|
In Reply to: Re: To Christina and Jered posted by direct question on September 11, 2003 at 11:54:08:
I always find it interesting when people asking for direct answers to direct questions choose not to indentify themselves by name. (if I've somehow missed your name in this thread you'll correct me I'm sure) As a SG who has no love for the Family and in fact is actively working for answers from them, I nonetheless find the inquisitioning the Love's Bridge SGs have faced to be astounding. In one of the first responses from a LB SG, I believe she refered to "the perverted doctrines" of TF. I have never heard someone who was a secret Tf member refer to their doctrines as such. For those of you who wonder why SG's often have difficulties in their relations with those from the first generation, (both in and out of TF) I would refer you to the ordeal these Love's Bridge SG have gone through. The fact is these young people are doing work that many of us would be proud to have on our resumes. I understand that because of Sam's actions, they felt compelled to visit this site and offer up a defense. That not withstanding, I am of the opinion that they should not and do not owe anyone an explination. Is it not enough when someone denounces the Tf and their beliefs? The issues I take with many of the first generation is that all too often, whether they are in the Family or fighting The Family, it seems there ssems to be more idealism than the rational thought, and more passion than nuanced approach to issues.
I would submit that these SG's efforts to explain their work and positions (as has been pointed out by many on this site) is to be commended.
