That was him. He was a nice man. TWI never took any responsibility. They just vilified him (though not as nastily as usual) for being weak.
Other men (much older Corpsmen, therefore more browbeaten anyway) have declined into depression and inability to do anything. Dare not, probably. Those men are also victims, just as much as their abused wives.
He may have been a nice man to you, but he threatened me once and tried to intimidate me.
I had asked him something. He lied to my face. I asked if he minded if I checked into what he said. He replied by threatening me with physical harm if I did.
He was big, but he wasn't fast, nor did he move like a trained fighter. I was NOT intimidated by him. I let my body language show it in spades at that point, and doubled down the more he talked. Frankly, he was increasingly bothered by how I didn't flinch or back down- which made it more fun for me to increasingly show calmness and confidence while he kept trying.
For the record, I was faster than him, and a trained fighter, and I already had a plan mapped out if he tried to jump at me. I wasn't just pretending he wasn't a viable threat to me.
I'm not of the opinion he was like that before he went to live on-grounds in the corps. I think he degenerated a lot in his first year in residence- since I'd met him before that and that's why we were even HAVING a conversation. Maybe it was because I was another guy, and maybe because he thought he could intimidate me because he was taller than me.
Looking back, whenever someone on-grounds said something and tried to one-up me (for the few times I was there, it happened quite a bit), I kept letting it all roll off my back. It looked to me like those came from insecurity and not from a legit concern for me, so I gave it the attention it deserved.
I was quite shocked when I'd heard about his death. Frankly, I thought he might have earned a smack-down or a thrashing, but I certainly didn't think he'd earned an early grave. Then again, by deciding to try to blend in on grounds, and cementing his blind loyalty when lcm demanded oaths of blind loyalty in 88-89, he'd begun to set the stage for what actually killed him. Was it his loyalty to lcm, or his loyalty to twi that really set the stage? Perhaps it was both- so when lcm took his wife and it turned out he could do nothing about it (he tried to get her to leave with him, they talked her into staying), he blew his brains out after yelling at her that he couldn't compete with lcm. Why he didn't just shoot lcm instead, I think, goes back to his blind loyalties. He decided previously that he'd go off a cliff for lcm/twi, so, when the option came, that's what he did. And, yes, they told his widow that he would have killed her and himself if she'd left the grounds with him. Yes, that was a vicious lie.
It was a big shock to me too, but then again we now know that's what the corpse can help do to folks. There was another guy from our branch in the Bronx, Ken B. once the branch leader, who died in the corpse getting hit by a bus on one of their programs. But what some folks don't know is, this lovely man was joy personified when he went in, a pleasure to be around at all times; then I saw him about a year later and I couldn't recognize him ... he was visibly too serious, sullen, like all the joy was taken out of him. The change was astonishing. So, when someone has that amount of joy and happiness in the Bronx and lose it in Ohio something's gotta be wrong.
There was another guy from our branch in the Bronx, Ken B. once the branch leader, who died in the corpse getting hit by a bus on one of their programs.
He was hitch hiking to L.E.A.D.
Here is a thread that references the events surrounding that particular trip.
I'm not denigrating him. That means to criticize unfairly.
I'm not being unfair. I'm being clear, and for someone with the potential for verbosity that I have, pretty concise.
I'm also being honest, as far as I'm concerned because a person can't understand how and why the Way Inc. went the way it did without understanding how horribly bad he performed as President of the Way Inc. in both his personal and private lives.
I can say something that will help Bolshy - if he'd like help with a specific set of circumstance he has encountered he'll need to say what it is, clearly. Till then I just wish him the best with whatever it is or was that's bugging him because it's largely academic without specificity.
And he could do that here with a degree of anonymity, and it could be discussed openly. Just as Waydale allowed. And if others take exception or use the information for evil it'll be a repeat of what seems to have happened before, if I'm reading right. I guess. Hard to say.
Some of us were actively trying to leave TWI when the internet struck. Putting information out there that was not necessary. You don't need to know a thing to know you don't like TWI.
These sites made the children of The Way responsible for the Leadership of The Way.
I had nothing to do with with what happened to those women. As a teenager, I was made responsible for it, thanks to the internet.
Bolshy one: consider his facemeltings as your badge of honor and personal integrity.
I was not facemelted by LCM.
I was made responsible for LCM by strangers outside of The Way because they read the internet. It disrupted the natural process of leaving . . . by shaming a kid for what happened to women . . . as if I could even understand all those sexual acts at the time. That's the power of the internet to destroy.
