Posted by someone on August 08, 2004 at 19:11:11
In Reply to: Life in the Family: Thoughts on Systemic Change posted by Carol on August 08, 2004 at 14:08:31:
Your juxtaposition of two ways of dealing with The Family and reasoning about disparate effects is eminently sound. Your observation is also correct that The Family leaders eventually respond with added hermeticality (is that a word? I doubt it!) to permeable borders, when the latter have been allowed for a time.
I *will* point out that the most culpable criminal elements of The Family, Zerby, and Kelly (aka Chris Smith?) and select others, really deserve consequences that would likely appear to members of The Family as an attack of the more aggressive kind. Members would probably consider it an attack against The Family rather than a move to exact accountability from the specific wrongdoers, not least because the perps want and have trained The Family to feel that way so they'll protect the rear ends of the big kahunas with all the peons have, as though "the antichrist forces are trying to kill your brothers and sisters and parents," as I was taught growing up.
Also, a move that would be considered entirely above ground and is legal in the World such as a lawsuit, would appear as evil and wrong to The Family. -- When in fact it would be consistent with them being "strategically pressured in a fair & ethical manner--where the rules and boundaries of the opposition's game are laid out in a way that allows the Family system to adjust and respond."
It would also allow for saving face (this is known as settling). As of now, The Family refuses to concede that they have done anything that warrants an effort to compensate their victims. They appear to require something more to get this.
I don't think The Family really understands as yet where the limits lie on what they can morally or legally do to minor children.