|
Post by Sylvestra on Aug 18, 2007 14:38:25 GMT -5
Recently there was a thread in which many were criticizing Edgar Massey for using the term "rape" to describe the emotional experience of members of his family.
I ran across this last night re: spiritual molestation. Please note the terminology!
"Victims place their complete trust in the parents or leaders of the toxic-faith system. They count on their parents and leaders to take care of them and nurture their spiritual well-being. At the time when the loyalty of these spiritually needy people is the strongest, the persecutors of the faith spiritually molest them. Spiritual molestation rapes the victims' minds of reason and strips them of direct access to God. It takes away their self-respect and leaves them feeling broken.
Some turn completely away from God after they realize they have been so badly abused. If they lack support after the victimization, they often lose their desire to know and draw closer to God. Left with feelings of betrayal and lack of confidence in their ability to identify a trustworthy person, they abandon their spiritual journey.
Once victims have been spiritually molested, persecutors and co-conspirators attempt to manipulate them into keeping the secret. Hellfire and brimstone and other tools of God's wrath are used as threats against rocking the boat and revealing the problems within the family or toxic ministry. Victims who succumb to the threats bear the pain of existing in a world of lies. When they are perceived as willing to go along with the lies and deceptions, they are repeatedly abused by being asked to adhere more closely to the rules of the family or ministry.
Tragically, these victims feel they deserve the abuse. They feel as though they don't measure up, are bad, and should be satisfied to get along and be accepted. Rather than stand up for what they sense if right, they continue to work hard to measure up and meet the needs of the system that molested them."
From "Toxic Faith", by Stephen Arterburn & Jack Felton
I guess these authors also feel that "rape" is an appropriate word to use in the context that Edgar used it!
Best regards! Edy
|
|
ann
Senior Member
Jesus did NOT say follow people .. He said follow ME!
Posts: 267
|
Post by ann on Aug 18, 2007 15:18:37 GMT -5
Edy, thank you for finding and posting this. This is exactly what I was hearing in Edgar's post. Well written - much better than I could put into words. I feel this describes exactly what happens. ann
|
|
|
Post by wanttobewithGod on Aug 18, 2007 15:37:32 GMT -5
This is meant as no disrespect to you, but we will just agree to disagree on this one. Take the following for instance....some people think it's ok to shoplift..or that it's appropriate. That doesn't mean I do. See what I mean? Honestly no disrepect to you or Edgar intended...we just have differing opinions on the severity of that word in relation to the 2x2 religion. Mich
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Aug 18, 2007 16:21:01 GMT -5
This is meant as no disrespect to you, but we will just agree to disagree on this one. Take the following for instance....some people think it's ok to shoplift..or that it's appropriate. That doesn't mean I do. See what I mean? Honestly no disrepect to you or Edgar intended...we just have differing opinions on the severity of that word in relation to the 2x2 religion. Mich Of course, you are always entitled to your opinion! That is an "understood" on these Boards. And, of course, our opinions here are the way others perceive us! I hope you noticed that this is from a book written by two people who specialize in "toxic faith" recovery, and one of which in fact is a licensed therapist, and an ordained minister at New Hope Christian Counseling Center that specializes in additions! I don't think you fully understand the parallel of physical abuse (a la rape) and the mental/spiritual abuse that Edgar and these men are talking about! I truly don't! I suppose it is likely that, until one has experienced this or been close to those who have, one can't fully relate. Even though you told us you were "on the fence" when you came here, I don't believe you have had the devastating experiences that some here have had. You know it's a little like childbirth. A woman can describe it, but until it happens personally, one can never fully grasp it! Edy
|
|
|
Post by no name on Aug 18, 2007 16:24:22 GMT -5
And . . . . it wasn't just that particular word that caused the stir. His use of the word "rape" just added to his already lengthy history of extreme over-generalizations, broad-sweeping condemnation, and hateful rhetoric.
|
|
|
Post by Nancy on Aug 18, 2007 16:32:14 GMT -5
I think I will agree to disagree with the authors for their choice of words as well.
