Yeah right. We're convinced you've got the skinny and the truth about VPW - and everyone and everything that has ever been associated with TWI.
Don't be offended that we just can't come to the same conclusions you have - that is, that you've got everything competely in balance regarding VPW, TWI, etc., when we see your vindictive fingers still stuck upon the scales of justice.
Does this mean that you are an unapologetic wierwille apologist?
Again, I don't think anyone here is trying to insist you agree with them.
The concerns have to do with attacks by any of the so-called wierwille apologists on those who post their own testimony to the conduct of this man many have come to believe was a charlatan.
If YOU do not participate in those attacks, then there's no problem with you (except for from groucho, I suppose... but he's got his own issues with attacking people).
The teller has a right to communicate their story; the listener has a right to have their own ideas about that story and interpret the meaning and conclusion of that story, not necessarily in harmony with the teller's conclusion. In an open forum such as this where ideas and debates are encouraged, the hearer then has the right to communicate that "varying conclusion". Communicating a different meaning or conclusion about an event is not an "attack"; it is simply exercising one's options.
Does this mean that you are an unapologetic wierwille apologist?
Again, I don't think anyone here is trying to insist you agree with them.
The concerns have to do with attacks by any of the so-called wierwille apologists on those who post their own testimony to the conduct of this man many have come to believe was a charlatan.
If YOU do not participate in those attacks, then there's no problem with you (except for from groucho, I suppose... but he's got his own issues with attacking people).
If YOU do not participate in those attacks, then there's no problem with you (except for from groucho, I suppose... but he's got his own issues with attacking people).
A little snipe at me from my pal Rocky?...just because I didn't like his waycorps website?...oh never mind, I don't want to go
to the subject at hand...Make no mistake about it, Wierwille was a scum bag. He molested his own daughters (by his own admission)...I'm here to oppose any and all pro twi, pro Wierwille, pro pfal and pro waybrain. If anyone has a problem with that...too bad, I'm not here to make friends.
I have to admit that blanket statements on both sides made here make me uncomfortable at times. Like most here, I had bad experiences with TWI and they did a lot to harm me. But TWI also had some of the most wonderful people to ever come into my life as well. Fellow-sufferers with God. ;) I guess when folks are dealing with hurtful subjects, not everything comes out perfectly.
What The Hey, I don't understand how you and others who defend Wierwille and TWI can do that with a clear conscience. All claims, whether in the end they are true or false, have some sort of basis. Some of the things said here about Wierwille and other leaders in TWI, and about TWI itself, may indeed be the result of exaggeration and people taking things out of context, I won't rule that possibility out (though I believe it is highly unlikely). But you all cannot just reject entirely the words of people who were in TWI just as you were, who are recounting their personal experiences. What reason would they have to lie? Why do you so virulently defend Wierwille?
Catholics have not defended the priests who were found in sexual abuse cases, and the Catholic Church has even apologized for what has happened to many people. Heck, the Pope visited the US just for that! But it appears that TWI has not come out in the open about all the abuse and scandal in it. There is a large difference. Either TWI wants to keep everything undisclosed, or all the claims of scandal and abuse in TWI are exaggerated or should be treated as rubbish and feeble attempts to paint a black cloud over the white purity that is, in the minds of some, what TWI is.
When someone tells their story - whether in a thread or a podcast, those with opposing views start another thread. That way the original thread isn't derailed and even if there is a disagreement and ensuing food fight, the person telling the story doesn't have to feel directly challenged. He or she can choose to read the "comment thread" but doesn't have to wade through post after post about proof and getting over it or the kind of food fight that ensues.
It would require manners, compassion, and adult behavior... you think we can handle it?
JustThinking, I'm sure why that's why it is so hard to come to grips with our experiences in TWI -- they are so different, even from day to day in the same person, let alone from one person to the next.
Add to that, that we were taught to see everything in black and white, God or the devil, good or best, walking by the spirit or spiritually off. Mathematical exactness and all that. When the reality is, life isn't so easily slotted.
A little snipe at me from my pal Rocky?...just because I didn't like his waycorps website?...oh never mind, I don't want to go
to the subject at hand...Make no mistake about it, Wierwille was a scum bag. He molested his own daughters (by his own admission)...I'm here to oppose any and all pro twi, pro Wierwille, pro pfal and pro waybrain. If anyone has a problem with that...too bad, I'm not here to make friends.
