Re: Do Dave McKay and the "Jesus Christians" shelter child molesters?
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: January 20, 2011 10:11PM
Davidito: By Their Fruits...
Friday, 25 March 2005
When I first met the Children of God, more than 30 years ago, they were already getting a lot of opposition from the churches. One of their best defences was this one: 'Judge a tree by its fruit.'
It was a hard argument to refute, as the movement was populated by fresh, idealistic, enthusiastic young hippies who had been turned on to the teachings of Jesus. Even agnostics were impressed by their vitality and expressions of love.
I expressed one reservation before moving in with them. I said that it sometimes takes a little while for the fruit to actually appear, and so we must always be willing to examine ourselves to see if we are moving away from the truth. I observed that enthusiastic and spontaneous young people look pretty good almost anywhere. But the big question was what would be the long-term results of their ministry?
I spent only a few months actually living with The Children of God before I felt that I would have to break fellowship with them and head out on my own. They had just started to teach something called 'flirty fishing', in which they were offering free sex to outsiders as an enticement for people to join their ranks, donate to their cause, or just say the magic prayer that was guaranteed to give them a ticket to heaven that not even God could take away.
To me the error was obvious: They had mistaken sex for love. From beginning to end the Bible imposed restrictions on sex, and the Children of God (later called The Family) was ignoring those restrictions at their own peril. At least that was my firm belief.
So I branched out and started my own movement, called first just Christians, and later Jesus Christians. We Jesus Christians have, over the years, often been compared with The Family, on the basis of the fact that we live together, that we do not work in system jobs, that we often use cartoons to illustrate our message, or that we talk about Bible prophecy.
However, those are not the issues that people MOST dwell on when comparing us with The Family. Instead, they mention my own personal links with them (No other member of our community has ever been a member of The Family or of the Children of God.), and then they launch into a description of the very teachings which caused me to leave The Family more than a quarter of a century ago, as though these are the teachings that we share in common. It is a cruel and unfair comparison.
About the time that I left The Family, their leader (David Berg, a.k.a. 'Mo') was undertaking a dangerous and perverted experiment. His mistress had become pregnant by a waiter that she was flirty fishing, and so 'Mo' decided to keep a record of the experiment that he was going to make with this baby, whom he named Davidito ('little David'). Davidito was to be exposed to total sexual indulgence, including regular sexual fondling by members of Mo's harem, as well as regular exposure from infancy to sexual intercourse and orgies.
The philosophy was basically that all sex is beautiful and ordained by God, and it is only religious hang-ups about sex that destroy people's appreciation of it. This child was going to experience pure love through total sexual indulgence.
Mo made several prophecies about Davidito eventually taking on the mantle of leadership from his aging stepfather. It was prophesied that he would lead them into true 'freedom'. The entire Children of God community was given unrealistic hopes for this boy from the day that he was born, and an intimate diary was kept of all his experiences, which was shared with the entire movement.
The effect on Davidito himself was traumatic. His most notable personality trait was extreme shyness. Nevertheless, he stayed in the community until he was out of his teens, engaging in sex with his many topless nurses from the time he was eleven years old.
A few years ago, Davidito left The Family, convinced that what they were teaching was not, as they claimed, based on the teachings of the Bible. Unfortunately, he fell in with another lot who turned out to be worse for him than the people he had fled. He linked up with other former members of The Family, who were largely motivated by hatred toward the people they had once loved.
This feeling of hatred grew in Davidito (who had changed his name to Ricky Rodriguez) as a result of his new associations, to such a point that he eventually plotted to kill his mother, Mo's former mistress. (Mo died in the 1990's.) Davidito's hatred for his mother having allowed him to be sexually abused in such a way grew to the point where he could no longer contain it. However, his mother, in company with her latest lover, now leads The Family, and Family security is such that it was impossible for him to locate her.
The nearest that Davidito could get to his mother was to meet up with one of his former nursemaids, a woman old enough to be his mother. He arranged a meeting with her in January of this year, in Tucson, Arizona, and he stabbed her several times before slitting her throat. He then drove to San Diego, California, where he took his own life with a gunshot to his head.