First of all, Edgar WAS a leader in the group. It looks to me as if your authors are talking about congregants, not ministers.
Secondly, I still find the word "rape" highly offensive as used by Edgar.
Here is a quote from a women's rights website:
I hate it when people use rape as a metaphor. Why use a symbol of sexualized degradation, violence, and control -- and something so heavily gendered -- to characterize some abstract idea or unrelated action? How do you think rape survivors reading these metaphors feel about having heir experiences compared to some abstract ideological issue in this way? I feel jarred every time I see it used. Also, I feel like it just habituates us to the idea or rape -- that it's not a big deal. What a stupid, ridiculous metaphor -- why would anyone want to compare sexual violence against (primarily) women with anything else?
|
|
|
Post by Nancy on Aug 18, 2007 16:36:51 GMT -5
I agree that spiritual bullying would seem to be an appropriate term.
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Aug 18, 2007 19:52:11 GMT -5
Edy,
I have a strong scepticism to using any one text as a basis for understanding an entire system of Faith, no matter how well-experienced or educated the authors may be. I guess it comes from years within academia (in which I am still immersed) that nothing can be taken too seriously if it has not been peer-reviewed, critiqued and examined from multiple angles. When I tried looking up a critique of this text, I could find nothing. Indeed, I could not find the author's names in wikipedia.
Recently there was a thread in which many were criticizing Edgar Massey for using the term "rape" to describe the emotional experience of members of his family.
I was one person who wrote a critique to this effect. One of my main points was that the term "rape" demeans real victims of real sexual rape. A similar analogy can be made between the use of the word rape and the word holocaust.
At the moment I have been teaching a course on Auschwitz and the Jewish Holocaust. It is stunning how many people make reference to these events in relation to something so mundane as to be irrelevant, compared to the enormity, the monstrosity of evil that took place in those camps.
Victims place their complete trust in the parents or leaders of the toxic-faith system. They count on their parents and leaders to take care of them and nurture their spiritual well-being.
This sounds like the way a Church ought to function.
The problem with people who write about cults and abusive systems is that they fail to recognise that it is not necessarily the system itself that is at fault, but rather the individuals who exist within the system. It is for this reason that some ex-JW's can say they had wonderful experiences with loving people in their Church, and ex-Mormons can say the same about their bishops. (I have read hundreds and hundreds of Mormon and JW testimonials about their exit from these groups, so I am not merely generalising here). There are also plenty of Mormons and JW's who say they experienced hostility and angst.
If there can be totally different experiences within the same system and organisation, what is the differential that creates these experiences? Individuals and their personalities.
Do the authors of Toxic Faith advocate Churches based on incomplete trust in each other, scepticism and suspicion about everyone's motives? Because this would be the alternative to having "complete trust" in each other.
At the time when the loyalty of these spiritually needy people is the strongest, the persecutors of the faith spiritually molest them. Spiritual molestation rapes the victims' minds of reason and strips them of direct access to God. It takes away their self-respect and leaves them feeling broken.
"At 10:00 at the train station, an altercation broke out between two men. Violence was used."
The above hypothetical statement says as much as the citation from Toxic Faith. It's one thing to say that people are "spiritually molested" but what does "spiritual molestration" actually comprise? How does one "spiritually molest" someone else? The authors are using terms they have not properly defined. And when, of course, one uses terms which could potentially mean anything, it's unsurprising that the differential is made up by personal interpretation.
Some turn completely away from God after they realize they have been so badly abused. If they lack support after the victimization, they often lose their desire to know and draw closer to God. Left with feelings of betrayal and lack of confidence in their ability to identify a trustworthy person, they abandon their spiritual journey.
"Violence was used"; "Spiritual molestation occured". Both statements exist on the same level of clarity.
Once victims have been spiritually molested, persecutors and co-conspirators attempt to manipulate them into keeping the secret. Hellfire and brimstone and other tools of God's wrath are used as threats against rocking the boat and revealing the problems within the family or toxic ministry.
