CultureWatch

Bill Muehlenberg's commentary on issues of the day...

Atheists Say the Ugliest Things

May 4, 2010

While atheists will demur, it seems that miracles still happen. One of Australia’s most foul-mouthed, bigoted and vile columnists has just lost her job. Atheist Catherine Deveny has just been fired by the Melbourne Age newspaper.

Even this godless newspaper has finally decided that enough is enough. While she was not dropped for her militant and fundamentalist atheism, she was dropped for some despicable and disgusting comments she made about Sunday night’s Logies ceremony.

The “comedian” and columnist used Twitter to send a series of damning remarks about the evening’s proceedings. She said this about child star Bindi Irwin: “I do so hope Bindi Irwin gets laid”. And she said this about Rove McManus and his wife Tasma, “Rove and Tasma look so cute … hope she doesn’t die, too”.

This of course was in reference to the death of his first wife, Belinda Emmett, who succumbed to cancer in 2006. Even fellow secular entertainers were appalled at her remarks. John-Michael Howson called her “a pathetic loser,” and said, “She is the most vile creature in Melbourne’s media”.

Melbourne radio personality Neil Mitchell said her comments were “vulgar, sick stuff”. But Ms Deveney refused to apologise, and defended her actions. “I meant every single word,” she said. As a result of all this, the Editor-In-Chief of the Age Paul Ramadge, was forced to fire her. “We are appreciative of the columns Catherine has written for The Age over several years but the views she has expressed recently on Twitter are not in keeping with the standards we set at The Age,” he said.

Of course she has said plenty over the years which should have resulted in her getting the sack. She recently appeared at the Melbourne International Comedy Festival with a show entitled, “God is Bulls**t: That’s the Good News”. This is how the “comedy act” is described:

“Strap yourself in for a death-defying ride through Catherine’s spiritual journey from wannabe Catholic altar girl to atheist eye candy. Includes diversions to the megachurch experience, the cult of the Quakers, taking on Cardinal George Pell in a faceoff and her diagnosis that God has Narcissistic Personality Disorder – even though he doesn’t exist. A big finish. Trust me.”

Riotously funny I am sure. She has managed to offend a good 80 to 90 per cent of the world’s population with that routine. That should have been enough for the Age to get the hint that she is not worth her paycheque. But she continued to write, spouting forth the most obnoxious trash.

Just last week for example she said this about Anzac Day: “Men only enlisted to fight for the money, for the adventure or because they were racist. Anzac Day Sh**s Me. Anzac Day IS a glorification of war. They didn’t die for us but because they were risktaking testosterone fuelled men with a pack mentality.”

Well she can continue her poison-tongued tirades, but at least now it will not be in a major newspaper. How in the world they could ever have employed her for so long is beyond me. I have interacted with her ugly remarks from time to time, including here:

billmuehlenberg.com/2009/09/04/more-atheist-tirades/
billmuehlenberg.com/2009/04/15/more-atheist-arrogance/
billmuehlenberg.com/2008/07/23/889/

I mentioned in those articles that even though she was a bigoted and twisted God-hater who obviously has lots of issues to deal with, we must nonetheless recognise that God has made her in his image, and although she is fallen big time – as we all are – she is still someone for whom Christ died.

I have no idea what she is going through now. She appears not to have the slightest bit of remorse for her barbaric attacks. She may in fact simply become more hardened, more bitter, and more twisted. But we can all pray that despite this cold steel exterior somewhere deep down inside there is still a soft spot that God can work with.

I for one am absolutely thrilled that she no longer has the Age as a vehicle to pour forth her wretched rants. She has finally got what was coming to her. But we must remember to pray for her. She desperately needs to come to the foot of the cross, and find the mercy, grace and forgiveness that she so very much needs.

Indeed, we all need the cross, and some of us have already made that decision to renounce self and put God first. Let us all pray that she makes that decision as well, in what may be a time of crisis for her.

www.theage.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/deveny-dropped-as-columnist-for-the-age-20100504-u6si.html?autostart=1
www.heraldsun.com.au/entertainment/confidential/catherine-deveny-slammed-as-vile-creature-over-logies-twitter-rant/story-e6frf96x-1225862242173
www.comedyfestival.com.au/2010/season/shows/catherine-deveny-god-is-bullshit-that-s-the-good-news

[754 words]

16 Responses to Atheists Say the Ugliest Things

  • As ye sow, so shall ye reap. Good riddance to the hateful woman. I pity her poor children.
    Dennis Ryan

  • I strongly suspect that she would be convinced that what she did was acceptable. Yes, of course, Catherine, the whole world is wrong and you are the only one who is right. Because life is just so much better for everybody when you get to spew the most adolescent bile about 11 year old girls and yet claim you champion the cause of women everywhere… I have to wonder – isn’t her own daughter about the same age?

    She is unfortunately a prime example of how much a hatred of God can distort a person to be a predicable and sad silhouette of what they were created to be. Maybe she could one day have her blindness lifted – after all, Saul of Tarsus did quite a bit worse than her!

    This letter I sent to The Age a couple of year back came to mind:
    http://www.theage.com.au/news/letters/cut-this-program-and-lives-will-be-lost/2008/03/21/1205602652791.html?page=6

    Right now, her life-destroying cynicism has indeed reflected on her and it has cost her. It would be very good if she did wake up, but I suspect it will sadly take more than this to shake her pride.