The song says, 'Lemon tree very pretty; and the lemon flower is sweet. But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat.' Such was the fruit, both of The Family's distorted teachings about sex, and the anti-Family movements justification and nurturing for hatred and revenge.
Both sides will argue that it is not possible for them both to be right, and that one or the other of them has to be wrong. And depending on which side you listen to, it is easy to start believing one side or the other. But, whether or not it is possible for them both to be RIGHT, there is no doubt in my mind that it is not only possible, but quite definitely true that both sides are very WRONG. There is no need for anyone to side with either camp.
That is not to say that there are not good people in both movements. We have tried hard to establish positive relationship and constructive communication with both sides, but our efforts have been fruitless in both directions.
As a community, we have tried to take the biblical truths which were taught (or at least hinted at) by The Family (especially in their early days), and to preach them without the lies about free sex. We have tried to communicate lovingly to members of the Family, as well as to communicate lovingly with ex-members.
Ex-members do not take long at all to launch into vitriolic tirades against anyone who dares to say anything positive about The Family. Their hatred is rarely more than a sentence or two away from the surface. But The Family itself is much more subtle. They smile sweetly and express love in words over and over again, all the while walking backwards away from us. And as soon as they have a door between us and them, they lock it and warn their members not to open it.
We write this article now because the front page story in the Los Angeles Times about Ricky Rodriguez's tortured life and death has stirred up worldwide interest once again in The Family; and scandal in The Family is never very far away from us.
You see, when The Family stopped preaching Christianity on the streets, and started flirty fishing, opposition from the churches actually fell off. And that's about the time that opposition toward ourselves took off. The church today (and many system parents and other authorities) have more hatred for the truth that we teach (and that was hinted at in the early teachings of The Family) than they do for the perversions that took all these years to manifest themselves in a murder-suicide by the one whom The Family promised would lead his people to freedom.
As evil as Family teachings about sex are, and as evil as anti-Family teachings about hate are, most people would prefer either of them to the truths contained in the teachings of Jesus. But we are determined to stick with the truth, and to bank everything on the good fruit that will eventually come from that.
[jesuschristians.net]
Dave says that he left the COG once he found out about the introduction of FFing. Yeah we know that that's BS.
Notice also how this article never directly repudiates or expresses any renunciation of the COG/Family on the part of McKay, how this article never condemns David Berg, and how it's authorship isn't even clear.
At no point does this article state anything explicitly; for example, "David Berg was a bad man and the Family are a bad group."
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2011 10:16PM by zeuszor.
Friday, 25 March 2005
When I first met the Children of God, more than 30 years ago, they were already getting a lot of opposition from the churches. One of their best defences was this one: 'Judge a tree by its fruit.'
It was a hard argument to refute, as the movement was populated by fresh, idealistic, enthusiastic young hippies who had been turned on to the teachings of Jesus. Even agnostics were impressed by their vitality and expressions of love.
I expressed one reservation before moving in with them. I said that it sometimes takes a little while for the fruit to actually appear, and so we must always be willing to examine ourselves to see if we are moving away from the truth. I observed that enthusiastic and spontaneous young people look pretty good almost anywhere. But the big question was what would be the long-term results of their ministry?
I spent only a few months actually living with The Children of God before I felt that I would have to break fellowship with them and head out on my own. They had just started to teach something called 'flirty fishing', in which they were offering free sex to outsiders as an enticement for people to join their ranks, donate to their cause, or just say the magic prayer that was guaranteed to give them a ticket to heaven that not even God could take away.
To me the error was obvious: They had mistaken sex for love. From beginning to end the Bible imposed restrictions on sex, and the Children of God (later called The Family) was ignoring those restrictions at their own peril. At least that was my firm belief.
So I branched out and started my own movement, called first just Christians, and later Jesus Christians. We Jesus Christians have, over the years, often been compared with The Family, on the basis of the fact that we live together, that we do not work in system jobs, that we often use cartoons to illustrate our message, or that we talk about Bible prophecy.
However, those are not the issues that people MOST dwell on when comparing us with The Family. Instead, they mention my own personal links with them (No other member of our community has ever been a member of The Family or of the Children of God.), and then they launch into a description of the very teachings which caused me to leave The Family more than a quarter of a century ago, as though these are the teachings that we share in common. It is a cruel and unfair comparison.