Once again, very vague. And I notice that no case examples are used to demonstrate precisely what is being spoken about here. In other words, the text is almost solely an opinionative generalisation which may be based on personal experience, but the extent of this is uncertain. Concrete examples, and psychological details might have helped.
As with so much "Toxic Faith" literature, it all boils down to a matter of interpretation. Do the authors say that preachers should NOT explain Hell, Damnation and Judgement in the context of consequences for actions made in the here-and-now?
Once again, certain individuals can foster fear and trepidation though misapplication of scripture, which is why in the fellowship, having two preachers in one place at one time can be an absolute boon, in that both peer-review what each other is saying. I remember at convention a few years ago, one worker from South American preached a very fiery sermon. The next brother worker to speak them immediately emphasised the love of God and his welcome to "all who believe". Peer review. Both sides of the coin.
Victims who succumb to the threats bear the pain of existing in a world of lies. When they are perceived as willing to go along with the lies and deceptions, they are repeatedly abused by being asked to adhere more closely to the rules of the family or ministry.
Lies and deceptions should be exposed, of course. But it seems as though "spiritual molestation" consists of nothing more than pastors or priests doing something bad, it being found out, and then using certain distortions of biblical teachings as leverage against the person speaking out and revealing the evil. This is simple manipulation. It would have helped if the authors had used this term instead of the more sensationalised "molestation", but then, "that don't sell books do it?"
I guess these authors also feel that "rape" is an appropriate word to use in the context that Edgar used it!
Molestation is typically used to refer to a different type of sexual abuse than rape. The two are not necessarily synonomous. And I still think it's over-the-top and demeaning to real victims.
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Aug 18, 2007 20:47:43 GMT -5
You are critiqueing a book you have not read? Interesting for someone entrenched in acedemia, as you are! But you just couldn't resist could you LOL!
One point you made that is quite valid is that the level of "toxicity" is determined by the individual. What you cannot see by the excerpt is that there is a difference between toxic faith and toxic religion. There are people who begin their walk in a very non-toxic religion, but who, because of their own family experience, their own faith becomes toxic. Further, there are different characters of the various toxic people within a church setting.
However, there are also toxic religions where some of the members do not have toxic faith who will act quite differently - but that is another chapter!
One of the things that I had to work through that is one evidence of my own toxic faith was being a perfectionist. I had to look perfect (as possible), keep my house like a model (what a struggle, especially with old, unmatched furniture and three kids!), speak in a way that no one could find fault with what I said, etc., etc. because this would be what was pleasing to God. You know.....working my way into His love. It was necessary to be such in order to be loved. Good grief, my cats even had to match!
Needless to say, I have that largely behind me now! Unfortunately, I traded that for a different addiction!
So, anyway, to shorten a longer post, read the book. There might actually be something interesting in it for you!
Best! Edy
|
|
|
Post by wanttobewithGod on Aug 18, 2007 20:51:04 GMT -5
The cats had to match.... LOL.
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Aug 18, 2007 23:49:05 GMT -5
You are critiqueing a book you have not read? Interesting for someone entrenched in acedemia, as you are! But you just couldn't resist could you LOL!
No, I could not resist. But note: I was not critiquing the book. I was instead critiquing the citation you offered and pointing out that the authors do not apparently explain what they are talking about (at least in the quote).
One point you made that is quite valid is that the level of "toxicity" is determined by the individual. What you cannot see by the excerpt is that there is a difference between toxic faith and toxic religion. There are people who begin their walk in a very non-toxic religion, but who, because of their own family experience, their own faith becomes toxic.
A valid point, which you beat me to pointing out.
Unless it is extremely far-out, I don't think any religious system is inherently "toxic" in the sense of psychologically damaging. The organisation of Jehovah's Witnesses is quite benign, when one does a bit of research (following, more-or-less, the old 19th century Bible meeting format). Even the Mormon Church, with its admixture of Levitical rites, adapted Roman Catholic concepts, and New Age infusions, is not organisationally "toxic".