    Mark Rabich

  • Is that who she is? I saw the whole twitter thing last night on ACA or one of those shows when I was fixing my parents computer. I was wondering who she was. Thanks for enlightening me Bill. The comments she made on Twitter were really beyond the pale, and given her history, I guess they make more sense now.

    Jason Rennie

  • I agree Catherine Deveny has reaped, for now, the harvest she so richly deserves. I also think that her whole personna is about her and not about anyone else. For example my daughter, at the age of 14 took exception to an article Deveny wrote regarding private school education and was quite critical of it, no downright nasty and full of reverse snobbery. My daughter went to a Girls grammar school in the eastern suburbs that imbued the students with a sense of social justice and she let Deveny know that. No reply, no acknowledgement, which to me smacked of rudeness and unprofessionalism. But then it is Catherine Deveny – rudeness, crassness, godlessness and unprofessionalism and full of foolish pride all rolled into one. However, we should remember that but for the Grace of God we too can be guilty of these actions.
    Wayne Pelling

  • Deveney is a “media whore” of the first order. And note the timing of both this latest fracas as well as her appearance on Q and A a few weeks back… she’s got her “comedy” show to promote.

    She is a deeply insecure person with really just one skill – muck-raking. What most appalls me is that the media – rather than urge her to get therapy for her overt bitterness – are giving her column inches and airtime.

    At last the Age has been forced to act. It had really become a question of just how obscene did she have to get before they would. At least now we know: you have to talk like a pedophile psycho before the Age will muzzle you. Good to know.

    Alister Cameron, Melbourne

  • Hi Bill,

    I think it more befitting that title be “Catherine Deveny says the Ugliest things”.

    I certainly do not condone what she has said. How old is Bindi Irwin?? 12?? So sad someone would even say something like that.

    Ben Green

  • Thanks Ben

    Yes Catherine does not speak for all atheists (although I am starting to collect all the foul, disgusting and putrid remarks some atheists send into this site – of which there are many).

    Bindi is 11.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • It’s a bit like those chaser’s war guys.

    Everyone says, “They’ve gone too far, they’ve gone too far.”

    But that’s their thing. They’ve made a career out of being obnoxious, misrepresenting people, guerilla journalism, going too far. The difference is the target.

    Same with this journalist.

    Take unsubstantiated pot shots at Christians and you are cutting edge. Do the same with cute Bindi Irwin or popular Rove, then you’ve gone to far.

    Michael Hutton, Ariah Park

  • Sadly, as someone else pointed out, she will end up with a regular gig on “our” ABC.
    Hilary Gilbert

  • She is a pathetic misadventure of humankind. Hatred of the kind she spouts can only destroy her soul. We all have a day of reckoning no doubt hers will come.
    Patrick Brahams

  • Hi Bill,
    This is great news. I think the point you make about her humanity and her need to come to the foot of the cross is so important.

    I read recently in ‘Wil you help me? Handbook of devotion to Divine Mercy’ that Jesus said even the most hardened sinners would melt if people of God spoke to them humbly of his divine mercy.
    Michael Hutton, you are spot on with your comment!!

    Catherine Dodd

  • Whilst what Catherine Deveney twittered was obvisously inappropriate and offensive, do you think that some of the name calling of her could be toned down a bit. Isn’t their a saying, hate the sin, love the sinner.

    Martin Turner

  • Thanks guys

    Andrew Bolt here takes on Deveney and the biased Age newspaper: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/toxic-tweets-a-death-knell/story-e6frfhqf-1225863331261

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • “Hate the sin, love the sinner” Is one of those twisted logics that allows school ‘disciplinarians’ to remove responsibility of a bad action away from the perpetrator. I am sorry, but the sinner commits the sin, and whilst we shouldn’t hate them, we must certainly let them know that they must repay for their sin, by firstly acknowledging their wrongdoing, secondly to repent for their wrongdoing, thirdly to say sorry for their wrongdoing, and finally to make every effort not to repeat the wrongdoing.
    Guilt is also a concept that should be explained. The sinner feels guilt because they have done something hurtful and through this process, they can ‘make up’ with God and try again.
    This concept of ‘love the sinner, hate the sin’ has been used by many Christians to water down the whole issue of sinning.
    Jane Petridge

  • Scenario: Civilian involved in dangerous driving (ie speeding), kills another driver in head-on crash. Do we separate the drive r(the civilian) from the accident? When using this analogy, one can see it is a complete nonsense, and wouldn’t stand up to the law.
    Yet, Martin you would have us believe the sinner should be separated from the sin (“Hate the sin……love the sinner)??
    Jane Petridge

  • Yes, it’s called personal responsibility for our words and actions. Out of the mouth the heart speaks. Our actions speak even louder. Let’s not play it down – God doesn’t. Jesus made it clear what the heart of the unholy man was filled with.

    A paedophile is a vile creature. A human trafficker a ruthless monster. Until one repents of their actions and intentions they are what they are. And they are that way by making decisions to be that, as we all do ultimately have to take responsibility for our decisions.

    Garth Penglase

Leave a Reply