Then you have left a cult to start a cult. You have chosen to harrass someone because they have different experiences, perceptions and opinions than you do. You have become the very people you claim to be persecuting.
Then you have left a cult to start a cult. You have chosen to harrass someone because they have different experiences, perceptions and opinions than you do. You have become the very people you claim to be persecuting.
...go on, keep defending those who stand up for the cult...that's YOUR choice...
harrass?...they defend a monster. I will speak out against that...
The teller has a right to communicate their story; the listener has a right to have their own ideas about that story and interpret the meaning and conclusion of that story, not necessarily in harmony with the teller's conclusion. In an open forum such as this where ideas and debates are encouraged, the hearer then has the right to communicate that "varying conclusion". Communicating a different meaning or conclusion about an event is not an "attack"; it is simply exercising one's options.
I disagree with YOU on this point.
Challenging the person giving first person testimony is MOST inappropriate, unless YOU HAVE PROOF the person was lying.
OM, your post above sugar coats your "responses" to people who, as young women especially, suffered abuse from wierwille.
It is NOT simply exercising one's options for you to suggest the person that had been abused is responsible for that abuse.
YOU sir, are a culprit in this situation.
And YOU sir, most definitely need to exercise significantly more discretion and respect to the LIVE people who come here and tell their own stories.
And frankly, I have to figure that if you weren't attacking these women, this fuss Groucho raised might not have come up in the first place (my opinion, absolutely).
...go on, keep defending those who stand up for the cult...that's YOUR choice...
harrass?...they defend a monster. I will speak out against that...
Abi's got a valid point, ya know Groucho...
How's about this...
When someone tells their story - whether in a thread or a podcast, those with opposing views start another thread. That way the original thread isn't derailed and even if there is a disagreement and ensuing food fight, the person telling the story doesn't have to feel directly challenged. He or she can choose to read the "comment thread" but doesn't have to wade through post after post about proof and getting over it or the kind of food fight that ensues.
It would require manners, compassion, and adult behavior... you think we can handle it?
As wonderful (and lofty) and idea (and ideal) that is... to answer your question succinctly: NO!
When someone tells their story - whether in a thread or a podcast, those with opposing views start another thread. That way the original thread isn't derailed and even if there is a disagreement and ensuing food fight, the person telling the story doesn't have to feel directly challenged. He or she can choose to read the "comment thread" but doesn't have to wade through post after post about proof and getting over it or the kind of food fight that ensues.
It would require manners, compassion, and adult behavior... you think we can handle it?
That sounds fair..... I agree to comply fully if its made part of the rules.
When someone tells their story - whether in a thread or a podcast, those with opposing views start another thread. That way the original thread isn't derailed and even if there is a disagreement and ensuing food fight, the person telling the story doesn't have to feel directly challenged. He or she can choose to read the "comment thread" but doesn't have to wade through post after post about proof and getting over it or the kind of food fight that ensues.
It would require manners, compassion, and adult behavior... you think we can handle it?
That sounds fair..... I agree to comply fully if its made part of the rules.
Actually Oldies, I was hoping we could be adults and handle this without written rules.
We're all adults here, most of us in our forties and fifties. I would like to think that compassion and manners are still within our repertoire. I'm asking for a little decency and self-moderation.
Well, I vote your suggestion be made part of the rules; that way it gets the blessing of the Owner of the website, and all participants know what is allowed and what to expect.
Would you follow this suggestion even if it weren't a rule?
Of course not. Starting another thread is not the problem, but what if I started another thread sharing my opinion about a victims' story and then the Owner of the website doesn't like my opinion finding it opposed to the "GS Mission" and then I get slammed again? That's why your suggestion was a good one but IMO needs his blessing and must be made part of the rules, so all participants know what is allowed and what to expect.
Yeah right. We're convinced you've got the skinny and the truth about VPW - and everyone and everything that has ever been associated with TWI.
Don't be offended that we just can't come to the same conclusions you have - that is, that you've got everything competely in balance regarding VPW, TWI, etc., when we see your vindictive fingers still stuck upon the scales of justice.
