Sometimes people simply make bad choices that they justify at the time that they are made, but come to feel personal responsibility and accountability for later on, and then admit to making bad decisions. I know I have.

Thank you for picking the "article" up so quickly, Apollo! Again, you yet again prove to be very sharp...!!!

....this is of course, a rehash of McKay's efforts to establish "credibility" for himself, by prostituting a "social cause" (Freeganism) for the purposes of drawing attention to himself....(thank you for the earlier National Geographic coverage, that you so expertly acquired Zeuszor).....

Roland's proved to be such a consistently arrogant and obnoxious individual down the years....that I think she will find it very difficult to "recruit", should this be still in the back of her mind.....however I still feel more hope for their son, as even though he will be denied a formal education.....he will have exposure to other perspectives (e.g. Ciaran O'Reilly and the other Catholic Workers) to be able to see beyond the incestuous insanity of McKay's idiocy....

So Sue is 43!.....she'd be too "invested" in the lies she has lived now, to be able to see through them (i.e. she likely wouldn't even WANT to discover that everything she believed in, is so much bullshit....hence she'd consciously seek to repress any questions she might otherwise quietly occur to her)

....I still suspect that she is the reason, "McKay Zombie" Roland was at the very least, able to physically escape the JC's, though....and the fact that they were deliberately EXCLUDED from the Cruise (obviously then already displeasing Lord and Master McKay, in some way).....DOES say something for her.

(...as I refuse to believe that Roland had either the "brains" or the "stomach" to say no to McKay, in any respect.....)

Quote
MWW
....I still suspect that she is the reason, "McKay Zombie" Roland was at the very least, able to physically escape the JC's, though....and the fact that they were deliberately EXCLUDED from the Cruise (obviously then already displeasing Lord and Master McKay, in some way).....DOES say something for her.

(...as I refuse to believe that Roland had either the "brains" or the "stomach" to say no to McKay, in any respect.....)

That' why I don't really buy the line that says that everybody who has been involved with the McKays is somehow a "victim" of the McKays.

Yes, the McKays created the conditions through which these decisions are made, and yes, these folks are in a psychological state of "bounded choice," but at the end of the day I still say that somebody is responsible for his or her own behavior. Nobody got hit by the Hypno-Beam and was mesmerized by Dave McKay into a thoughtless zombie. What he does could not work, without some degree of the participants' complicity.

This is not to blame the victim, or to minimize the experiences of the second generation. That's a whole other ball of wax, so to speak.

But for people like Roland and Sue...in my mind, no, they're not victims, they're participant/perpetrators now too. Cherry as well.

I know a guy who once regretfully told me (when describing a certain circumstance he found himself in while a member of the Roberts cult), "I could have listened to the voice of my conscience, or I could have listened to Jim Roberts. I listened to Jim Roberts."

Now he lives with the painful consequences of his bad decision every single day of his life, and he has slowly learned to quit blaming Jim Roberts for the way things turned out.

Twenty years from now Joe or Trevor or any of them might wake up and say "I could have listened to the voice of my conscience, or I could have listened to Dave and Cherry. Dammit, I listened to Dave and Cherry."

Let's hope that they "snap" out of it, sooner rather than later.

Quote
Apollo
You have as much right as anybody else to be here. It's a public forum.

You also came within a whisker of joining them so the cult has had an impact on your personal life.

Yes I did very nearly join the group once. And when I realized what I'd just stepped into, I chose to get the hell out of there.

The situation was just so controlling, and the dissonance that I was experiencing was so strong that I decided to exit rather than try and psychologically justify what I was witnessing and experiencing. In this way, I found consonance. I simply chose to leave. But, that's just me.

Also, you've got to remember that I met the JCs in Dallas in the period of time after the Ronson article (Blood Sacrifice) was published, but before Kidneys for Jesus was released. Casey and Robin had just left Dallas to fly to Minnesota for their donations a week or so before I showed up. I remember that Robin and Casey flew out of Dallas on a Friday, and that I came shortly after that, I think the following Saturday. But it was definitely a Saturday when I went to meet them. I also remember Fran bitterly muttering something about this Ronson guy. My point is, that the group in general was pretty well on edge during that time (the Ronson period). This probably had something to do with why the atmosphere in that apartment was especially glum and controlling that day. Fran telling Ufuoma what she was and wasn't allowed to say, and the look on her face when he said that, was enough to send me packing.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/18/2011 07:21AM by zeuszor.

Do you remember who was all there?

huh.

It's working again. But I'm gonna keep posting here.

[forum.culteducation.com]

James and Ufuoma were there, Fran was there, Sue and Daniel too, also Annette and her two kids, and the other guy that picked me up (I forget his name) from the 7-11 where I met them for a ride. Casey, Chris and Rob were in MN then for the surgeries. That's what I remember.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/18/2011 09:27AM by zeuszor.

There were four young children in that apartment, and six grownups excluding myself. All spending time and sleeping in close quarters. If I were a pervert (and I am not), then it would have been a picnic. Easy access.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/18/2011 09:40AM by zeuszor.

Oh, I just noticed my mistake. That (above) should have said that there were three young children present, not four. They were Daniel G., as well as Annette's two kids.

Was the good Fran kind enough to detail exactly what it was that Ufoma COULD NOT talk about....?

(...always interesting to what constitutes a topic of "sensitivity" for them....)