I was made responsible for LCM by strangers outside of The Way because they read the internet. It disrupted the natural process of leaving . . . by shaming a kid for what happened to women . . . as if I could even understand all those sexual acts at the time. That's the power of the internet to destroy.
Wassup!!!
That and some real dip$hits messing with a kid over what's on the internet.
I was made responsible for LCM by strangers outside of The Way because they read the internet. It disrupted the natural process of leaving . . . by shaming a kid for what happened to women . . . as if I could even understand all those sexual acts at the time. That's the power of the internet to destroy.
Hi, Bolshevik. Good to see you. I've missed you on these here threads.
But denigrating LCM doesn't help Bolshy. I wonder what we can say, that will help Bolshevik?
Don't you think these sites should go underground? People in the know about issues can get information together and present it to the proper authorities.
Those of us who did not join your organization were affected by these websites.
Don't you think these sites should go underground? People in the know about issues can get information together and present it to the proper authorities.
Those of us who did not join your organization were affected by these websites.
This is always true, right? Divorce, war, etc. So, were your parents in a fight with Waydale? You were shot in the crossfire from a fight between Waydale and your parents?
I thought Waydale was an open and free forum in an open and free society. Who is fighting where you are caught in the crossfire? And if Waydale is a forum, how is it a party in a fight? Or did the fight take place on Waydale?
Real questions. I'm not arguing with you. I'm not doubting you. I start with acknowledging that I know next to nothing. I'm just trying to understand what you mean, because what you've said so far is not clear.
Didn't someone here say Waydale was part of a fight? Between old people who by their free will joined TWI? Each of them for a time at least worshipped VPW?
They had a disagreement, and posted it to the internet. That's why these sites exist.
The internet of course, has not been around since the dawn of time. It's changed a lot of things.
The alarm was sent out, and the message was that if you go near anyone in TWI, you will get sexually raped or something of the sort. Maybe that was true - maybe everyone in TWI is dangerous. I don't know why The Law did nothing to stop that.
Those messages affect anyone associated in any way with TWI.
Sometimes it's appropriate to scream FIRE. Sometimes it's not.
I don't know why The Law did nothing to stop that.
Because freedom of religion. "The Law" has been constrained to prevent regulation of religion.
As religions, such as twi, RC, and Mormons use that freedom to hide abusive and harmful non-religion related practices to harm children and adults, legislation can address some related issues/concerns/risks.
But legislation gets challenged before, during, and after the legislative processes attempt to protect those at risk.
The struggle never ends. But it's still an important struggle.
Depending on the laws in one's state, citizens might be able to initiate such mitigating efforts in order to keep Big Money interests (churches and their insurance companies) from stopping movements for accountability.
Because freedom of religion. "The Law" has been constrained to prevent regulation of religion.
As religions, such as twi, RC, and Mormons use that freedom to hide abusive and harmful non-religion related practices to harm children and adults, legislation can address some related issues/concerns/risks.
But legislation gets challenged before, during, and after the legislative processes attempt to protect those at risk.
The struggle never ends. But it's still an important struggle.
Depending on the laws in one's state, citizens might be able to initiate such mitigating efforts in order to keep Big Money interests (churches and their insurance companies) from stopping movements for accountability.
I think these sexual practices are independent of religion. It think VPW took behaviors of a subculture and slapped religious language over it.
You can't murder and cite religious freedom. You don't need a religion to do these things.
Do we agree "The Law" is completely aware of everything that happens? And there is something arbitrary about what it enforces?
Also, perhaps there's simply no law against many of those things.
Do we agree "The Law" is completely aware of everything that happens? And there is something arbitrary about what it enforces?
No. We don't agree on what laws (which are not sentient) might be aware of.
The law doesn't enforce anything. Agencies with police power exercise discretion as to which laws or whether laws will be enforced. The situation varies by jurisdiction.
Laws are written/made by citizens and/or the representatives of citizens. Which laws are or aren't made also vary by jurisdiction.
I'm really not interested in and not trying to trigger you. Please recognize it.
1- Didn't someone here say Waydale was part of a fight?
2-Between old people who by their free will joined TWI?
3-Each of them for a time at least worshipped VPW?
4-They had a disagreement, and posted it to the internet. That's why these sites exist.
5=The internet of course, has not been around since the dawn of time. It's changed a lot of things.
6=The alarm was sent out, and the message was that if you go near anyone in TWI, you will get sexually raped or something of the sort.
7=Maybe that was true - maybe everyone in TWI is dangerous.
