|
In Reply to: Check this out. posted by Mekka on October 13, 2002 at 14:01:08:
I never saw anything that would resemble beastiality while I was around. I personally don't agree that it was a doctrine or belief that was advocated and followed. If so, it was extremely secret and only amongst the top leadership, cause you couldn't hide something like that. We didn't even have pets most of the time! If some members went to a farm and went beserk with the animals there, it's my opinion that they were just weirdos and not that it was an approved, encouraged or condoned practice. The only thing I can think of that would even come close is just an example Berg gave in some old Letter about how desperate men can get for sex that they will even fuck a hole in the wall and I think something was mentioned in there about sheep, but it wasn't condoning beastiality.
I'd have to disagree that it was a Family approved and advocated doctrine.
But about the FFing after '87, yes, that I can believe. What I would like to know is cases of approved sex with outsiders after the Charter in ('95 was it), because that is when it was made an excommunicable offense. We knew that there were still guys getting their fleshly gratification after '87, but it wasn't like women made it their ministry, at least not where I was. As in, going down in pairs to local bars and displaying themselves in the hopes of getting 'fish' (is this where the beastiality idea came in?), that definitely wasn't going on anymore. But I can imagine that some top potential society members were being 'hooked' by some of the higher class ex-Ffers in order to advance the Family's interests, as in the court case.
For the record, I don't know about the court case, but I do know of at least 3 cases in Japan where the Family girl who had 'won' the 'fish' and he had been close to them for years, continued to have approved sex with the guy despite the rules.