I don't think it takes a "critic" to judge the vicster's life. One doesn't need a fine education, years of training..
now something like fine wine, a classy theatrical production, perhaps one needs education and experience to evaluate the subtle nuances of the production.
With the vicster's life, isn't the need of a "critic" overkill? Even a wino knows sour wine when he encounters it.
It's just.. calling for a critic is kind of a waste of talent isn't it? It's like handing a world class wine taster a sample of a bad production of Gallo or something..
Of course not. Starting another thread is not the problem, but what if I started another thread sharing my opinion about a victims' story and then the Owner of the website doesn't like my opinion finding it opposed to the "GS Mission" and then I get slammed again? That's why your suggestion was a good one but IMO needs his blessing and must be made part of the rules, so all participants know what is allowed and what to expect.
Life is FULL of UNWRITTEN rules, OM. And I'd bet that you follow most of them.
They are called "mores"
mo·res // /ˈmɔreɪz, -iz, ˈmoʊr-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[mawr-eyz, -eez, mohr-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –plural noun Sociology. folkways of central importance accepted without question and embodying the fundamental moral views of a group. [Origin: 1905–10; < L mōres, pl. of mōs usage, custom]
—Synonyms customs, conventions, practices.
And frankly, these recent threads expressing consternation at your conduct (and that of some other wierwille apologists) is aimed at getting this point across to you (and them, as necessary).
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
4
9
6
9
Popular Days
Jul 10
18
Jul 9
14
Jul 14
11
Jul 11
9
Top Posters In This Topic
oldiesman 4 posts
Rocky 9 posts
pond 6 posts
doojable 9 posts
Popular Days
Jul 10 2008
18 posts
Jul 9 2008
14 posts
Jul 14 2008
11 posts
Jul 11 2008
9 posts
Rocky
Does this mean that you are an unapologetic wierwille apologist?
Again, I don't think anyone here is trying to insist you agree with them.
The concerns have to do with attacks by any of the so-called wierwille apologists on those who post their own testimony to the conduct of this man many have come to believe was a charlatan.
If YOU do not participate in those attacks, then there's no problem with you (except for from groucho, I suppose... but he's got his own issues with attacking people).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
The teller has a right to communicate their story; the listener has a right to have their own ideas about that story and interpret the meaning and conclusion of that story, not necessarily in harmony with the teller's conclusion. In an open forum such as this where ideas and debates are encouraged, the hearer then has the right to communicate that "varying conclusion". Communicating a different meaning or conclusion about an event is not an "attack"; it is simply exercising one's options.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
Mark the calendar because I agree with Rocky!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
A little snipe at me from my pal Rocky?...just because I didn't like his waycorps website?...oh never mind, I don't want to go
to the subject at hand...Make no mistake about it, Wierwille was a scum bag. He molested his own daughters (by his own admission)...I'm here to oppose any and all pro twi, pro Wierwille, pro pfal and pro waybrain. If anyone has a problem with that...too bad, I'm not here to make friends.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cheranne
If you prefer the HALF TRUTH and must do things as half a$$ mr wierwille did.
Go on keep deceiving yourselves,it's your life .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
I have to admit that blanket statements on both sides made here make me uncomfortable at times. Like most here, I had bad experiences with TWI and they did a lot to harm me. But TWI also had some of the most wonderful people to ever come into my life as well. Fellow-sufferers with God. ;) I guess when folks are dealing with hurtful subjects, not everything comes out perfectly.
JT
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brushstroke
What The Hey, I don't understand how you and others who defend Wierwille and TWI can do that with a clear conscience. All claims, whether in the end they are true or false, have some sort of basis. Some of the things said here about Wierwille and other leaders in TWI, and about TWI itself, may indeed be the result of exaggeration and people taking things out of context, I won't rule that possibility out (though I believe it is highly unlikely). But you all cannot just reject entirely the words of people who were in TWI just as you were, who are recounting their personal experiences. What reason would they have to lie? Why do you so virulently defend Wierwille?
Catholics have not defended the priests who were found in sexual abuse cases, and the Catholic Church has even apologized for what has happened to many people. Heck, the Pope visited the US just for that! But it appears that TWI has not come out in the open about all the abuse and scandal in it. There is a large difference. Either TWI wants to keep everything undisclosed, or all the claims of scandal and abuse in TWI are exaggerated or should be treated as rubbish and feeble attempts to paint a black cloud over the white purity that is, in the minds of some, what TWI is.