8-I don't know why The Law did nothing to stop that.
9-Those messages affect anyone associated in any way with TWI.
10-Sometimes it's appropriate to scream FIRE. Sometimes it's not.
[Hi. I numbered your questions/statements to make them easier to address. In order:
1- No, but grievances against/crimes committed by lcm/vpw/twi were posted there, starting with a pending lawsuit.
2= Older than you were at the time, but not "old." Most people who joined twi did so by their free will- those of you raised into it were the exception and not the rule.
3- No. They were fooled into thinking vpw was the real deal, but almost nobody actually "worshipped" him. They did cut him a ridiculous amount of slack, once.
4- No. "Disagreement" doesn't cut it. It began with the discussion of a pending lawsuit, and discussion continued from there. Except around 1970 when all the hippies arrived, twi was/has been/is a horrible place for open communication and free speech. Waydale was the beginning of open discussions for a LOT of ex-twi and then-current twi.
5- I agree.
6- Apparently, people reading these discussions leaped to those conclusions. People have always leaped to conclusions on insufficient evidence. That "message" is what those people concocted as some sort of "summary" despite what was actually posted.
7-It was never true, and ex-twi\ers never said it was. Again, some outsiders jumped to conclusions.
8-Law enforcement needs to respond to complaints or see a crime in progress. Arrests are made, and the criminal justice system gets to work, with criminal court the next step. Law enforcement are not mind-readers, and nobody complained directly to them. The couple with the case brought it in CIVIL court, where they probably had a MUCH better chance to win the suit. (In the US, criminal court is to "beyond a reasonable doubt" and civil court is "the preponderance of the evidence." The latter is easier to prove.) Finally, no actual complaint anywhere said twi was where "everyone was dangerous."
9-Well, once the lynch mobs panicked and sharpened their pitchforks, a lot of attention was leveled at twi from new directions, all of it bad for twi. So, their mangled, manufactured messages got results- even though they were wildly exaggerated.
10-In the abstract, I agree. In this case, the ex-twi discussed things in a rather healthy fashion. It was outsiders who grabbed pieces of their comments, mangled the messages, and flew into a panic over the events that nobody claimed were happening.
I suspect most of the panicked people had never read Waydale any more than you did. That's the nature of when people panic- part of the mob won't know what's going on in the first place.
Ok, I at least understand what the basic problem was. People who went to Waydale, saw some stuff, then went into a panic based on what they CLAIMED was there and probably THOUGHT was there, but was largely in their imaginations. These people then came after ANYONE in twi, including kids who had no idea what was going on.
1- I think these sexual practices are independent of religion.
2-It think VPW took behaviors of a subculture and slapped religious language over it.
3= You can't murder and cite religious freedom.
4-You don't need a religion to do these things.
5-Do we agree "The Law" is completely aware of everything that happens?
6-And there is something arbitrary about what it enforces?
7-Also, perhaps there's simply no law against many of those things.
Ok, addressing by the #s I added for ease of reply....
1- I think everyone would agree with this, I expect I would.
2- It was vpw, but he took the behaviors he wanted, and tried to find them in a subculture. He recruited the members, and tried to adapt the behaviors into his denomination. He did slap religious language over it. Where he succeeded was in adding all of the "this is a secret" business, and in his local network. His local network helped him scout out women he was likely to be successful raping, helped him manage it, and watched for signs they were going to squeal- and had the woman thrown out and savaged her reputation as soon as it looked like she was going to sing.
3- You CAN murder and cite religious freedom. It won't WORK, but you can cite it. Where religious freedom works here is a general reluctance to dig into a religion's everyday practices, as well as vpw making up a subculture for twi that included ideas that helped him- making sex more permissive, and the "lockbox", and if you don't think something's a sin, then it isn't a sin. Religious freedom technically made it possible for vpw to try that- but it took a pervert like vpw to actually try it.
4= I agree, but that religion made the subculture easy to manufacture, plus it added the chance to demand a tithe and donations, and gave vpw pseudo- authority.
5- No, I think you're alone on that one.
6- Mostly no, although I suspect there's a reluctance to dig into claims against a religion because First Amendment rights can conflict with any investigation.
7-No, it's still illegal to drug, rape, molest, embezzle the "company funds", etc. First, someone has to blow the whistle. Then, someone has to initiate the investigation.
Ok, addressing by the #s I added for ease of reply....
1- I think everyone would agree with this, I expect I would.