About the time that I left The Family, their leader (David Berg, a.k.a. 'Mo') was undertaking a dangerous and perverted experiment. His mistress had become pregnant by a waiter that she was flirty fishing, and so 'Mo' decided to keep a record of the experiment that he was going to make with this baby, whom he named Davidito ('little David'). Davidito was to be exposed to total sexual indulgence, including regular sexual fondling by members of Mo's harem, as well as regular exposure from infancy to sexual intercourse and orgies.
The philosophy was basically that all sex is beautiful and ordained by God, and it is only religious hang-ups about sex that destroy people's appreciation of it. This child was going to experience pure love through total sexual indulgence.
Mo made several prophecies about Davidito eventually taking on the mantle of leadership from his aging stepfather. It was prophesied that he would lead them into true 'freedom'. The entire Children of God community was given unrealistic hopes for this boy from the day that he was born, and an intimate diary was kept of all his experiences, which was shared with the entire movement.
The effect on Davidito himself was traumatic. His most notable personality trait was extreme shyness. Nevertheless, he stayed in the community until he was out of his teens, engaging in sex with his many topless nurses from the time he was eleven years old.
A few years ago, Davidito left The Family, convinced that what they were teaching was not, as they claimed, based on the teachings of the Bible. Unfortunately, he fell in with another lot who turned out to be worse for him than the people he had fled. He linked up with other former members of The Family, who were largely motivated by hatred toward the people they had once loved.
This feeling of hatred grew in Davidito (who had changed his name to Ricky Rodriguez) as a result of his new associations, to such a point that he eventually plotted to kill his mother, Mo's former mistress. (Mo died in the 1990's.) Davidito's hatred for his mother having allowed him to be sexually abused in such a way grew to the point where he could no longer contain it. However, his mother, in company with her latest lover, now leads The Family, and Family security is such that it was impossible for him to locate her.
The nearest that Davidito could get to his mother was to meet up with one of his former nursemaids, a woman old enough to be his mother. He arranged a meeting with her in January of this year, in Tucson, Arizona, and he stabbed her several times before slitting her throat. He then drove to San Diego, California, where he took his own life with a gunshot to his head.
The song says, 'Lemon tree very pretty; and the lemon flower is sweet. But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat.' Such was the fruit, both of The Family's distorted teachings about sex, and the anti-Family movements justification and nurturing for hatred and revenge.
Both sides will argue that it is not possible for them both to be right, and that one or the other of them has to be wrong. And depending on which side you listen to, it is easy to start believing one side or the other. But, whether or not it is possible for them both to be RIGHT, there is no doubt in my mind that it is not only possible, but quite definitely true that both sides are very WRONG. There is no need for anyone to side with either camp.
That is not to say that there are not good people in both movements. We have tried hard to establish positive relationship and constructive communication with both sides, but our efforts have been fruitless in both directions.
As a community, we have tried to take the biblical truths which were taught (or at least hinted at) by The Family (especially in their early days), and to preach them without the lies about free sex. We have tried to communicate lovingly to members of the Family, as well as to communicate lovingly with ex-members.
Ex-members do not take long at all to launch into vitriolic tirades against anyone who dares to say anything positive about The Family. Their hatred is rarely more than a sentence or two away from the surface. But The Family itself is much more subtle. They smile sweetly and express love in words over and over again, all the while walking backwards away from us. And as soon as they have a door between us and them, they lock it and warn their members not to open it.
We write this article now because the front page story in the Los Angeles Times about Ricky Rodriguez's tortured life and death has stirred up worldwide interest once again in The Family; and scandal in The Family is never very far away from us.
You see, when The Family stopped preaching Christianity on the streets, and started flirty fishing, opposition from the churches actually fell off. And that's about the time that opposition toward ourselves took off. The church today (and many system parents and other authorities) have more hatred for the truth that we teach (and that was hinted at in the early teachings of The Family) than they do for the perversions that took all these years to manifest themselves in a murder-suicide by the one whom The Family promised would lead his people to freedom.
