'So ultimately what McKay is suggesting is that paedophiles should be given as little punishment as possible'

Current psychological thought holds that paedophiles, along with sociopathic personalities cannot be cured so punishment, which was originally intended as a means to correct behaviour by giving the prisoner time to reflect in isolation, not simply to sadistically inflict unnecessary pain on the wrongdoer, has no effect on a person whose brain is wrongly wired from an early age.

This finding had been leapt upon as a get-out clause by those wanting to rationalise their continuing paedoplhiliac and anti-social behaviour.

The justice system, however, holds that a person is punished for their actions, unless that person is not of a sane mind at the time of the action. The fact that a person is 'supposedly' unable to control his thinking towards paedophilia is not held as an excuse for him to have carte blanche to act out those desires.

I often have a fleeting desire to wring some-ones neck. As an adult I hold back from acting on that desire as it is anti-social to indulge in such behaviour. I do not lie to myself that the thought is nevertheless sometimes there, given enough provocation.

Davejc is taking a half-truth of the current state of psychological thought on the subject and using that to rationalise his own position and is subtly make the case for holding no-one--read: holding Davejc in particular, since it is always about Davejc, whatever the cover story--- to account for their poor behaviour.
Unfortunately, naive, inexperienced and unsophisticated thinkers will find his rationalisations to be sound if not an inspiring example of christian compassion.

There is such a thing as 'idiot compassion', best illustrated by the story of the frog who kindly agreed to ferry a scorpion across a river. The frog had raised the issue of the scorpion stinging him to death but the scorpion insisted that he would not do that.
Of course half-way across the scorpion stung the kindly frog and when the frog gasped out with his last breath "Why?" the scorpion replied that it was because he was a scorpion-- that's what scorpions do and what else could the frog reasonably expect from a scorpion?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/13/2010 02:46AM by Stoic.

Matilda wrote:

Quote

The first two don't ring a bell, but I was there while Dave was in Angleton. We were giving out free copies of Armageddon for Beginners out to people who were coming out of the theatre who just saw Left Behind. This was to give them a different view of prophecy.

After getting out a few we were told to leave. Later on that night Dave came back to the theatre and told the manager (or someone who said they were the manager) that he intended to continue distributing the books. He was warned that if he did they would call the police, and that is what they did. He was in Angleton jail for forty days or so. Shortly after his release he appeared on a local (Houston) news tv show which consisted of him and a couple of other news-guys protesting his arrest.

Dave has also sent a message to Falling Leaves, who he claims is one of the ones in the final shake-down of the Jesus Christians:

Quote:

Anyway, I knew when I saw you posting there that it was going to be the best thing that could happen to you, that you would be back here before very long. I mean, we have had our disagreements, but we're cuddly kittens compared to those guys.

I hope that you are finding your freedom inspiring, and that you are growing spiritually. Please don't lose touch. And give my love to any of the others that you are in touch with.

Thank you, Blackhat,

David of course, could have chosen to discreetly PM this message (or email it directly)to "Falling Leaves"...so in part, I imagine it is meant to simply "ridicule" or "misinform" us, and I would thus otherwise thus just dismiss it outright...("falling leaves" could easily register and post on the xjcs site without any difficulty...Why this has NOT transpired, needs some explanation from "falling leaves"!) I will though endeavour to be "positive" and assume that it's yes a (barely disguised) "plea" on David's part for his flock to return....

...which then, of course, backs up Blackhat's "take" on events,

If they have indeed, walked out on McKay, I wish the former JesusChristians, some nature of "success" in their new ventures...they will of course need to eschew, the fraudulent policies of McKay in relation to how "income" may be "received" and "personnel management" and "administrative practices",....or they too will remain a feature on this forum...but there is no NEED for them to do as much. Boyd and Sheri (nee McKay) are outstanding examples of moral individuals with considerable integrity, who yet remain radical in the the expression of their faith....

The following update message has been placed on the web site of Takatifu Gardens, Kenya:

Quote:
Update:
Due to a change in management, Takatifu Gardens is no longer offering a volunteer program.
Some associates are planning a more urban-based volunteer program, which we will endeavour to update you on.
Please keep checking this site for updates.

I am again indebted to you Blackhat for promptly bringing this to our attention,.....sad news I fear, as I suspect it means the loss of either personal or income (David will be vainly smirking to himself..." I KNEW they couldn't do it, without me...heh, heh, heh!")....and this was THE one practical aspect of their "ministry" that I believe offered them some opportunity for "rehabilitation" and that indeed deserved some wider support.....( I can't see a life of "dumpster diving" and posting fear-mongering video's on you-tube, about the "Mark of the Beast", somehow being as quite as effective, in recovering from years of "McKay-think"...)