What can be toxic is the interplay between individuals, or between some with strong or negative personalities. And when it is reduced to this, one quickly sees why cult-theories begin to loose their credibility. (I will be starting a thread soon with some research of anti-cult movements through the last century, some of which have an ugly past). I would go so far as to say that anyone who refers to the Fellowship, the LDS, or JW's as cults have no credibility, have not an adequate grasp of the subject, and are talking through their hats on the issue.
Back to the point: toxicity can happen in any church.
Further, there are different characters of the various toxic people within a church setting.
Characters as in stereotyped presentations of individuals? No one fits a stereotype.
One of the things that I had to work through that is one evidence of my own toxic faith was being a perfectionist. I had to look perfect (as possible), keep my house like a model (what a struggle, especially with old, unmatched furniture and three kids!), speak in a way that no one could find fault with what I said, etc., etc. because this would be what was pleasing to God.
Do you believe the fellowship created this perfectionist issue? Because in my experience, no one has ever told me to keep a model house, speak perfectly, or to choose matching pets. You could create a connection by saying underlying principles in the fellowship worked their way out in this form, but I think you'll have to work hard to demonstrate this.
You know.....working my way into His love. It was necessary to be such in order to be loved. Good grief, my cats even had to match!
Again, I hope you don't blame the fellowship for this. I have never been told to "work my way" into the love of God. Never.
So, anyway, to shorten a longer post, read the book. There might actually be something interesting in it for you!
I doubt very much I will read the book, because it appeals to me as being sensationalist literature. And, as I have said previously, I personally don't put much store into books and literature, unless they have academic validity. You will obviously disagree with this, and that's fine. I'm glad you are enjoying the book. You have certainly mentioned it on this forum more than once, so I assume it has been motivating and inspirational for you.
Best!
And to you.
|
|
|
Post by I thought on Aug 19, 2007 5:14:31 GMT -5
Isn't spiritual rape what they feed Hindu spiritual cows?!?!?!
|
|
|
Post by mirror on Aug 19, 2007 7:05:47 GMT -5
You are critiqueing a book you have not read? Interesting for someone entrenched in acedemia, as you are! But you just couldn't resist could you LOL! One point you made that is quite valid is that the level of "toxicity" is determined by the individual. What you cannot see by the excerpt is that there is a difference between toxic faith and toxic religion. There are people who begin their walk in a very non-toxic religion, but who, because of their own family experience, their own faith becomes toxic. Further, there are different characters of the various toxic people within a church setting. However, there are also toxic religions where some of the members do not have toxic faith who will act quite differently - but that is another chapter! One of the things that I had to work through that is one evidence of my own toxic faith was being a perfectionist. I had to look perfect (as possible), keep my house like a model (what a struggle, especially with old, unmatched furniture and three kids!), speak in a way that no one could find fault with what I said, etc., etc. because this would be what was pleasing to God. You know.....working my way into His love. It was necessary to be such in order to be loved. Good grief, my cats even had to match! Needless to say, I have that largely behind me now! Unfortunately, I traded that for a different addiction! So, anyway, to shorten a longer post, read the book. There might actually be something interesting in it for you! Best! Edy The best book on the subject is (unfortunatelly in French) the « Le syndrome du berger» by Jean-Yves Roy, a psychiatrist from the University of Montreal in Canada. It explains in a very thorough way the relationship between believer and guru, the shared responsibility of both, the extremes that can be attained and the healing process.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2007 7:32:48 GMT -5
I will remind readers that it was my family that experienced the way the senior workers forcefully dealt with them in the excommunication process as 'spiritual rape'. (I was more prepared so I didn't experience it that way). They felt that after senior workers made it impossible for them to defend themselves in any way, and then found sickly pleasure in violating the families most intimate moral values before our closest friends. They arranged meetings to finger and poke every aspect of our personal dignity.