As evil as Family teachings about sex are, and as evil as anti-Family teachings about hate are, most people would prefer either of them to the truths contained in the teachings of Jesus. But we are determined to stick with the truth, and to bank everything on the good fruit that will eventually come from that.
[jesuschristians.net]
Dave says that he left the COG once he found out about the introduction of FFing. Yeah we know that that's BS.
Notice also how this article never directly repudiates or expresses any renunciation of the COG/Family on the part of McKay, how this article never condemns David Berg, and how it's authorship isn't even clear.
At no point does this article state anything explicitly; for example, "David Berg was a bad man and the Family are a bad group."
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2011 10:16PM by zeuszor.
Re: Do Dave McKay and the "Jesus Christians" shelter child molesters?
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: January 20, 2011 10:14PM
Notice how David will not directly answer the question Apollo puts to him: would you consider ''Moses'' David Berg a paedophile?
Instead, he simply posts another propaganda article.
Just a simple yes or no, Dave, please. This ain't rocket science.
Apollo, I suggest that you next ask him, "Do you believe that David Berg was a prophet of God?"
[jcs.xjcs.org]
Anything less than your complete, unconditional, and explicitly expressed, renunciation of David Berg and his teachings, Dave, I will consider just more of your bullshit double-talk.
Dave: "Do you believe that David Berg was a prophet of God?"
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2011 10:19PM by zeuszor.
Instead, he simply posts another propaganda article.
Just a simple yes or no, Dave, please. This ain't rocket science.
Apollo, I suggest that you next ask him, "Do you believe that David Berg was a prophet of God?"
[jcs.xjcs.org]
Anything less than your complete, unconditional, and explicitly expressed, renunciation of David Berg and his teachings, Dave, I will consider just more of your bullshit double-talk.
Dave: "Do you believe that David Berg was a prophet of God?"
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2011 10:19PM by zeuszor.
Re: Do Dave McKay and the "Jesus Christians" shelter child molesters?
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: January 21, 2011 12:37AM
Re: Do Dave McKay and the "Jesus Christians" shelter child molesters?
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: January 21, 2011 08:31AM
Some relevant Scriptures:
Romans 13: 1-3 (NIV)
1 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended.
See also Matthew 22:21, Mark 12:17, Luke 20:25 for Jesus' commands with respect to our duty to obey the civil authorities.
Matthew 22: 15-21 (NIV)
15 Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. 16 They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. “Teacher,” they said, “we know that you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren’t swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are. 17 Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the imperial tax[a] to Caesar or not?”
18 But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, “You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19 Show me the coin used for paying the tax.” They brought him a denarius, 20 and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?”
21 “Caesar’s,” they replied.
Then he said to them, “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”
Romans 13: 1-3 (NIV)
1 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended.
See also Matthew 22:21, Mark 12:17, Luke 20:25 for Jesus' commands with respect to our duty to obey the civil authorities.
Matthew 22: 15-21 (NIV)
15 Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. 16 They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. “Teacher,” they said, “we know that you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren’t swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are. 17 Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the imperial tax[a] to Caesar or not?”
18 But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, “You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19 Show me the coin used for paying the tax.” They brought him a denarius, 20 and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?”
21 “Caesar’s,” they replied.
Then he said to them, “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”
Re: Do Dave McKay and the "Jesus Christians" shelter child molesters?
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: January 21, 2011 09:34PM
Toward a better understanding of MO Berg of his group, I recommend reading LUSTFUL PROPHET: A Psychosexual Historical Study of the Children of God's Leader, David Berg by Stephen A, Kent.
[www.exfamily.org]
The extensive material on Berg that currently is available allows me to portray a person whose legacy to the world likely will be very different from those left by the subjects of Erikson's two religious psychobiographies. Both Luther and Gandhi are remembered for the creative manner in which they channeled complex psychosexual tensions into social action, thereby having a profound (and arguably positive) influence upon important societal events. Berg's legacy, however, likely will not be respected. His group has attracted widespread condemnation from various authorities and the public because of allegations that some members engage in certain deviant practices, each of which is the direct translation of Berg's psychosexual drives into religious ideology. Among these controversial practices are "flirty fishing," incest (according to some close family members), and pedophilia.
