In Reply to: if one approaches every fammem as a cookie cutter ... posted by ray on December 11, 2002 at 05:03:32:
I have some questions that I don't understand on what you just said:
1. By "cookie cutter" you mean different personalities, right? I am sure you don't mean membership to the Family, which does come in "cookie cutter" form because if they adhere to Family procedures, you have to admit that every family member knows what the procedure is and they will adhere to it. You know very well that part of the procedure is to hide their membership to the core beliefs of The Family.
In order for them to leave that mentality and abandon family procedures, which will only happen after they have already developed a strong link of trust with their counterpart, being a prospective convert, a new convert, a contact, a king or queen, etc., there must be something else at play. They must have already be almost at the exit door, or an old flame or friend is the counterpart, or some other circumstance that makes them question their current situation. None of this will happen overnight and you also know very well Family members will always act a certain way with all outsiders. So, there is a lot of the "cookie cutter approach" that should be used when dealing with The Family. For the most part, unless they are ready to leave the Family, members are drones in the way they approach many things.
Your hopes about Gary and Solomon admitting being members of the Family is overly optimistic. In fact, they may acknowledge it to you or me as exmembers who know what the scoop is but have already publicly denied that fact.
What you say evasion of answering the question in that letter from Solomon, it is a denial. I find interesting that you don't see it that way but then again I am used to deal with letters like those. When a direct question is asked and the answer comes back pussyfooting and going around in circles, it amounts to admission. I am not talking about a court of law but plain daily business with sneaks.
2. The baby cherubs are innocent and not the first step to dropping out. Have you forgotten the camel's nose? Besides, having been in the field for so long you know very well that many publications were meant not for proselitizing but for PR. In this case the videos serve those two things. Forgive me but this argument is very naive.Do you really believe that there was no follow up intention?
Let me thank you for your points, they are making me think a lot. I hope we can continue talking, or writing as the case may be.