You believe your wife's story even though you haven't seen any proof of it (correct me if I'm wrong)

Either you think it's a bad example, or you think it's a good likening. It can't be both. Which is it?

ou can call yourself an individual, but for all intents and purposes you are not.

leocon - what you seem to be missing here is that by the sheer fact that you do support Maria (whom we know through her own writings, and those about her, abused her own son as well as Mene and who knows who else) and the upper ecehlon of leadership through your tithes and the reading of their prophecies and religious materials as well as promoting them, unfortunately for you, means that you also have to answer for their actions.

Yes I am sure you would like to hear me grovel and say that you were 100% correct ...

... here again you are doing what most of you do and that is talk and talk about everything else....except the things that are REALLY useful! Basically you seem to be on a war path to undermine and humiliate me at every turn! I do not appreciate you taking your "life" out on me!

The best some have come up with was some pictures of a naked woman lying with or cuddling Davidito and some text saying something regarding some woman having sucked Davidito's penis! Ummm, what about the very common practice that has been in action for hundreds, if not thousands, of year where mothers would suck their young sons penis to help the foreskin fold back? Fondling? You want to talk about fondling? Everytime a mother/dad/caregiver showers/bathes the young lad they also are required to "fondle" the penis or genitals in order to wash them properly!

So where are you going to go now? Are you going to say that "Yes, but their minds were perverted and lustful".
HA! So now you are presuming to know the mind of man? Pretty high and mighty stuff!

The Davidito debate can go on and on, but it will not make any relevant, physical difference to your PERSOANL case! So why not move on?!

If you say that the Davidito book is responsible for someone else commiting abuse that is wrong. There are countless Authors who write about rape, suicide, murder and even pedophilia. If someone where to read one of their books and then get the sudden inspiration to go out and rape someone, what, are you going to blame the author of the book?

Come on! Try bringing that to a court of law and see what will happen! The Judge will laugh you to smithereens, thats what!

The Davidito Book

This was first printed in a series of letters from about 1975 to 1981 and then reprinted in 1982. In the letter "The Advantages of Having Children" May 1978, Berg explained how when Maria became pregnant, they discovered there was no childcare ministry and so they obtained whatever literature they needed and decided they did not like it "because it was not the way we believed in rearing kids!" It seems that Davidito had started the childcare revolution. Berg wrote:-

"You can throw a lot of that old stuff out! We're writing a whole new childcare series called The Davidito Series. Maria was wondering why she had to get pregnant and have a baby. She couldn't see any good reason for it at all, but look what happened! God knew why! Amen? PLT! Davidito was to become an example to the world and inspire" lots of childcare material! Thank God!"

Berg was, in my judgment, quite clear giving his approval to whatever was being written and he was assuming responsibility for it. It is naive of The Family to seek to distance the leadership from this book and cast the sole blame upon Sara. In their original answer filed in this case, that is exactly what they sought to do.

The book contained these passages:-

a) Learning fun at 20 months, October '76.

"Sex! he gets quite excited when I wash his bottom and his penie gets real big and hard. I kiss it all over till he gets so excited he bursts into laughter and spreads his legs open for more. I wonder what it's going to be like when he begins to talk and asks me for more? When playing on the floor he's often times spread his legs open for me to kiss his penis (what we call his penie). He got to where he liked it so much he'd pull people by the hand down onto the floor and would spread his legs apart for "the treatment" so we had to explain to him that there are a lot more important things in life than just sex, and for a time and place for everything!" (I note that this chapter appeared at the same time as "Little Girl Dream.")

b) At the age of 2 years and 3 months Davidito is taken to a brothel and in the early hours one of the girls "gave a special little show for Davidito with her gyrations and heavy breathing, running her hands over her body, really turning everybody on".

c) In Bed Bugs, May 1977 with Davidito 2 years 4 months. Sara wrote:- "Sex! Now if I share with you some of Davidito's sexy experiences, will you try prayerfully and cautiously to benefit from the lessons learned and follow the Lord's leadings in possibly sharing the same kind of gentle love and fun, without stumbling our little sheep? Sex is a beautiful God-given wonderful part of life we enjoy together and we would love to share it with you as long as you don't use it as "an occasion to the flesh" and in some way that could actually harm or confuse the children. It is often times the little ones who suffer through our big people mistakes." (In other words, provided you do it in love, the child will not suffer harm or confusion - a thesis that Dr. Heller, NT's own expert, roundly deprecates.) "So we'll attempt to share a few of our experiences with you, not so that you will try to do exactly what we do," ( then why on earth tell them this sordid little encounter? ) "but because it's part of little David's life story, praise the Lord. On 28th April after nap time Alfred, Davidito and I were all three loving up, when Dito looked at me with those big dreamy canary black eyes and said, "Sarah I yub you". He pulled me down to kiss him, then pushed my head down to kiss some more! It all developed so gently and lovingly that he was really affectionate, eyes closed, so guess what happened? For a bouncing climax (ha), he spoke out in excited foreign tongues! He sounded so very happy....afterwards he lay still in my arms to rest....now often when we lay on the bed together....he'll put his arm around me and say, "Sarah, love me up big".