One of the regrets that I have in the process was that I didn't take my wifes plea to flee completely from the scene more seriously. Even afterwards we went to a convention in Italy, and then I continued taking my children to a few meetings even after we were rejected -- until after one meeting my kids came home in tears as the children of the other proffessing family had turned their backs on our children when they had gone out to play in the garden after the meeting. That is the last meeting we went to.
Edgar
My wife is a social worker in a correctional institution for teen age girls, so as far as what rape and the sickest forms of sexual abuse is concerned --- she knows what she is talking about.
|
|
|
Post by Correction on Aug 19, 2007 7:55:19 GMT -5
Victims place their complete trust in the parents or leaders of the toxic-faith system. They count on their parents and leaders to take care of them and nurture their spiritual well-being.This sounds like the way a Church ought to function. Anytime you allow complete control of others over your life you are exposing yourself to potential danger. Do you really think a church should function with all of the members being automatons who give complete control of their lives to others? There is the problem. The very fact that you have taken the information from a number of sources and reduced it to a single thought is generalizing. Unless, of course, all of the books said the exact same thing. Or perhaps you could tell us your definition of generalization.
|
|
chris
Junior Member
Posts: 90
|
Post by chris on Aug 19, 2007 8:16:10 GMT -5
For what Edgar has endured concerning this "church" he can use any terminology he decides to use.
As for me I put my complete "trust and devotioin this "church" that was "straight" from the "shores of Galiee" SHAME ON ME!
I was sucked in by others who were sucked in by those "who knew the truth about the beginnings of this "church" Excuse my terminology here. But that is how I see it.
I was devistated & heartbroken upon finding the real truth. Why did God allow this to happen? That is a journey many of us are on now. And my I say what a wonderful journey it has been so far.
We are so blessed to have a God that loves us, sent his own Son to DIE for us because of that LOVE!
Let us wake up every morning with a greatful heart and give thanks for what HE has done & continues to do just for us.
|
|
|
Post by no name on Aug 19, 2007 10:49:59 GMT -5
For what Edgar has endured concerning this "church" he can use any terminology he decides to use. And people can react with a smack-down against hate talk.
|
|
|
Post by Stefan on Aug 19, 2007 11:16:46 GMT -5
They arranged meetings to finger and poke every aspect of our personal dignity. Edgar Edgar, From the many posts of yours that I have read since I started lurking on the TMB about a year ago, I do not blame the workers for wanting you to stop coming around with your family. I can only imagine the affect you had on people who just wanted to worship in peace. I read an exchange of letters on your website with a worker who tried to be kind to you but eventually asked you to stop writing to him. You have all the tact of a sledgehammer. Many of us ex's have problems with the 2x2 system, but you are one of those ex's that has a huge chip on your shoulder and a lingering anger. You really need to "let it go" and move on. You generally use an inflammatory writing style, but your use of the word "rape" offends me as well. Justifying the word because of where your wife works reminds me of people who justify using racist words because, "they have friends who are black."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2007 14:03:48 GMT -5
They arranged meetings to finger and poke every aspect of our personal dignity. Edgar Edgar, From the many posts of yours that I have read since I started lurking on the TMB about a year ago, I do not blame the workers for wanting you to stop coming around with your family. I can only imagine the affect you had on people who just wanted to worship in peace. I read an exchange of letters on your website with a worker who tried to be kind to you but eventually asked you to stop writing to him. You have all the tact of a sledgehammer. Many of us ex's have problems with the 2x2 system, but you are one of those ex's that has a huge chip on your shoulder and a lingering anger. You really need to "let it go" and move on. You generally use an inflammatory writing style, but your use of the word "rape" offends me as well. Justifying the word because of where your wife works reminds me of people who justify using racist words because, "they have friends who are black." One thing that I have noticed as an often recurring 'bottom of the barrel' tactic for 2x2 supporters is that when faced with some pretty damning evidence of their groups basic makeup -- they will franticly try to change the subject of the thread and instead of dealing with the issue, direct a maximum volume of venom at the personal integrity of the voice of concern. On boards like this it is most often done from behind the bushes by someone who won't even take identifiable personal responsibility for the ugliness they are anxious to express --- I know that this tactic is legal on a board like this one -- but it hardly represents any kind of deeper moral courage. Talk about a chip on the shoulder and a lingering anger!! Edgar I will refer to 'no names´ previous post expressing the right to "smack down on hate talk"
|
|
|
Post by wanttobewithGod on Aug 19, 2007 14:41:13 GMT -5
I agree no name.... This latest descriptive post gave me a good idea of what I hadn't seen before concerning this sort of talk. I'm sorry for whatever your family endured Edgar (I really am; you can choose to believe that or not) but I will continue to disagree that the way you describe it is appropriate. It doesn't matter if I was there or not, either, to me....words like 'finger and poke' etc...are only trying to describe it as rape...it doesn't make it so. Most people would have said something there to the effect of " they pried into every aspect of our personal lives until our dignity was worn down" or you know..something like that. Fingered and poked? ...sickly pleasure in violating... Sheesh. JMO, of course, M.
