oldiesman

I think it's wrong for you and Danny to think evil of other folks Corps commitments. You can talk that way about yourselves, but how dare you judge your brothers and sisters in what their heart was before God. Shame shame shame on you ...

Abigail It does seem to sound like Greasespot Wound Addiction, doesn't it? Ha.Nah, I'm not bitter about it at all. It took me about a year to get over the dismissal, but by PFAL '77, I was ok with it. I finally realized that the dismissal was my fault, for not living up to expected standards. It was tough to realize that, because of the added perception that others were getting a better deal than me, that those who also sinned were recipients of possible greater mercy from the powers that be. But at any rate, the facts are still the facts, present feelings notwithstanding ... those women were given a choice, something that sounds decent to me.

Shellon, I think I misunderstood; it sounded like you were calling me a child, cause I mentioned I screwed up. Sorry if I misunderstood.

rascal A person who disagrees with you, wholeheartedly. Shellon Thanks for the insult. Have a nice weekend, folks. I'm going record hunting. Until next time ...

Mike, if you and I can get on the BOD, we'd turn things around. How about putting all the PFAL segments on the net?

And so, what is the complaint? TWI gave these women an opportunity to stay in the Way Corps if they wanted, after screwing up. Sounds pretty charitable to me. March 7, 1976. I will remember that day as long as I live. That's the day I got dismissed from the 6th Corps, for screwing up. Dismissed. Good bye. So long. Don't let the door hit your butt too hard on the way out. And so, from my viewpoint, those women were given a choice, and they were treated decently. Opinions vary.

Looks like it's snowing outside.

Tom, I did offer the alternative view. So did mj412. If a single woman got pregnant and wanted to enter the single way corps program, she had two choices, get an abortion and enter the program, or not enter the corps program. It was not available for single women to go into the single way corps program having a baby with them. Women in that category had to make choices for themselves. It was a tough choice, given their circumstances, no question; but I suppose that's what happens when one gets pregnant out of wedlock. Bad, sad and unforeseen things happen. Maybe they thought that if a whole bunch of single women brought their babies with them, that wouldn't be good for the program or the volunteers themselves; that their priorities were different. So they didn't allow it, and those were the choices.

Kit Sober Can you be more specific? What deception and lies involving abortion are you referring to? Individual circumstances vary, but did it ever occur to you that maybe TWI sponsored the abortions because they wanted to offer an option to the woman involved? Give the woman a choice? Why does their (twi's) motive always have to be an evil one?

Interesting point, Mike. Thanks.

Tom Let's try to refrain from namecalling, shall we?Tom, simply put, I don't swallow whole some things that sound incredibly biased like some of rascal's posts, and sometimes, in those cases, attempt to present an opposing opinion. rascal's words and opinions are gospel now? Lighten up, ok? And if you've been observant, I'm not the only one on this thread that takes the viewpoint that abortion in twi was a choice of the woman who consented to it, no matter what any leader said or suggested. I stand by that viewpoint, because I think it's factual and true.

Sounds like a good idea.

I'd still like to hear what their take on it is, just so folks can know definitively. I think partial birth abortion borders on infanticide, so it might be worthwhile. Perhaps an innie could send them the article and ask what their take is on the paragraph about partial birth? I'll be happy to email the article to anyone in PDF format if anyone wants it.

mj412, thanks for your support, and your words of wisdom! Raf said: Ha! I found the quote. It didn't come straight from TWI, but a TWI believer who started his own magazine.In 1984/85 there was a magazine called "Free Spirit -- New Light For American Culture" -- (ISSN 0740 2333) published quarterly by season by Free Spirit Publishers, David C. Craley, publisher and editor. As I recall, this was a magazine that contained articles about different topics, all applying God's Word to cultural issues. Articles on business, health, education, art, photography, music, literature...etc.., all with the word-in-culture theme. So I can't say it came from TWI and was wrong there. On the other side of the coin, David Craley was an established TWI believer in that time period, and judging from all the articles in that magazine, all written by established TWI believers such as Elena Whiteside, Cathy Crawley, Carolyn M. Rawlins, M.D., Alison Freeland, Sue Pierce, Ted Ferrell, Grace Bliss, Sue Pierce, Dennis McGee, Ellie Wilson, etc.., and judging from twi's much desired one-mind mindset, one may assume that this editorial could have been TWI's teaching on the subject or at least written with their blessing. But I guess it's ultimately up to the reader to decide for themselves. I think Craley's editorial is sound and reasonable, and gives a slightly different viewpoint than rascal's portrayal of the satan-serving murder-promoting spittle-spewing bad-breath-in-your-face fire-breathing twi bully, forcing you to get an abortion or else mandate. Quoted below is the editorial, with the paragraph I spoke about previously in bold: David C. CraleyFree Spirit -- New Light For American Culture Winter 1984 [Added below: Much gratitude to Jeff Stanley, San Antonio, TX, and to Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille's "By The Way" columns published in the St. Mary's (OH) Evening Leader for significant contributions to this editorial.]