2- It was vpw, but he took the behaviors he wanted, and tried to find them in a subculture. He recruited the members, and tried to adapt the behaviors into his denomination. He did slap religious language over it. Where he succeeded was in adding all of the "this is a secret" business, and in his local network. His local network helped him scout out women he was likely to be successful raping, helped him manage it, and watched for signs they were going to squeal- and had the woman thrown out and savaged her reputation as soon as it looked like she was going to sing.
3- You CAN murder and cite religious freedom. It won't WORK, but you can cite it. Where religious freedom works here is a general reluctance to dig into a religion's everyday practices, as well as vpw making up a subculture for twi that included ideas that helped him- making sex more permissive, and the "lockbox", and if you don't think something's a sin, then it isn't a sin. Religious freedom technically made it possible for vpw to try that- but it took a pervert like vpw to actually try it.
4= I agree, but that religion made the subculture easy to manufacture, plus it added the chance to demand a tithe and donations, and gave vpw pseudo- authority.
5- No, I think you're alone on that one.
6- Mostly no, although I suspect there's a reluctance to dig into claims against a religion because First Amendment rights can conflict with any investigation.
7-No, it's still illegal to drug, rape, molest, embezzle the "company funds", etc. First, someone has to blow the whistle. Then, someone has to initiate the investigation.
As far as I know, nothing of significance happened to LCM. He was removed from a joke of an organization by the organization. Which was likely planned for by those within the organization.
Back to Paul Allen. One other guy faced with the same situation as Paul caved in to the pressure and committed suicide. The wife of the guy who committed suicide is remarried and in a leadership position in the Way. See how they clean up messes?
That's common outside of The Way. He formed an unhealthy attachment.
As far as I know, nothing of significance happened to LCM. He was removed from a joke of an organization by the organization. Which was likely planned for by those within the organization.
The Allen suit accomplished nothing.
The Allen lawsuit accomplished setting boundaries to LCM behavior. It also made behavior public to the church so all could watch out. Without it LCM might have had 20 more years of Bill Cosbying it up. It also deterred similar practitioners. And eventually it led to LCM removal and expulsion.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
21
35
13
9
Popular Days
Jul 26
20
Jul 31
14
Jul 21
13
Oct 10
13
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 21 posts
Bolshevik 35 posts
chockfull 13 posts
OldSkool 9 posts
Popular Days
Jul 26 2022
20 posts
Jul 31 2022
14 posts
Jul 21 2022
13 posts
Oct 10 2022
13 posts
Popular Posts
engine
I left in 1986 and stumbled onto Waydale around 1999 perhaps. I spoke to Paul Allen one time, too. He was calmly furious at twi and determined to push them as far as he could. IMO, it was becaus
Nathan_Jr
Aha! Yep. That's it. That's what I remember seeing. Nice work, OldSkool!
chockfull
Because it denotes a person in a position of trust relationship like a judge or a therapist. It describes the betrayal of the trust that society normally places in a person with those credentials.
Twinky
That was him. He was a nice man. TWI never took any responsibility. They just vilified him (though not as nastily as usual) for being weak.
Other men (much older Corpsmen, therefore more browbeaten anyway) have declined into depression and inability to do anything. Dare not, probably. Those men are also victims, just as much as their abused wives.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Thank you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
He may have been a nice man to you, but he threatened me once and tried to intimidate me.
I had asked him something. He lied to my face. I asked if he minded if I checked into what he said. He replied by threatening me with physical harm if I did.
He was big, but he wasn't fast, nor did he move like a trained fighter. I was NOT intimidated by him. I let my body language show it in spades at that point, and doubled down the more he talked. Frankly, he was increasingly bothered by how I didn't flinch or back down- which made it more fun for me to increasingly show calmness and confidence while he kept trying.
For the record, I was faster than him, and a trained fighter, and I already had a plan mapped out if he tried to jump at me. I wasn't just pretending he wasn't a viable threat to me.
I'm not of the opinion he was like that before he went to live on-grounds in the corps. I think he degenerated a lot in his first year in residence- since I'd met him before that and that's why we were even HAVING a conversation. Maybe it was because I was another guy, and maybe because he thought he could intimidate me because he was taller than me.
Looking back, whenever someone on-grounds said something and tried to one-up me (for the few times I was there, it happened quite a bit), I kept letting it all roll off my back. It looked to me like those came from insecurity and not from a legit concern for me, so I gave it the attention it deserved.