|
|
|
Post by no name on Aug 19, 2007 15:10:21 GMT -5
Edgar, From the many posts of yours that I have read since I started lurking on the TMB about a year ago, I do not blame the workers for wanting you to stop coming around with your family. I can only imagine the affect you had on people who just wanted to worship in peace. I read an exchange of letters on your website with a worker who tried to be kind to you but eventually asked you to stop writing to him. You have all the tact of a sledgehammer. Many of us ex's have problems with the 2x2 system, but you are one of those ex's that has a huge chip on your shoulder and a lingering anger. You really need to "let it go" and move on. You generally use an inflammatory writing style, but your use of the word "rape" offends me as well. Justifying the word because of where your wife works reminds me of people who justify using racist words because, "they have friends who are black." Agreed. The fact that a self-described "ex" can notice the same things that I do confirms my own assessment of Edgar's style of communication. You certainly aren't the only "ex" who has observed this, either. One thing that I have noticed as an often recurring 'bottom of the barrel' tactic for 2x2 supporters is that when faced with some pretty damning evidence of their groups basic makeup -- they will franticly try to change the subject of the thread and instead of dealing with the issue, direct a maximum volume of venom at the personal integrity of the voice of concern. On boards like this it is most often done from behind the bushes by someone who won't even take identifiable personal responsibility for the ugliness they are anxious to express --- I know that this tactic is legal on a board like this one -- but it hardly represents any kind of deeper moral courage. Talk about a chip on the shoulder and a lingering anger!! Edgar I will refer to 'no names´ previous post expressing the right to "smack down on hate talk" No one seems to spew the hate talk and seethe with lingering anger quite like you do, Edgar. You're right on up there at the top of the list. I agree no name.... This latest descriptive post gave me a good idea of what I hadn't seen before concerning this sort of talk. I'm sorry for whatever your family endured Edgar (I really am; you can choose to believe that or not) but I will continue to disagree that the way you describe it is appropriate. It doesn't matter if I was there or not, either, to me....words like 'finger and poke' etc...are only trying to describe it as rape...it doesn't make it so. Most people would have said something there to the effect of " they pried into every aspect of our personal lives until our dignity was worn down" or you know..something like that. Fingered and poked? ...sickly pleasure in violating... Sheesh. JMO, of course, M. I know what you mean.