That letter cannot be interpreted otherwise than Sara kissing the boys penis and the boy later simulating sexual intercourse with her as is shown in one of the pictures. To that Berg added this comment, again an indication of his participation in the writing of this book and his approval of it:

"God made children able to enjoy sex so he must have expected them to. I did! All my life! Thank God! I love it! And it didn't hurt me any! Nearly all kids to anyhow despite prohibitions! And the only reason the system frowns on it is that the churches have taught sex as evil! Which is contrary to the Bible! How could God have created sexual enjoyment to be a sin? The system is really screwed up! God help us! They're the ones not normal! But let not your good be evil spoken of! So take it easy!"

(d) At 2 yrs 7 months Sara wrote:-

"Dito and I loved up together after our bath! Ha! What a revolutionary life we do lead!".

The photograph below that passage showed the two of them naked on the bed with Sara fondling the boys penis.

(e) There were some words of caution. In December 1977:-

"And please remember dear Family, that we do not share Davidito's own experiences or lessons with you expecting you to always do the very same thing with your own children. Dad and Maria are hoping to prepare themselves for a very special God appointed mission in life. He is a royal prince...he has matured and grown very fast, much like Dad himself, always ahead of us, who his followers learn from as an example. Of course all our Family children are very special and we have an extremely important mission to fulfil in these latter days we do hope you can apply what lessons you may have learnt from this story in their disciple training. What a wonderful opportunity and blessing that we can all take part in helping to teach God's little children who are so chosen in new fresh vessels the way the truth and the life of Jesus Christ and our shepherd and king David."

As I read that it is more encouraging than discouraging.

(f) In August 1979 the now notorious "My Little Fish" chapter was published. There were citations from Revolutionary Sex and accompanying photographs. They showed, for example, Davidito kissing Sara's breasts and squeezing her nipples, they showed them together naked in bed hugging each other under the caption "Enjoy yourself in what God has given you to enjoy" and in another photograph under a caption "When two shall lie together they shall have heat." The original also had the photograph of Sara sucking the boy's penis above a caption "It's a wonderful relaxation, a satisfaction created by the Lord". At the time it was published, My Childhood Sex, itself published four months earlier, might have been fresh in everyone's mind. That it was outrageously inappropriate seems to be conceded silently by that omission of that photograph when the book was published in 1982.

(g) In March 1978 at aged 3 years 2 months Davidito wandered around watching the copulating couples at the "come-union":

"So next he wanted his turn and as soon as I got into bed he jumped on me and said "Sarah love me". He specifically asked for several swigs of wine, got happy real quick so we really had a good time! Alf, Tim and Mommy were outside the door listening to him. "Sara now kiss it!" and then he began to laugh and laugh. "Oh it flopped in your nose!"...he kept asking for more and more love....We were all really surprised that he took everything so well, since he didn't have a playmate too and is usually very jealous about "sharing" but he waited his turn and was a real good boy."

(h) In April 1978 at 3 years 3 months Sara wrote:

"Sex - (do you find yourself looking for this part to read first? Ha!) Several times while I was gone to Egypt, David mentioned he'd wished I'd hurry home to bed. The day upon my return we had a nice picnic lunch with Alf right by the riverside near our house. David wanted to bring a blanket and a scented candle so that we could make love, but there were too many people around so we didn't quite get to the climax, Ha. But it was a real cute idea. He's so precious! One night when Alf and the cook were kissing and cuddling in the living room on the living room couch, David came into the bedroom and offered me a glass of wine then suggested that we go together into the living room to be with Alf. We sat down and he said, "Have some apply juice," because he's only a little boy and once served then we began to love up too. We got undressed and he got real affectionate, trying to do just what Alf did."

What can this be other than that this 3 year old boy was participating in sexual shenanigans with his nanny?

The book ended with a cartoon of Berg holding Davidito and saying, "Davidito do you know what you're doing? You're teaching the whole world how to take care of babies!"

The leadership must have known and intended that this book be acted upon by The Family. In July 1978 they published in Family News a letter from one of the members who wrote with reference to her new child that she wondered now how these letters were going to become a reality in his life. Had she not been perverted by them?

So far none of you have been very helpful along the lines of MY requests!
Remember, I started this section with a clear explination of why I am here to begin with!