There would be a lot of work in the property, of course, and I assume the reasoning would be that it "tied up" resources, that could otherwise be devoted to "getting the word out" ....however it appeared that Rob and Christine, really managed it all with some aplomb...and without it, the former followers of Dave may quickly find that they have very increasingly less and less "words" of any "worth" to get out.....


After the split in '96, the impression that I have is that "K", "A" and the others involved, struggled manfully to keep the ideals that they had lived for "going" in some sense, with the continuation of the community that they lived for.....the JC's run on "repression" though, and once that is no longer the case, individuals eventually start to spiritually "drift" into different directions....that are not "bad" directions, by any measure, but that are simply "different"...

If they have indeed, ditched Dave, they need to consider consulting with "K", "A" or the other contributers on the xjcs site (I realize that this site is too "antagonistic" for such purposes") and indeed getting in touch with Boyd and Sheri, in order to gain some reputable advice, direction (AND some simple encouragement!)....unlike the vile misdirection of McKay.

I personally remain very committed to many of the ideals they espouse...sincerity before God, full time committment to the principles of scripture, the communal ideal, God's divine provision and so on.....they need the insight to see, that most of McKay's questionable practices...are irrelevant (or directly contrary) to the ideals that they seek to live out.....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/13/2010 05:48AM by Malcolm Wesley WREST.

Dave McKay wrote:

Quote

But a better example is paedophilia. Kids are not FORCED to have sex, and yet society says it is wrong. I know, I know, they are not adults. But you see, we each have our restrictions that we think makes it wrong or doesn't make it wrong. And so what we decided to experiment with is just trying to follow the rules as we honestly and humbly think God wrote them.

Dave McKay wrote:

Quote

It sounds a lot like what I have suggested be done for paedophiles, i.e. create an environment (e.g. on an island) which is as little like punishment as possible, but which still keeps them away from mainstream society/children.

When you put these two quotes together it really doesn't look good for David.

Paedophilia is one of the most evil and disturbing crimes a human being can commit. It is a crime which deserves a harsh punishment. What David suggests is quite simply ludicrous. A softer punishment would only encourage these animals to push the boundaries.

Dave McKay (former member of the notorious ''Children of God'') is sounding more and more like a paedophilia apologist.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/13/2010 06:08AM by Apollo.

Dave McKay (former member of the notorious ''Children of God'') has made another huge post on behalf of ''falling_leaves''.

If falling_leaves really does exist then why can't they make their own postings on the JCs site?

If falling_leaves really is a member/ex member then surely they'll have a username on the JCs forum?

Dave seems to have recently taken it upon himself to speak on behalf of others. He recently slipped up when he posted on behalf of ''Consort'' Cherry and we now also see him posting on behalf of falling_leaves.

On second thoughts, maybe falling_leaves is speaking on their own behalf... perhaps falling_leaves was McKay all along?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/13/2010 07:20AM by Apollo.

This is Sisi. My intense dislike for the behavior of a cult leader are not good enough reasons to be deceptive even if it’s to avoid more personal harassment. I wasn’t out to make a fool of anyone on this forum or the ex forum. I felt the lifetime ban was unreasonable. I simply spoke out against the dossier and the damage it could do to ALL people who were included in it. Rick Ross has posted then that bans are “lifetime”. In interviews, Rick Ross has spoken of second chances for himself. He seemed very grateful for a second chance after his troubles so I find it odd that there is such a hard line taken on others but this is his forum and if he feels that my speaking out against Brian’s actions is a “crime”, then that’s his call.

Nobody at the x site or here had anything to do with me signing up here and I had no reason to discuss it there. The x site isn’t a very gossipy site and people don’t hound others in pm to discover personal information about other users. I wonder if Stoic would be happy to have their full name, their family’s names and maybe some deeply person information handed all over the internet so that crazies make videos about them killing their own child. I kept my business private until someone else felt it was fair game to broadcast it. Perhaps some would change their tunes a bit, if they were on some of the receiving ends of the unwarranted attacks and then you might grasp why people would like to keep some level privacy. I made sure that I posted that I was not Glenn so that Dave would stop blaming him. I can apologize when I am wrong and I can also forgive people.