I was quite shocked when I'd heard about his death. Frankly, I thought he might have earned a smack-down or a thrashing, but I certainly didn't think he'd earned an early grave. Then again, by deciding to try to blend in on grounds, and cementing his blind loyalty when lcm demanded oaths of blind loyalty in 88-89, he'd begun to set the stage for what actually killed him. Was it his loyalty to lcm, or his loyalty to twi that really set the stage? Perhaps it was both- so when lcm took his wife and it turned out he could do nothing about it (he tried to get her to leave with him, they talked her into staying), he blew his brains out after yelling at her that he couldn't compete with lcm. Why he didn't just shoot lcm instead, I think, goes back to his blind loyalties. He decided previously that he'd go off a cliff for lcm/twi, so, when the option came, that's what he did. And, yes, they told his widow that he would have killed her and himself if she'd left the grounds with him. Yes, that was a vicious lie.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
It was a big shock to me too, but then again we now know that's what the corpse can help do to folks. There was another guy from our branch in the Bronx, Ken B. once the branch leader, who died in the corpse getting hit by a bus on one of their programs. But what some folks don't know is, this lovely man was joy personified when he went in, a pleasure to be around at all times; then I saw him about a year later and I couldn't recognize him ... he was visibly too serious, sullen, like all the joy was taken out of him. The change was astonishing. So, when someone has that amount of joy and happiness in the Bronx and lose it in Ohio something's gotta be wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
He was hitch hiking to L.E.A.D.
Here is a thread that references the events surrounding that particular trip.
Edited by waysideradd link
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Thank you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Some of us were actively trying to leave TWI when the internet struck. Putting information out there that was not necessary. You don't need to know a thing to know you don't like TWI.
These sites made the children of The Way responsible for the Leadership of The Way.
I had nothing to do with with what happened to those women. As a teenager, I was made responsible for it, thanks to the internet.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I was not facemelted by LCM.
I was made responsible for LCM by strangers outside of The Way because they read the internet. It disrupted the natural process of leaving . . . by shaming a kid for what happened to women . . . as if I could even understand all those sexual acts at the time. That's the power of the internet to destroy.
Edited by BolshevikLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Wassup!!!
That and some real dip$hits messing with a kid over what's on the internet.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Hi, Bolshevik. Good to see you. I've missed you on these here threads.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I think that's true of some of them but not all.
One on one relationships become you versus the Internet, unbeknownst to you. Hence The Challenging Counterfeit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I think you're being deliberately silly, using the term "intended". People don't intend to join a cult, isn't that the trope? But they do join cults.
These websites have effects beyond their intent. That is how I ended here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Don't you think these sites should go underground? People in the know about issues can get information together and present it to the proper authorities.
Those of us who did not join your organization were affected by these websites.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
????????????????
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Didn't someone here say Waydale was part of a fight? Between old people who by their free will joined TWI? Each of them for a time at least worshipped VPW?
They had a disagreement, and posted it to the internet. That's why these sites exist.
The internet of course, has not been around since the dawn of time. It's changed a lot of things.
The alarm was sent out, and the message was that if you go near anyone in TWI, you will get sexually raped or something of the sort. Maybe that was true - maybe everyone in TWI is dangerous. I don't know why The Law did nothing to stop that.
Those messages affect anyone associated in any way with TWI.
Sometimes it's appropriate to scream FIRE. Sometimes it's not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Because freedom of religion. "The Law" has been constrained to prevent regulation of religion.
As religions, such as twi, RC, and Mormons use that freedom to hide abusive and harmful non-religion related practices to harm children and adults, legislation can address some related issues/concerns/risks.
But legislation gets challenged before, during, and after the legislative processes attempt to protect those at risk.
The struggle never ends. But it's still an important struggle.
Depending on the laws in one's state, citizens might be able to initiate such mitigating efforts in order to keep Big Money interests (churches and their insurance companies) from stopping movements for accountability.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I think these sexual practices are independent of religion. It think VPW took behaviors of a subculture and slapped religious language over it.
You can't murder and cite religious freedom. You don't need a religion to do these things.
Do we agree "The Law" is completely aware of everything that happens? And there is something arbitrary about what it enforces?
Also, perhaps there's simply no law against many of those things.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
No. We don't agree on what laws (which are not sentient) might be aware of.
Edited by RockyThe law doesn't enforce anything. Agencies with police power exercise discretion as to which laws or whether laws will be enforced. The situation varies by jurisdiction.
Laws are written/made by citizens and/or the representatives of citizens. Which laws are or aren't made also vary by jurisdiction.