My study shows how the death of Berg's mother unleashed his suppressed sexuality within the social context of the sexually permissive and anti-authority era of the late 1960s. This social context facilitated Berg's construction of a religious theology and accompanying practices that directly reflected the desires of his newly unfettered id. Religious ideology sanctified his own sexual appetite, and the group context in which he expounded the ideology ensured that Berg's own complex sexual dilemmas influenced members' behavior around the world. COG's religious theology, and even its religious cosmology, reflected its founder's personal sexual drives.
One of MO Berg’s few regrets, as he wrote in one of the MO Letters, was that he never slept with his mother.
[www.exfamily.org]
The extensive material on Berg that currently is available allows me to portray a person whose legacy to the world likely will be very different from those left by the subjects of Erikson's two religious psychobiographies. Both Luther and Gandhi are remembered for the creative manner in which they channeled complex psychosexual tensions into social action, thereby having a profound (and arguably positive) influence upon important societal events. Berg's legacy, however, likely will not be respected. His group has attracted widespread condemnation from various authorities and the public because of allegations that some members engage in certain deviant practices, each of which is the direct translation of Berg's psychosexual drives into religious ideology. Among these controversial practices are "flirty fishing," incest (according to some close family members), and pedophilia.
My study shows how the death of Berg's mother unleashed his suppressed sexuality within the social context of the sexually permissive and anti-authority era of the late 1960s. This social context facilitated Berg's construction of a religious theology and accompanying practices that directly reflected the desires of his newly unfettered id. Religious ideology sanctified his own sexual appetite, and the group context in which he expounded the ideology ensured that Berg's own complex sexual dilemmas influenced members' behavior around the world. COG's religious theology, and even its religious cosmology, reflected its founder's personal sexual drives.
One of MO Berg’s few regrets, as he wrote in one of the MO Letters, was that he never slept with his mother.
Re: Do Dave McKay and the "Jesus Christians" shelter child molesters?
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: January 21, 2011 09:58PM
For those who are interested in learning more about Dave McKay and the "Jesus Christians" please see:
[forum.culteducation.com]
[forum.culteducation.com]
[www.youtube.com]
[forum.culteducation.com]
[forum.culteducation.com]
[www.youtube.com]
Re: Do Dave McKay and the "Jesus Christians" shelter child molesters?
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: January 21, 2011 11:34PM
[cust.idl.com.au]
1996
Meanwhile, we spent a lot of effort trying to relate to The Family (formerly known as The Children of God), mainly because they had shown some willingness to relate to us. In March, we started printing a series of five "Baby Books", which each featured a collection of articles on a different subject, many of them based on early writings of the Children of God. All five books (each 40 pages long) were written and published in the space of six months.
1996
Meanwhile, we spent a lot of effort trying to relate to The Family (formerly known as The Children of God), mainly because they had shown some willingness to relate to us. In March, we started printing a series of five "Baby Books", which each featured a collection of articles on a different subject, many of them based on early writings of the Children of God. All five books (each 40 pages long) were written and published in the space of six months.
Re: Do Dave McKay and the "Jesus Christians" shelter child molesters?
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: January 22, 2011 08:12AM
Found this site today...
This is the man, and here is the group, that apparently have so influenced DM over the years.
This is the man, and here is the group, that DM apparently tacitly endorses to this day.
Why do you not categorically denounce Moses David Berg, the COG/Family and all that they stand for, Dave McKay?
WARNING: graphic images.
[www.gnosticliberationfront.com]
PLEASE ALSO SEE:
[forum.culteducation.com]
[forum.culteducation.com]
[forum.culteducation.com]
[www.youtube.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/22/2011 08:27AM by zeuszor.
This is the man, and here is the group, that apparently have so influenced DM over the years.
This is the man, and here is the group, that DM apparently tacitly endorses to this day.
Why do you not categorically denounce Moses David Berg, the COG/Family and all that they stand for, Dave McKay?
WARNING: graphic images.
[www.gnosticliberationfront.com]
PLEASE ALSO SEE:
[forum.culteducation.com]
[forum.culteducation.com]
[forum.culteducation.com]
[www.youtube.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/22/2011 08:27AM by zeuszor.