Posting under the name of Styxxx I said “I am not Verity.” I was feeling like I was justified in playing word games like Dave and a few others do but imitating people you don’t respect isn’t a wise choice. I reasoned I am not Verity as that is a screen name. I am Sisi. But I understood what I was doing was not really fair and was a lie and thankfully it over took me overnight to correct myself. I did really just want to post in peace without the level of craziness that goes on when people are identified but it’s not worth it to me. No need to waste time involved in internet wars that accomplish nothing when there are authorities who will stop people who make slanderous videos and who post libel. Some of you will be glad to know that the lawyer in Washington seems to have contacted a few people so Dave’s insistence that this is a “lie” is a “lie” itself as I presume he hopes to use his tool as long as he can.

But the point here was that I lied. There is no good reason to lie. None. None good enough to compromise who you are and who you answer to ultimately. I don’t answer to Dave McKay. Dave isn’t worth anyone to losing their integrity over.


I am sorry to people who have been my friends here and at the ex site. I apologize to the forum owner, Rick Ross, for signing up under the name Styxxx and for lying about doing that.

I will not sign up here again.

Sisi

Quote
Styxxx
This is Sisi. My intense dislike for the behavior of a cult leader are not good enough reasons to be deceptive even if it’s to avoid more personal harassment. I wasn’t out to make a fool of anyone on this forum or the ex forum. I felt the lifetime ban was unreasonable. I simply spoke out against the dossier and the damage it could do to ALL people who were included in it. Rick Ross has posted then that bans are “lifetime”. In interviews, Rick Ross has spoken of second chances for himself. He seemed very grateful for a second chance after his troubles so I find it odd that there is such a hard line taken on others but this is his forum and if he feels that my speaking out against Brian’s actions is a “crime”, then that’s his call.

Nobody at the x site or here had anything to do with me signing up here and I had no reason to discuss it there. The x site isn’t a very gossipy site and people don’t hound others in pm to discover personal information about other users. I wonder if Stoic would be happy to have their full name, their family’s names and maybe some deeply person information handed all over the internet so that crazies make videos about them killing their own child. I kept my business private until someone else felt it was fair game to broadcast it. Perhaps some would change their tunes a bit, if they were on some of the receiving ends of the unwarranted attacks and then you might grasp why people would like to keep some level privacy. I made sure that I posted that I was not Glenn so that Dave would stop blaming him. I can apologize when I am wrong and I can also forgive people.

Posting under the name of Styxxx I said “I am not Verity.” I was feeling like I was justified in playing word games like Dave and a few others do but imitating people you don’t respect isn’t a wise choice. I reasoned I am not Verity as that is a screen name. I am Sisi. But I understood what I was doing was not really fair and was a lie and thankfully it over took me overnight to correct myself. I did really just want to post in peace without the level of craziness that goes on when people are identified but it’s not worth it to me. No need to waste time involved in internet wars that accomplish nothing when there are authorities who will stop people who make slanderous videos and who post libel. Some of you will be glad to know that the lawyer in Washington seems to have contacted a few people so Dave’s insistence that this is a “lie” is a “lie” itself as I presume he hopes to use his tool as long as he can.

But the point here was that I lied. There is no good reason to lie. None. None good enough to compromise who you are and who you answer to ultimately. I don’t answer to Dave McKay. Dave isn’t worth anyone to losing their integrity over.


I am sorry to people who have been my friends here and at the ex site. I apologize to the forum owner, Rick Ross, for signing up under the name Styxxx and for lying about doing that.

I will not sign up here again.

Sisi

Good on you!

Now lets see if the moderator will allow me to post this...

Well, dear moderator, here we have someone confessing all and asking for a second chance on this forum. This is against the rules, but to my mind Sisi has remained focused on the issue of the cult of the Jesus Christians, and the only reason for banning her in the first place was her speaking out against the dossier on ex Jesus Christians which was being circulated. I agree with what she said about how that sensitive information on ex-members of a cult should not have been put into the public arena.....

I ask you, dear moderator, to allow her to continue to post here, given her credentials and track record.....

Quote
Blackhat
Well, dear moderator, here we have someone confessing all and asking for a second chance on this forum. This is against the rules, but to my mind Sisi has remained focused on the issue of the cult of the Jesus Christians, and the only reason for banning her in the first place was her speaking out against the dossier on ex Jesus Christians which was being circulated. I agree with what she said about how that sensitive information on ex-members of a cult should not have been put into the public arena.....

I ask you, dear moderator, to allow her to continue to post here, given her credentials and track record.....

I second that. I myself have been forced to operate by pm only. I wouldlike to see more people able to post. If I break the rules then ban me.

And no, i am not falling_leaves, or Dave Mckay.