Use your reason and decide for yourself.
~Phil
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
How's about this...
When someone tells their story - whether in a thread or a podcast, those with opposing views start another thread. That way the original thread isn't derailed and even if there is a disagreement and ensuing food fight, the person telling the story doesn't have to feel directly challenged. He or she can choose to read the "comment thread" but doesn't have to wade through post after post about proof and getting over it or the kind of food fight that ensues.
It would require manners, compassion, and adult behavior... you think we can handle it?
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
shazdancer
JustThinking, I'm sure why that's why it is so hard to come to grips with our experiences in TWI -- they are so different, even from day to day in the same person, let alone from one person to the next.
Add to that, that we were taught to see everything in black and white, God or the devil, good or best, walking by the spirit or spiritually off. Mathematical exactness and all that. When the reality is, life isn't so easily slotted.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Then you have left a cult to start a cult. You have chosen to harrass someone because they have different experiences, perceptions and opinions than you do. You have become the very people you claim to be persecuting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
...go on, keep defending those who stand up for the cult...that's YOUR choice...
harrass?...they defend a monster. I will speak out against that...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
I disagree with YOU on this point.
Challenging the person giving first person testimony is MOST inappropriate, unless YOU HAVE PROOF the person was lying.
OM, your post above sugar coats your "responses" to people who, as young women especially, suffered abuse from wierwille.
It is NOT simply exercising one's options for you to suggest the person that had been abused is responsible for that abuse.
YOU sir, are a culprit in this situation.
And YOU sir, most definitely need to exercise significantly more discretion and respect to the LIVE people who come here and tell their own stories.
And frankly, I have to figure that if you weren't attacking these women, this fuss Groucho raised might not have come up in the first place (my opinion, absolutely).
Abi's got a valid point, ya know Groucho...
As wonderful (and lofty) and idea (and ideal) that is... to answer your question succinctly: NO!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
Is there not enough going on in the world, in TWI, or in your own life that you have make yourselves busy labeling everyone and pigeonholing everyone?
How about arguing with their first-hand experience? What DO you get from that? (Rhetorical question...)
Good grief... why can't y'all lighten up and just follow the forum rules? They're not so hard, you know.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
That sounds fair..... I agree to comply fully if its made part of the rules.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
That's not manners, compassion, and adult behavior.
That is a law for the lawless.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Actually Oldies, I was hoping we could be adults and handle this without written rules.
We're all adults here, most of us in our forties and fifties. I would like to think that compassion and manners are still within our repertoire. I'm asking for a little decency and self-moderation.
We shouldn't need another rule.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Well, I vote your suggestion be made part of the rules; that way it gets the blessing of the Owner of the website, and all participants know what is allowed and what to expect.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
The rules here are fine the way they are.
IMO
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Would you follow this suggestion even if it weren't a rule?
We tell our kids, "Play nice." That's a fairly broad admonition and they get it.
Think of this suggestion as falling under the heading of playing nice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
Well, if the lawless only do what's right when it's in a written law, I guess it's better than nothing.
Either way, it's a good idea.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Of course not. Starting another thread is not the problem, but what if I started another thread sharing my opinion about a victims' story and then the Owner of the website doesn't like my opinion finding it opposed to the "GS Mission" and then I get slammed again? That's why your suggestion was a good one but IMO needs his blessing and must be made part of the rules, so all participants know what is allowed and what to expect.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I don't think it takes a "critic" to judge the vicster's life. One doesn't need a fine education, years of training..
now something like fine wine, a classy theatrical production, perhaps one needs education and experience to evaluate the subtle nuances of the production.
With the vicster's life, isn't the need of a "critic" overkill? Even a wino knows sour wine when he encounters it.
It's just.. calling for a critic is kind of a waste of talent isn't it? It's like handing a world class wine taster a sample of a bad production of Gallo or something..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Life is FULL of UNWRITTEN rules, OM. And I'd bet that you follow most of them.
They are called "mores"
And frankly, these recent threads expressing consternation at your conduct (and that of some other wierwille apologists) is aimed at getting this point across to you (and them, as necessary).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.