I'm really not interested in and not trying to trigger you. Please recognize it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
[Hi. I numbered your questions/statements to make them easier to address. In order:
1- No, but grievances against/crimes committed by lcm/vpw/twi were posted there, starting with a pending lawsuit.
2= Older than you were at the time, but not "old." Most people who joined twi did so by their free will- those of you raised into it were the exception and not the rule.
3- No. They were fooled into thinking vpw was the real deal, but almost nobody actually "worshipped" him. They did cut him a ridiculous amount of slack, once.
4- No. "Disagreement" doesn't cut it. It began with the discussion of a pending lawsuit, and discussion continued from there. Except around 1970 when all the hippies arrived, twi was/has been/is a horrible place for open communication and free speech. Waydale was the beginning of open discussions for a LOT of ex-twi and then-current twi.
5- I agree.
6- Apparently, people reading these discussions leaped to those conclusions. People have always leaped to conclusions on insufficient evidence. That "message" is what those people concocted as some sort of "summary" despite what was actually posted.
7-It was never true, and ex-twi\ers never said it was. Again, some outsiders jumped to conclusions.
8-Law enforcement needs to respond to complaints or see a crime in progress. Arrests are made, and the criminal justice system gets to work, with criminal court the next step. Law enforcement are not mind-readers, and nobody complained directly to them. The couple with the case brought it in CIVIL court, where they probably had a MUCH better chance to win the suit. (In the US, criminal court is to "beyond a reasonable doubt" and civil court is "the preponderance of the evidence." The latter is easier to prove.) Finally, no actual complaint anywhere said twi was where "everyone was dangerous."
9-Well, once the lynch mobs panicked and sharpened their pitchforks, a lot of attention was leveled at twi from new directions, all of it bad for twi. So, their mangled, manufactured messages got results- even though they were wildly exaggerated.
10-In the abstract, I agree. In this case, the ex-twi discussed things in a rather healthy fashion. It was outsiders who grabbed pieces of their comments, mangled the messages, and flew into a panic over the events that nobody claimed were happening.
I suspect most of the panicked people had never read Waydale any more than you did. That's the nature of when people panic- part of the mob won't know what's going on in the first place.
Ok, I at least understand what the basic problem was. People who went to Waydale, saw some stuff, then went into a panic based on what they CLAIMED was there and probably THOUGHT was there, but was largely in their imaginations. These people then came after ANYONE in twi, including kids who had no idea what was going on.
I STILL don't blame Waydale for that one.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Ok, addressing by the #s I added for ease of reply....
1- I think everyone would agree with this, I expect I would.
2- It was vpw, but he took the behaviors he wanted, and tried to find them in a subculture. He recruited the members, and tried to adapt the behaviors into his denomination. He did slap religious language over it. Where he succeeded was in adding all of the "this is a secret" business, and in his local network. His local network helped him scout out women he was likely to be successful raping, helped him manage it, and watched for signs they were going to squeal- and had the woman thrown out and savaged her reputation as soon as it looked like she was going to sing.
3- You CAN murder and cite religious freedom. It won't WORK, but you can cite it. Where religious freedom works here is a general reluctance to dig into a religion's everyday practices, as well as vpw making up a subculture for twi that included ideas that helped him- making sex more permissive, and the "lockbox", and if you don't think something's a sin, then it isn't a sin. Religious freedom technically made it possible for vpw to try that- but it took a pervert like vpw to actually try it.
4= I agree, but that religion made the subculture easy to manufacture, plus it added the chance to demand a tithe and donations, and gave vpw pseudo- authority.
5- No, I think you're alone on that one.
6- Mostly no, although I suspect there's a reluctance to dig into claims against a religion because First Amendment rights can conflict with any investigation.
7-No, it's still illegal to drug, rape, molest, embezzle the "company funds", etc. First, someone has to blow the whistle. Then, someone has to initiate the investigation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
As far as I know, nothing of significance happened to LCM. He was removed from a joke of an organization by the organization. Which was likely planned for by those within the organization.
The Allen suit accomplished nothing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
That's common outside of The Way. He formed an unhealthy attachment.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
The Allen lawsuit accomplished setting boundaries to LCM behavior. It also made behavior public to the church so all could watch out. Without it LCM might have had 20 more years of Bill Cosbying it up. It also deterred similar practitioners. And eventually it led to LCM removal and expulsion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Bolsh near as I can figure out your parents went to a splinter over this BS and held you hostage about it. That sucks.
I think different people get different things from this site. But mostly we are here to tell the truth underneath all the whitewash. At least I am.
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.