initial challenge to you was to discuss this via an actual conversation, I feel this would be appropriate.

      If you are unwilling to do so, please add a note to your site stating ‘The Fundamentally Flawed Podcast was more than happy to meet my challenge, but I declined to speak to them’ – you can use one of your own photographs of yourself to illustrate if you so desire.

      • I’d also like to point out that WordPress sometimes marks things as spam automatically, and in this case that’s exactly what happened. As I removed the comment from the spam folder the moment I was able to, I would appreciate an apology for you ad hominen attack.

  11. Alex,

    I’m not refusing to debate you or Jim but I do not believe a ‘podcast discussion’ is a suitable means for debating either you or Jim Gardner and I’ve explained why in my comment posted here at your blog January 22. So you, Alex, are NOT accepting THE challenge ‘to come and debate the article at my blog’ I had offered the 20 top atheist blogs.

    Jim Gardener DID accept my challenge and came to debate at my blog but did not make one cogent point but, rather, made a few ancillary, irrelevant and unsupported points before leaving off our debate. The manner in which you continue to twist the truth and now claim I’ve made an ‘ad hominen attack’ without showing how I supposedly have done this altogether underscore the fact that a Skype ‘discussion’ with you would most likely be a waste of time.

    • Rick, the ad hom was in an email where you wrote “It seems both you and Jim prescreen comments – a true sign of intelectual [sic] weakness. If you choose to censor my comments as Jim does, it only further underscores your combined lack of philosophical aptitude.”

      If you believe us to lack ‘philosophical aptitude’ then it should be a small job to show us up completely on the podcast…..but yet again I see you’re running away from the challenge I presented to you.

      BTW, reading Dawson’s disemboweling of you was quite interesting, that you continue to think that you have even a shred of argument left after that speaks volumes about your delusional state.

Write what you like, but don't cry if you act like a dick and get banned for it

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: