Comorbidity Is Self-Evident

The comorbidity of Rosa Rubicondior is becoming more and more apparent I'm afraid.  I think Rosa is finally giving up.  Perhaps my call to report her for child abuse is finally activating whatever moral compass was left within her hollow existence.

In any event, via another individual I offered Rosa a deal that would get her out of trouble with the law and social media as well as help her save face after her defeat.  Rosa refused and now must deal with the numerous reports being sent in by my readers.  Child abuse is no laughing matter and Rubicondior will feel the heavy weight of the law soon enough.

Rubicondior in an air of defeat has posted this:

http://rosarubicondior.blogspot.com/2013/04/what-to-do-with-spent-loon.html

My response will be in black and Rosa's words will be in blue:


<<THURSDAY, 11 APRIL 2013

What To Do With A Spent Loon?

Regular readers here and followers of the #atheism hashtag on Twitter will have heard of 'Sacerdotus' which is one of the many pseudonyms of an unemployed narcissistic, probably psychotic loon who spends most of every day boasting about his academic qualifications, claiming to hold various university degrees, tweeting and blogging about how he's about to 'destroy Atheism' and fantasising about being a Catholic seminarian about to qualify for the priesthood, whilst simultaneously displaying his crass ignorance about almost everything. In fact, he was expelled from St Joseph's Seminary, New York shortly after 2003 because of gross misconduct, thus ending his clerical career and simultaneously rendering himself unemployable.>>


Sacerdotus replies:

Ad hominem after ad hominem, that is all Rubicondior could offer unfortunately.  All this energy could have been well spent in presenting strong arguments in favor of atheism.  Nevertheless, Rosa made my ministry easy by presenting atheism as nothing more than a circus of the socially aloof.  It is a haven where morons can become fictional characters - as you see Rosa using a fake name and image of a halloween mask - and post away their delusions that feed their need to feel significant and wanted.

Notice that Rubicondior has much to say of me but does not back this say with evidence.  Even commentators on Rosa's blog request for evidence of her claims but as usual, Rosa is mum.

I will post the questions that someone posted which Rosa does not answer for obvious reasons:

<<Readers may also be aware that he has developed something of a psychotic obsession with me, inventing lurid tales of child abuse and terrorist activities and posting them on his blog. He also, rather pathetically, desperately tries to convince people that I have declined to debate him despite the fact that the record of his public display of cowardice in running away from my challenge to him to engage me in open debate can still be read inDebate: Is There Scientific Evidence Only For The Christian God?. I had challenged him to establish his claim to have scientific evidence proving the existence of the Christian god. The topic of the debate, which, had it been won would have established his claim, together with simple terms for ensuring transparency and unbiased moderation, and reducing his opportunity for his usual obfuscation, avoidance and quibbling over the meaning of words as a diversion, was laid out for discussion. As expected, his boasting proved to be empty and he refused to even discuss the terms, let alone producing anything resembling the scientific evidence he claimed to have or engage in anything resembling meaningful debate. It seems that the idea of open debate in a neutral forum is terrifying to him.>>


Sacerdotus replies:

Psychotic obsession indeed... we can see your projection and displacement here Rosa.  I never knew of you until you messaged me August of 2011.  You then blocked me while I was answering your questions.  When I posted on my blog the experience, this is when you came back for more.

You can write all you want and tell your own version, but I prefer the readers to see the proof themselves: http://www.sacerdotus.com/2012/10/poor-thingchoking-on-defeat.html   Everything is documented in this post.  Your own tweets, your acceptance and your dilly dally and eventual forfeit of the debate.

If someone invites you to debate and you accept the terms and begin to debate, you CANNOT go off topic and then present your own terms in the middle of a debate you already agreed to.  Have you not learned anything about contracts?  Once you accept a contract, you are bound by it.  You accepted my challenge to a debate with its terms, posted rants and then forfeited.  It is all documented Rosa.  Your pathological lying is also noticeable I might add.

Now, I have been constantly inviting you to debate me, even made a petition and you still run away.  Out of anger, you decided to pick a kid off the internet and label him as me in order to channel the shame you received and present it back at me as an expose of a "fraud."  This failed because you were reported to authorities for child abuse and people can verify that this information about me is false.  Notice how you do not answer this individual's questions regarding proof of your claims on me.

<<Following that public humiliation, 'Sacerdotus' went on a spree of abusive posts on Twitter, setting up impersonations of my account to post sexually explicit obscenities, campaigning to have me banned from Twitter, accusing me of being behind a conspiracy to have all Christians banned from the Internet, and issuing threats of violence resulting in Twitter intervening to take down all his accounts and any new ones, pending an undertaking to observe the rules he signed up to on joining. He was placed on special monitoring to ensure compliance. At the same time there were several crude and inept attempts to hack my Twitter account by changing the password.>>


Sacerdotus replies:
You made your bed and now you are laying in it Rosa.  You should have accepted your shame and moved on instead of escalating this into a circus.  I gave you a fair chance to debate me and you blew it by behaving like a moron.  That is not my fault.  I did not make any accounts posting sexually explicit things nor did I hack you.  This is part of the paranoia you created in your disturbed mind.

<<In the traditional style of a deranged psychotic, he frequently claims to have provided reports to the FBI, NYPD and something called 'The UK Authorities' on my 'terrorist' activities allegedly provided by his many 'contacts' who he says are watching me, presumably imagining 'The UK Authorities' would need his assistance and that of his team of 'contacts' if any of this were true. No doubt in pre-word processor times these 'reports' would have been written in green ink and signed "A Consernd Cityzen".>>


Sacerdotus replies:

Under the law, I and others have to report child abuse.  The instant I learned that you picked a random child off the internet and began to abuse him in order to attack me, this is when I drew the line and began to expose you for the sick individual you are.  I will not stop until you are prosecuted.  You should never abuse a child!  Your issue is with me, not anyone else.  Reports will be made against you until you are prosecuted or you remove all mentions of this child.  Welcome to the real world where laws exist.  



<<So, having initially spotted 'Sacerdotus' as an inept, infantile fraud ripe for plucking, so to speak, and recruited him to help me discredit religion in general and Catholicism in particular, by putting him on a public stage for all to witness his dishonesty and ineptitude in the name of Jesus and Catholicism, what to do about him now?>>


Sacerdotus replies:

Back your talk up with evidence Rosa.  Stop spewing your mental instability publicly.  Why won't you answer the questions people ask you?  Don't you know anyone can contact St. Joseph's seminary and inquire?  You cannot be that stupid, can you?  A reporter with a hot story does not keep the details.  Why not share them?



<<He has just spectacularly failed yet another simple challenge in which he only needed to answer an easy question exploring a fundamental tenet of Christianity (see here). It's now become something of a sport on Twitter to challenge 'Sacerdotus' to a debate to see what excuses he will come up with next, or even if he will acknowledge having seen the challenge.

I have many more such questions which would also show his cowardly disingenuousness, but is there any point to this? Does it help further the cause of Atheism and to discredit Catholicism more (is that even possible after all the recent scandals?) to continue to expose this sad fraud who probably has a personality disorder or Dunning-Kruger Syndrome, and is possibly mentally ill, and who has probably outlived his use-by date as an example of the harm religion does to people?

Or should I just ignore him from now on, consigning him to the obscurity he probably fears most, bearing in mind that the reactions he gets on Twitter are probably his only means of self-affirmation and the only way he has to measure his perceived importance to the world, no matter how distorted that perception is?>>


Sacerdotus replies:

I answered your question.  Notice how you cannot counter it and instead resort to ad nauseum.  Your questions are easy to answer and this is why you hate me so much.  I am the only individual who has taken you to task and mopped the floor with your nonsense.  Your time of picking on uneducated fundamentalists is over.  Once you stepped in my shadow, you stepped into my large footprint of academia.

Your readers may be atheists, but I do not think most of them are as stupid as you want them to be.  They can see my answers and my attempts to get you to debate me.  Those who support you do so in order to avoid making you look bad.

• No one takes you seriously Rosa, when will you realize this?  
• Why are you afraid to debate me?  
• If I am such an easy challenge as you claim, then why run from me?  
• Why block and hide behind your blog and immature friends?  

• Do my degrees scare you?  Is my wit too much?  
• What exactly are you afraid of?  
• If I am a fraud, then where is the proof?  
• Where is the letter showing my name as that of the child you abuse?  
• Where is the letter from the seminary showing my supposed expulsion?  
• Why are you hiding this information?  
• If you have information that will "expose" me and get rid of me for good, why not show it to every one?  

No one will fall for your stupidity Rosa.  This is why you have to be prosecuted by the law.  You need to be shown that life is serious and not a game on the internet.



<<I have prepared this little questionnaire. I will leave it up for a week. Please let me know your thoughts.


Now 'Sacerdotus' has spectacularly failed another simple challenge from me what should I do?
Keep exposing him as a fraud by putting up more challenges for him to flunk every few weeks or months?

Leave the infantile fool alone now and ignore him?

Keep baiting him because he is such a good argument for Atheism?

pollcode.com free polls>>


Sacerdotus replies:

Your silly questionnaire shows your fear.  It is laughable how I brought down the "mighty" vocal atheist.


<<
[Update 19 April 2013]

Voting is now closed.

With the vote being 55:45 in favour of ignoring the infantile fool, serial Internet abuser and sociopath, Manuel de Dios Agosto, aka @Sacerdotus, in future he will now be ignored by me no matter what username he uses. I suggest others do likewise as that would seem to be the only way to help him control his psychotic behaviour.

It just remains for me to thank him for the sterling work he did for me, albeit unwittingly, in helping to discredit religion in general and Catholicism in particular. Would Manuel be the obnoxious little excrescence he is today if it hadn't been for the Catholic Church? Nice one Manuel.



PS. Just one last thing, for anyone who is tempted to believe Manuel's denial that he is the Manuel de Dios Agosto who was expelled from St Joseph's Seminary, and his claim that Manuel de Dios Agosto is a young child: here is the account by Claudia McDonnell of the announcement by Bishop Garmendia of New York in New York Catholic that Manuel de Dios Agosto was to be admitted to a Franciscan seminary. The Franciscan seminary in New York is St. Joseph's. The New York Catholic site was archived on 2 February 2003 so clearly this announcement was made more than ten years ago. Manuel left the now closed (for low academic standards) Grace H Dodge school in 2000 when he would have been 16. There is no formal lower age limit for admission to seminary but this is not normally before age 18, which would mean Manuel entered seminary in 2002 - consistent with the site being archived in 2003. Assuming Manuel was indeed 18 years-old at the time, this would make him 31 years old now. Although very clearly mentally still a minor, Manuel is chronologically not the minor he likes to pretend. >>


Sacerdotus replies:

Rosa, picking a random article from the internet is not proof that this individual is me.  You have to show people my driver's licence, social security card, passport, birth certificate or other identification.

Moreover, please show us a letter from this seminary stating that this individual is me, was expelled etc.  Until you do so, your claims are false and libelous.

I invite all those reading this to verify for yourself that this person is not me and never attended this seminary:

St. Joseph's Seminary
201 Seminary Ave Yonkers, NY 10704
(914) 968-6200

I have nothing to hide.  If you believe Rosa, you are mentally disturbed as well.

Thank you for proving that you have absolutely no evidence for your claims.  You chose a random individual from the Bronx and said he was me.  This shows you are mentally ill and suffering from schizophrenia.  Schizophrenics are often delusional and suffer from paranoia.  They feel that people are out to get them and create fantasies in their heads.

Thanks also for providing evidence for this seminary so they can bring charges against you.  No institution likes to be slandered.  

Let's back-track on how you have changed your story:

• You find a profile on classmates with a chi rho and the name is Manuel and you say he's me because of the chi rho.  This classmates profile is of a high school kid.  
• Then you state that you found a myspace profile.  
• Then you said he was in St. Joseph's Franciscan Seminary which doesn't exist.  
• Then you say he is an adult mentioned in an article and is not a minor.  
• Then you say he is in St. Joseph's Seminary but is a Franciscan.  

Rosa, you are constantly changing your story.  Let's analyze this:

• How can you claim a kid on classmates is me and then change and say an adult in an article is me?  
• Furthermore, St. Joseph's Seminary has no record of this individual.  Everyone can contact them and verify this.  I invite them to.
• This seminary is for the Archdiocese of New York, not the Franciscan order.  Only men preparing for the diocesan priesthood go there.  
• The only Franciscans who study there are the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal.  They do not have a record of this individual.    

It is obvious that you are making this up as you go.  You need help!