|
|
|
Post by Stefan on Aug 19, 2007 15:11:11 GMT -5
Edgar, From the many posts of yours that I have read since I started lurking on the TMB about a year ago, I do not blame the workers for wanting you to stop coming around with your family. I can only imagine the affect you had on people who just wanted to worship in peace. I read an exchange of letters on your website with a worker who tried to be kind to you but eventually asked you to stop writing to him. You have all the tact of a sledgehammer. Many of us ex's have problems with the 2x2 system, but you are one of those ex's that has a huge chip on your shoulder and a lingering anger. You really need to "let it go" and move on. You generally use an inflammatory writing style, but your use of the word "rape" offends me as well. Justifying the word because of where your wife works reminds me of people who justify using racist words because, "they have friends who are black." One thing that I have noticed as an often recurring 'bottom of the barrel' tactic for 2x2 supporters is that when faced with some pretty damning evidence of their groups basic makeup -- they will franticly try to change the subject of the thread and instead of dealing with the issue, direct a maximum volume of venom at the personal integrity of the voice of concern. On boards like this it is most often done from behind the bushes by someone who won't even take identifiable personal responsibility for the ugliness they are anxious to express --- I know that this tactic is legal on a board like this one -- but it hardly represents any kind of deeper moral courage. Talk about a chip on the shoulder and a lingering anger!! Edgar I will refer to 'no names´ previous post expressing the right to "smack down on hate talk" Nice try Edgar. You're trying to rewrite history and accused others here of leveling venom against you. Sorry, but "spiritual rape" is the most venom filled phrase in all of this thread. You and I could probably agree on many issues having to do with 2x2's. As an ex myself, I see many things in the system that I don't agree with. However, I am equally against posts like yours that go the extreme on the other side and use words carelessly like you do. As others have told you many times before, your message gets lost in your rhetoric and inflammatory words. It's hard to see the trees through your forest of hate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2007 15:34:24 GMT -5
One thing that I have noticed as an often recurring 'bottom of the barrel' tactic for 2x2 supporters is that when faced with some pretty damning evidence of their groups basic makeup -- they will franticly try to change the subject of the thread and instead of dealing with the issue, direct a maximum volume of venom at the personal integrity of the voice of concern. On boards like this it is most often done from behind the bushes by someone who won't even take identifiable personal responsibility for the ugliness they are anxious to express ---
I know that this tactic is legal on a board like this one -- but it hardly represents any kind of deeper moral courage. Talk about a chip on the shoulder and a lingering anger!!
Edgar
I will refer to 'no names´ previous post expressing the right to "smack down on hate talk"
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Aug 19, 2007 15:36:08 GMT -5
All I can see is the hurt that Egars's children must have felt when they were rejected. The other children did not do that on their own. It was the workers and the parents of those children that caused the bullying. Bullying is like child abuse, rape, sexual harassment, and racism... they all have the same lasting hurt. This is a shame. What does the Bible say about hurting the little ones... they will get their judgement in the end.
For me ... you can hurt me... I will forgive... but don't you dare hurt my children.
|
|
|
Post by who knows on Aug 19, 2007 15:38:25 GMT -5
All I can see is the hurt that Egars's children must have felt when the were rejected. The other children did not do that on their own. It was the workers and the parents of those children that caused the bullying. Bullying is like child abuse, rape, sexual harassment, and racism... the all have the same lasting hurt. This is a shame. What does the Bible say about hurting the little ones... they will get their judgement in the end. Well that is certainly Edgar's story now isn't it? We all know that there are three sides to every story. Yours, theirs and the truth. Edgar certainly writes from a large point of bias.
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Aug 19, 2007 15:43:01 GMT -5
It was his story 5 of so years ago when I first had contact with him through e-mail and his original website.
And... so would you if your children were rejected.... this is not the first time children have been disfellowshipped along with their parents. What did they do? It is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by who knows on Aug 19, 2007 16:08:16 GMT -5
First of all, I wouldn't have put my children in that position. If I was going to leave, we would leave. I would not continue to antagonize and put my children in the middle of it. By leaving with prejudice, but then hanging around and being a pain, he put his children in a really bad spot. Sounds like he put a lot of friends and workers in an uncomfortable position too.
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Aug 19, 2007 16:16:14 GMT -5
So if your children were professing... you would tell them that they would have to leave. I would want my children to make their own choice.
One belief exes have to deal with for along time after they leave is that the "truth is the only right way" ... for some it takes along time before they find out the REAL TRUTH.... they are NOT doomed to hell. There is hope.
|
|