Re: Do Dave McKay and the "Jesus Christians" shelter child molesters?
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: January 24, 2011 05:01AM
They think that they can persuade DM to do the right thing (with respect to the situation involving X, John, and the others) by appealing to his vanity and basically publicly kissing his ass.
But I say that the best way to predict a given person's future behavior, is by studying their past behavior.
When was the last time that DM decided to do the right thing, about anything, in a sudden inspired flash of magnanimous, selfless altruism?
NEVER, that's when. So what makes anybody think he's just going to change his MO now?
Therefore, I think it's foolish for anybody to expect him to suddenly have a change of heart, through sufficient stroking of his ego.
I am not interested in entering into any kind of dialog, whether in public or in private, with DM or any of his croneys, whether in some special VIP area of XJCs or anywhere else.
I am interested in seeing to it that that he be locked up, one way or another, by whatever legal means at our disposal.
But I say that the best way to predict a given person's future behavior, is by studying their past behavior.
When was the last time that DM decided to do the right thing, about anything, in a sudden inspired flash of magnanimous, selfless altruism?
NEVER, that's when. So what makes anybody think he's just going to change his MO now?
Therefore, I think it's foolish for anybody to expect him to suddenly have a change of heart, through sufficient stroking of his ego.
I am not interested in entering into any kind of dialog, whether in public or in private, with DM or any of his croneys, whether in some special VIP area of XJCs or anywhere else.
I am interested in seeing to it that that he be locked up, one way or another, by whatever legal means at our disposal.
Re: Do Dave McKay and the "Jesus Christians" shelter child molesters?
Posted by:
Apollo
()
Date: January 26, 2011 12:37AM
Here's a post h/j previously made on the xjcs site which is relevant to this thread.
H/j is someone who has known the JCs for a number of years. She is someone who has spoken to them personally on numerous occasions. It was ex member Sue who confessed to her about the child abuser in the JCs who had learning difficulties. This man was not reported to the police or encouraged to receive the appropriate treatment.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/26/2011 12:40AM by Apollo.
Quote
h/j
I'm sorry I'm so late to respond to your curiosity! As some of you know I may look at the forums or may not. ( Busy is all )
I'm not ever wanting to deliberately ignore someone. In my opinion what Nick did was unethical. It reminded me of how I felt when one of the JC's dishonestly accessed my forum accounts and published a private email between myself and Kevin. No one ever had the decency to fess up and no one rushed to say it was wrong. There was never an apology from anyone. I found the best thing was to let it go. Forgive.
In this case there were no children being sexually molested. There wasn't an entire community being complicit in the cover- up of child abuse. For a community that prides itself on being willing to ' err on the side of caution ' - it seems you're willing to take some mighty huge and tragic risks when it comes to innocent children.
I hope everyone will pray that the paedophile in your midst isn't still working with vulnerable third world children in Africa. Who's keeping an eye on him now?
A MINIMUM of five children have been sexually molested at the hands of three one time JC's. When all is taken into account that could easily be in double figures. Your community set the tone so that Alf/ Monty was MORE concerned about the reaction of a mother than the harm to innocent children or the rehabilitation of the man himself.
I doubt that concerns Alf/ Monty or any of you at all- because you're all so high on your morality fix.
Children were sodomized , raped , forced to perform oral sex on one of your members - which you furnished with Easy Listening books ( books that are attractive to children ) and sent to India- home of some of the most vulnerable children on the planet. Your community enabled this to happen and the leader didn't even resign and so far has shown NO remorse.
By the time I met the community ( early 2004 ) - there were TWO more cases. One involving ' x' and one involving another member with learning difficulties. At no time was any proper rehabilitation offered to these people.
Instead , as long as they sold enough books Dave happily let them masturbate and fantasize with his blessing.
H/j is someone who has known the JCs for a number of years. She is someone who has spoken to them personally on numerous occasions. It was ex member Sue who confessed to her about the child abuser in the JCs who had learning difficulties. This man was not reported to the police or encouraged to receive the appropriate treatment.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/26/2011 12:40AM by Apollo.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.