"Unapproved" sex with minors?

  1. xFamily
  2. » Documents
  3. » "Unapproved" sex with minors?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reply Sun 25 Sep, 2005 10:30 pm
"Unapproved" sex with minors?
I just came across this paragraph in Answers To Your Questions! No. 2:
Quote:
6. QUESTION: ALSO, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT ADULT BRETHREN LUSTING SEXUALLY AFTER CHILDREN UNDER 10 YEARS OLD!--Francis & Summer Sonrise; USA

(Note: We have recieved several letters from concerned parents re: "unapproved" sex with young children--without counsel or knowledge of parents, usually done by single brothers. Any comment? TY! Love, Sara D)

ANSWER: I think we've said enough about this in the Letters. But it's sad if the poor single brothers have to resort to this because of obvious sexual deprivation by older sisters!


Basically, Sara D. is saying that if the parents were counseled with or had a knowledge of it, that an adult having sex with a minor is OK or "approved".

Berg's reply labels adult-child sex as nothing more than "sad" while arrogantly placing the blame for such behaviour on the "older sisters".

This question is also being asked specifically about children under 10 years old, which suggests that the authors deem lusting sexually after children aged 11 to 15 to be acceptable behaviour.

This letter was published in September, 1982. Sara admits to receiving reports of this nature back then and yet The Family leadership waits 4 years (if their official line is to be believed) to establish "stringent policies" on this issue.

It doesn't get much clearer than this, IMO. This one paragraph alone refutes their entire official statement.
 
evanman
 
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2005 06:34 am
"Unapproved" means that there is such a thing as "Approved"?

So the principal is set! There is no problem (in principal) for such abhorrent behaviour!
 
Indian Joe 1
 
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2005 07:21 am
I just read that question myself yesterday, and it really caught my attention. I've never seen it before.

It is yet another smoking gun that exposes the frame of mind of leadership during that period. It allows one to draw a reasonable conclusion that sex with minors was considered normal and healthy if approved by the parents. I can't imagine that any sane person would not find that completely shocking and repugnant.
 
Anonymous
 
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2005 09:57 am
Berg had a low opinion of men
I don't know what's more repulsive--blaming older sisters for failing to minister to a "need" or the view that men are pigs who will rut with children because they're incapable of controlling their animal instincts.
 
Acheick
 
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2005 02:14 pm
Very true - yes, it was always, always about the brothers needs, the poor lonely brother, how could you turn him down, blah, blah, blah.
 
Anonymous
 
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2005 04:34 pm
sex and abuse
I have 2 young ladies here at my place who just left the Family. Get this:

1. their father sexually molested their older sister in the late 80's. He only confessed to it because leadership wanted to make some sort of purging of the ranks. When he confessed he was excommunicated.

*the ladies only found out about this recently.
*another point... their father is still sympathetic to the Family because he feels so bad that he got excommed... he thinks his daughters should still be in the Family
as he thinks it's God's highest calling to be there... that is TWISTED!

2. up until last month, their step father was beating up their younger sister and mother. He's Indian.

*the mother is now seperated from the Indian guy and has left the Family only this momth.


So, it is one more confirmed lie of Claire Borowick... she says that abuse hasn't happened since 1986. That's a bunch of baloney. The Indian man mentioned above is STILL in the Family... even though there have been countless reports on his behavior. He terrorized his step daughter and wife.

The Family of Love is a bunch of shit! Mad
 
Anonymous
 
Reply Mon 26 Sep, 2005 04:42 pm
wondering
I know it's because of the teachings of Berg that gave this so-called "brother" the "faith" to "share" with his daughter... Berg's teachings should be confiscated and burned from off the face of the planet.

Another point: this man may have had pedaphile tendancies and kept them in check like a normal human does in the civilized ... but after reading the teachings of Berg... he get's "faith" to live out his dreams... but then he gets excommed for obeying the GN's.... talk about sending mixed signals...

I just can't make sense of this. Evil or Very Mad



can you imagine a gay guy reading the Loving Jesus Revelation?
 
Porceleindoll
 
Reply Tue 27 Sep, 2005 05:50 pm
Re: wondering
I have to be selah wrote:
I know it's because of the teachings of Berg that gave this so-called "brother" the "faith" to "share" with his daughter... Berg's teachings should be confiscated and burned from off the face of the planet.

Another point: this man may have had pedaphile tendancies and kept them in check like a normal human does in the civilized ... but after reading the teachings of Berg... he get's "faith" to live out his dreams... but then he gets excommed for obeying the GN's.... talk about sending mixed signals...