Leocon/Eman, you have no right to speak about Ricky. You did not know him. I personally knew Ricky and I know your perverse religion, and their leaders broke the poor kid.

leocon wrote:

So far none of you have been very helpful along the lines of MY requests!
Remember, I started this section with a clear explination of why I am here to begin with!

You started this thread requesting a chance. You had your chance. You requested refrain from usage of "low-class terminology." We all have (you said 'ticked off'). You were looking for people who sincerely are looking for closure. You are now shunning those people. You have ignored my questions and requests. You are a liar. You are on this site with an agenda which you are not being open about. You are not interested in helping. You are not worth interacting with.

Shut up, learn some spelling and grammar and go suck Jesus' dick.

Quote:

If you say that the Davidito book is responsible for someone else commiting abuse that is wrong. There are countless Authors who write about rape, suicide, murder and even pedophilia. If someone where to read one of their books and then get the sudden inspiration to go out and rape someone, what, are you going to blame the author of the book?

Come on! Try bringing that to a court of law and see what will happen! The Judge will laugh you to smithereens, thats what!

This was brought to the High Courts in London. The Judge, Lord Justice Ward, did not laugh, in fact he had some very severe comments to make concerning that matter. You can read a transcript of his ruling on the xfamily website.
http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/Complete_Judgment_of_Lord_Justice_Ward

leocon wrote:

Yes I am sure you would like to hear me grovel and say that you were 100% correct ...

No, actually. I would have just as much liked to hear you say, "I stand by what I said. I think it was a great analogy. Period." It's not about being 100% correct. It's about accountability. We're all adults here, we should know that by now.

leocon wrote:

... here again you are doing what most of you do and that is talk and talk about everything else....except the things that are REALLY useful! Basically you seem to be on a war path to undermine and humiliate me at every turn! I do not appreciate you taking your "life" out on me!

Eman, please tell me if I'm not understanding you correctly: First you tell me "Don't presume to know anything about my life, please!" and then you proceed to assume things about my life.

My presumption about your knowledge of your wife's abuse was just that: a presumption. I was willing to be corrected on that matter, hence the prompt for as much. Now that you have explained, the issue is closed as far as I am concerned.

leocon wrote:

The best some have come up with was some pictures of a naked woman lying with or cuddling Davidito and some text saying something regarding some woman having sucked Davidito's penis! Ummm, what about the very common practice that has been in action for hundreds, if not thousands, of year where mothers would suck their young sons penis to help the foreskin fold back? Fondling? You want to talk about fondling? Everytime a mother/dad/caregiver showers/bathes the young lad they also are required to "fondle" the penis or genitals in order to wash them properly!

First, I would need you to present some form of evidence, or proof, that "mothers would suck their young sons penis to help the foreskin fold back" as a "very common practice that has been in action for hundreds, if not thousands, of year". Even a single historical reference to it would be help to make your statement hold more weight.

As an adult, I'm sure you are aware of the very large difference between touching a child's penis as a matter of healthcare and sexual stimulation. I'm also sure that you would not be so naive as to think that the only instances on which such contact occured with Davidito was when a photographer was present.

By all of that, I take it you do not believe Ricky was abused. Is that correct?

leocon wrote:

So where are you going to go now? Are you going to say that "Yes, but their minds were perverted and lustful".
HA! So now you are presuming to know the mind of man? Pretty high and mighty stuff!

Considering that is exactly what you did in the previous sentence, I don't think you really consider it that high and mighty.

The assumptions and consecutive to the assumption of what I am going to say is hardly conducive to talking shop. Don't you agree?

leocon wrote:

The Davidito debate can go on and on, but it will not make any relevant, physical difference to your PERSOANL case! So why not move on?!

As I said in a previous post, yes, it would. Because if it wasn't for the Davidito book, I would have never experienced what I did. And if you cannot accept that Ricky was abused, then you will not believe me when I say I was abused. And if you do not believe my story of abuse, then you can't really help me. Do you see my point?

Look, Eman. I'm not trying to tear into you. I don't think you're the "enemy" and I'm not out to make you look like a fool at every turn. But if you want us to take you seriously you have got to start putting some serious thought behind what you write.

For what it's worth, I used to come across as being just as arrogant as you. When I look back, I think I would have appreciated someone telling me I was making a total ass out of myself. (That still holds true now.)

But I might just be projecting my past onto you, so if you want me to stop calling you on this stuff, just let me know.

I apologize if you have felt hurt or confused by anything I have said.

As far as proof about the Foreskin issue is concerned, I would love to find the various books and magazines which have broached the subject, and I will try to find them again! I am surprised you have neer heard about this. It was something that was used in the "less civilised" areas of the world so that might be one of the reasons why its not that well known of!

