|
In Reply to: Re: Teaching Family doctrines posted by good questions on May 07, 2006 at 10:19:36:
Perhaps if you chose a better name it would help to avoid confusion. Here's what you posted as "good questions": “That is why I believe that people in the Family that are not THE Top Leaders or known serious criminals ( as in molesters) might be more likely to seek help to get out if they weren't bolstered in their thinking that simply by being a member then ex-members and society at large are out to get them.”
The post that referred to a crusade was posted by "interesting questions", so you can understand why I easily got confused. It seemed to me that it was the same person writing both posts, because not only were the names similar but so was the writing style. Here's the comment about crusades by "interesting questions": “So I can't just go on a crusade against individuals that are PR robots or paying tithes to the Family but are just associated or even still in full-fledged.”
Taken together, both posts seemed to be implying that I and others like me are on a "crusade" against individual Family members to "get them". That's a ridiculous attempt to once again deflect criticism from where it really belongs, which is on Peters and TF.
Btw, I also respect porceleindoll, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with everything she posts. Anyway, my quarrel was not with PD, but with Tim's daughter.
I agree with the points you and others have been making that it is sometimes a slow process for someone to come out from under the heavy mind-fog of group-think. But imo, Peters has had more than enough time to reconsider his continued support of a deceitful, corrupt organization. It is his choice to continue to support TF and deceive his donors, but in doing so he invites public scrutiny, for the public also has the right to know who Peters is associated with.