I just can't make sense of this. Evil or Very Mad

can you imagine a gay guy reading the Loving Jesus Revelation?


It was always like that in the group, you never knew when it was right or wrong. That verse "According to your faith be it unto you" was so universally applied, such a 'one-size-fits-all' application. I know many people who used that verse when they wanted to do something that went against Berg's teachings, or was outside of the Family's presently approved list of do's and dont's. I HATE that verse!!

There was that one question and answer FN or something where a mother asked if it was wrong for her to have sexual intimacy with her son, and the response was "according to your faith...". Even though I was only a teen when I read it, I choked over it. Not because I thought it was wrong, I had no clue that it could be morally wrong, but because I could see myself being in the same position and some guy wanting to jump my pants, and using that verse to justify himself in doing it, and accusing me of not having enough faith to have sex with him, it was a scarey upbringing.

One thing that kept (at least myself) in a lot of fear and a constant state of trying to obey, was that you really never knew when you were going to be in trouble, when you would be accused of being demon possessed, or foolish, or out of it, or proud, or unyielded, or whatever. It was a constant state of fear, every meeting, every look from your shepherd, every talk-time. Even though I've been out of the group for 5 years now, if someone says "Do you have a minute, can I talk to you?" or "I just need to have a word with you", I immediately fall into a panic, and have to work hard to shake it off and regain my confidence, tell myself that I'm not 'in trouble', and that even if I did do something to piss them off, so what, that's their problem, it's not that I'm wrong or a bad person.

Anyway, that goes back to your point about the father 'confessing' his sin and being excommed, but simultaneously the Family seemed to advocate that such relationships were ok, so he was following the letters, as instructed, and gets kicked out for it.

I'm not advocating what he did, it wasn't right. But the Family created the situation for it to happen, then he got punished for it. It's really twisted.
 
Anonymous
 
Reply Sun 23 Oct, 2005 10:45 am
Agreed Porcelain Doll,

The Family's values are so mixed up, that it mixes up their followersd. No one knows waht is right or wrong. and what is right and acceptable for a leader can be grounds for excommunication if done by a mere disciple. What one deems they have faith for is acceptable but those of one ranking but under a different hierarchial position it is labelled 'unacceptable'. The teachings from Mo to Maria to NOw are so complicated and open to interpretation, that the leaders can always excuse themselves for actions under some subsection letter, or accuse others using another subsection.

If you followed "Come on Ma burn your bra, and all the girls run around topless like one leader did,..' you get demoted for being so unspiritual, and yet at a leadership hiome those actions would have been deemed obediance to the letters.

The Family's doctrine is so convulted no one can understand it, and any leader can circumvent them. They truly have made themselves scribes and pharisees..

IMO

LIJ

D
 
fisherman 1
 
Reply Sat 29 Oct, 2005 02:05 am
I have to again say to the accussers, the above post was from me.. David Jay Jordan FISHERMAN, as no decpetion was involved. I merely didn;t SIGN IN...and yet you accuse and accuse and accuse. Will you never learn that wrath and blaming others is not the solution to your pain and abuse. Love and simple truths and humility is the only way to heal your wounds and the wounds of exers, but you adamantly refuse to allow such discussions. You accuse and accuse because it protects you from personal heart searches that could HEAL.

Im at [email protected] if you have any heart and mind changes, or want sincere help and ideas on how to help FM's or exers with simple truths that HEAL
 
Anonymous
 
Reply Thu 6 Mar, 2008 10:41 am
Re: Berg had a low opinion of men
BlackElkk wrote:
I don't know what's more repulsive--blaming older sisters for failing to minister to a "need" or the view that men are pigs who will rut with children because they're incapable of controlling their animal instincts.


just to point out it wasnt just the men, the women were quite happy for "cuddle time" with the male children too
its absolutly discusting
 
JASONLANIK
 
Reply Fri 16 May, 2008 06:10 pm
Re: wondering
I have to be selah wrote:
I know it's because of the teachings of Berg that gave this so-called "brother" the "faith" to "share" with his daughter... Berg's teachings should be confiscated and burned from off the face of the planet.

Another point: this man may have had pedaphile tendancies and kept them in check like a normal human does in the civilized ... but after reading the teachings of Berg... he get's "faith" to live out his dreams... but then he gets excommed for obeying the GN's.... talk about sending mixed signals...

I just can't make sense of this. Evil or Very Mad



can you imagine a gay guy reading the Loving Jesus Revelation?
 
 

 
  1. xFamily
  2. » Documents
  3. » "Unapproved" sex with minors?
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 01/23/2019 at 08:54:30