Steve, I don't think you're paying much attention. My response was to rascal, who's the one who sidetracked my comment on twi's supposed (yet to be proven) partial birth belief. The real issue here is what exactly did TWI teach on the subject, ... not alleged corps coercion experiences, which is a sidetrack. What does me having or not having empathy, or being emotionally disabled or not, have to do with this thread's topic?You accuse me of sidetracking, then go and do thou likewise ... Qu'elle simpleton. ...

Ok, I'll try. You still had a choice, no matter what one said or thought was best.Here's my schpeal again: (1) Adults are responsible for their actions. (2) Those who freely availed themselves to enter programs like wow and corps, freely submitted their will to others. One *had* to follow the program (which means following other people) to remain in it, and if that meant leaving the program to have a baby, if that's what one wanted, that's what one did. Others acted differently, according to their own choices. (3) Adults who found those programs repugnant or unacceptable, were free to leave those programs at any time.

Well I will say this, ultimately it was the woman's decision what to do. Did they sign the consent forms with Uzi's pointed at their temples? For those who think all abortion is murder, no matter what trimester, it really doesn't matter, twi's position will *always* be ungodly to them. But I thought a point should be made that twi's position wasn't that cut and dry and they were seeing the difference between 1-2 trimester and 3rd trimster. I'll try to find that article if I can ...

Yes, it was a big deal, in that situation. He had the gumption, the proverbial Intestinal Fortitude, to make an issue out of it. To be a pain in the butt, for a godly reason. He could have just ignored it and went his merry way, as so many apparently did.

If I happened to run into someone who thought twi was off the wall, I asked them to come see for themselves whether it was off the wall or not. Have them decide for themselves, rather than take someone else's word for it. The couple of folks I knew who were in that category never checked it out for themselves, seemed like they had their minds already made up, so after that, I had little respect for them, even contempt, for speaking about something they thought they knew so much about, without any experiences. It's one thing to speak from experience; that I can try to respect and understand. But it's entirely another to speak from gossip alone. And yeah, in those days lots of folks thought we were a cult all because of JCING.

Agreed. But that's not the whole take on what they said, from what I read. They said the pregnancy should be continued to term if the fetus is old enough to breath on its own, or words to that effect. Kinda strange nobody here remembers this but me...but I know I'm not imagining it, I read it and it was significant enough to remember.I'll try to find the exact quote and where it came from ...

Here's some 'o Craig's sayings:

Raf Your question is a good one and for someone who really wants to know what twi teaches on this, it should be clarified. I thought the teaching was in one of the "By the Way" articles, but I see now it's not. I do remember a teaching (in written form) where they wrote that if the fetus can live outside the mother's womb (on its own) then it's breathing and therefore a living soul. Since that can happen in the third trimester, that would knock out partial birth.Perhaps we can hear from someone presently in twi to verify or not verify. I'd like to know myself. What I saw was written perhaps over 20 years ago ... who knows, they may have changed that too ...

Just wanted to bring this one back up to the top, in response to the recent decision to block the partial birth abortion ban. It's disgusting, isn't it? U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton's ruling agrees with abortion rights activists that a woman's right to choose is paramount, and that it is therefore "irrelevant" whether a fetus suffers pain, as abortion foes contend. That second part is ridiculous. Can anything be more barbaric than sucking out a baby's brains before they're born? First or second trimester is one thing, but partial birth is so devilish. I agree with TWI's teaching on this, which has been that 1-2 trimester abortion is not murder, but 3rd is a no-no, so I'm glad twi at least had/has the good sense to teach folks to oppose that barbaric procedure.

I thought another possible reason why folks didn't speak up when they should have, knowing full well that adultery is wrong, was the fact that generally, folks don't want to upset the apple cart. It's a difficult thing to go on a crusade to make a point, even if one is absolutely correct. Most folks just live and try to get by, ignoring what they know in their heart is right, but can't bear to make themselves a "pain in the butt". For most, it's human nature to want to take the easy way out, to want to take the path of least resistance. I bet John Schoenheit felt super lousy when he was fired. But now, years later, I bet he feels so sweet and good and proud (in a good way) he took a stand back then, something he'll never forget.

Refiner, Another key TWI belief is remission and forgiveness of sins. Remission of sins (whereby one gets a "totally clean slate") is reserved for unsaved sinners. When the unsaved sinner receives Christ (Romans 10:9), they receive remission of sins. A totally clean slate. Forgiveness of sins is for the saved sinner. When the saved sinner sins, they break fellowship with God, and in order for that fellowship to be restored, the saved sinner must confess the sin to God. At that point, the saved sinner once again is in fellowship with God because of God's promise of forgiveness. Here's how Wierwille writes it, his comments of I John in brackets: "Fellowship is the Secret"Victor Paul Wierwille The New Dynamic Church pp. 78-79 It should also be noted that the above belief necessitaties the additional belief that there are no "degrees" of sin when it comes to confession and getting back in fellowship with God. Whether it's murder, adultery, stealing, lying, or another sin, the promise of forgiveness is there when one confesses the sin.