As far as the Davidito issue, I will not be able to say that "I know that he was abused" simply because I was not there and "I don't know"!

But if you have evidence of what you say then please share it with me in point by point form!

For the nth time, you cannot blame the abuse you experienced on a book!

Based on the accounts in the Story of Davidito, do you consider Ricky to have been abused? Yes or No?

It was after leaving The Family and falling into the wrong companionship that sent him into the messed up state that he ended up in. Any psycologist who interviewed him around that time when he was 19-20 would agree to that! Its called "Mass-Histeria" and I got to experience it firsthand when I was told that I was abused.

Some days I have come so close to snapping and going back to their compound--but not for a social visit and not as a repentant prodigal, but as an avenger. I don't see why I should have to pay for their sins. I feel like we would be even and I could get on with my life. They f***ed with me. I made them pay dearly for it, and then I could move on.

Of course, I am no ninja, and so it would be far from a surgical strike and a lot of the people there would probably end up getting hurt too.
http://www.rickyrodriguez.org/documents/Ricky_to_James_22_December_00.pdf

According to the book there is only proof that any sexual interaction he was engaged in was enjoyed by him. There is nothing in the book stating or anything written which would lead me to think that what was happening to him was painful to him or that it was done against him wanting or enjoying it! To the contrary there is mention of him being the one to ask women to suck him off, he enjoyed it that much.

When he was around 19-20 yrs of age he traveled to Australia around the time of the raids and court cases here. He was talked to by many reporters and psycologists. He was found to be a well adjusted young man, especially for his age, and was muture beyond his years. They saw nothing in him that would have suggested that he was in any way abused as a child.

Likewise his conclusion about Davidito. This was an opportunity to explore exactly what had taken place in Berg's household. He merely touched upon these matters and Davidito made it obvious he was not prepared to talk about it. Nor did they talk about the reasons which impelled that young man to make attempts on his life said by The Family to have been caused by Satanic influences. Because I conclude that Dr Lilliston was not too concerned critically to examine The Family's past, I cannot be sure I get an accurate picture from him.
http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/Complete_Judgment_of_Lord_Justice_Ward#THE_PSYCHOLOGICAL_AND_PSYCHIATRIC_EVIDENCE

So now you have my answer!

According to the book there is only proof that any sexual interaction he was engaged in was enjoyed by him. There is nothing in the book stating or anything written which would lead me to think that what was happening to him was painful to him or that it was done against him wanting or enjoying it! To the contrary there is mention of him being the one to ask women to suck him off, he enjoyed it that much. Now whether it was good for him or not is something that psycologists are still arguing about to this very day.

Some say that it is completely heathful and normal for humans at a very young age to be open and inquisative about their sexuality. Others say that children should be taught to not even dable into the sexual aspects in life until quite a bit later on.

Let me enlighten you further on the subject of Ricky.

When he was around 19-20 yrs of age he traveled to Australia around the time of the raids and court cases here. He was talked to by many reporters and psycologists. He was found to be a well adjusted young man, especially for his age, and was muture beyond his years. They saw nothing in him that would have suggested that he was in any way abused as a child.

It was after leaving The Family and falling into the wrong companionship that sent him into the messed up state that he ended up in. Any psycologist who interviewed him around that time when he was 19-20 would agree to that! Its called "Mass-Histeria" and I got to experience it firsthand when I was told that I was abused.

Now you asked whether, based on the accounts in the Story of Davidito book, do I consider Ricky to have been abused!

My answer is: NO!

And you have proof of this? Or are you just taking the word of your leaders in whose best interest it is to distract from their own blame and create an "us vs. them" environment?

Did you know that for 5 years before he committed suicide, Ricky had little contact with ex-Family members (certainly not the ones who the Family labels "vitriolic")?

Did you know that Ricky had almost no contact with former members when he wrote this:

Have you watched the video he made before he murdered Sue? He says he's been wanting to commit suicide and imagined doing violent things to his shepherds since he was 11 years old.

You cannot begin to imagine how disgustingly sick your above comment is. You state that a child, whose amygdala is completely undeveloped, should be allowed to determine what is good for them.

You are, in essence, saying that if a child wants to be sucked off by an adult, the adult should oblige. Are you insane?

The question is not, "How did this two-year-old boy feel about it?", but rather "WHAT THE F*** WAS GOING THROUGH THE MIND OF THE 28 YEAR OLD?"

Did you know that when Lawrence Lilliston (yes, it was a single psychologist, and no reporters either) interviewed Rick, Rick refused to answer any questions about sex or his sexual history or his feelings about the matter?