moreclearnow wrote:1. ex-l's intereference and control in each and every thread should be reduced.
Your repeating what is being said on the BKs' forum, do you also post there? I cannot remember if you answered the same questions as '
clearernow' (and
here) but if you just answer my simple and straightfoward questions, I think you will find I butt in far less.
a) Do you consider God and the god of the BKs to be the one and same individual?
b) If so, how do you negotiate believing in them to be god and not believing in the 5,000 Year Cycle (if what you say is true)?
ex-l generally respond to the individual as ex-l find them and show respect to them if they show respect to the issues we raise. If ex-l senses they are being less than straightforward or disrespectful to those issues, then ex-l's respect drops equivalently to the point where if they are sick or being an insensitive moron, ex-l will tell them.
You should be glad I am not expressing myself. I am far more free and colorful with my descriptions in real life.
Pretty much anyone can post where and when they want. I don't control anyone. No one does what I say. This ain't the BKWSU and I ain't a center-in-charge. The only restrictions we have are relating to BKs and PBKs who are required to serve or contribute something to what we are doing ... e.g. supply Murlis and other materials for us to re-distribute.
Once it is clear that an individual has no desire to exit Brahma Kumarism, they have to give something back for what they are taking. We don't accept advertising on this website.2. While it is down to you to post what you like, it may help if you reduce the length of posts for readers to get the message more productively.
Do poor BKs lack the ability to concentrate and follow more complex arguments? Do they need more meditation or less meditation to achieve a better grasp?
3. Clearly define what this forum wants to achieve ...
This forum is many different things to many people. It is defined by who ever happens to turn up at the time, and what they are interested in. We're not a cult. We don't have a leadership or an agenda. We offer our resources freely. It changes according to the season.
4. Respect Anonymity
My main objection to that is that the Brahma Kumaris (BKWSU and BKWSO) did not respect my and others anonymity, so why should we respect theirs? Indeed, they (Hansa Raval, Simon Blandford and others) conspired to out and expose me in order to sue me personally for comments I did not make. Why should I offer it to them?
Honest question requiring an answer. They've never apologised for it. BKs don't.
Having exposed certain individuals, the BK have since gone on to develop extensive personal attacks based mostly completely invented falsehoods. There is even a team of BKs following the forum and reporting back looking for god knows what. Most individuals on this forum are protected by the anonymity we offer them, however, there have been cases where the BKs have speculated who they are and then pressurised them and their families as a "
Chilling Effect" to silence them.
Imagine Hansa Raval running along the road, trying to hold her sari together, as her BK husband finally drove away from the center with only a minimum of belongings leaving the rest, or ask why she failed to register their divorce papers?
They act in secret, we act on "the world stage".
Generally, we would respect the privacy of sincere '
private individuals', but where a BK promotes themselves as a '
public figure' and personally benefits from the system (e.g. makes money or achieves status), or plays an intrinsic part in the BKWSU legal and publicity machinery, then different laws apply as there is a clear '
public interest' to such discussion.
This is only a discussion. We need to be able discuss in order to come to conclusions.
Recently, we discussed BK Simon Blandford's marriage to another BK as someone reported that it was for the sake of visa rather than love, sex and building a family. Regardless of any contradiction to the Maryadas and Shrimat, which are the BKs' business, that would be an abuse of the legal system and not unique amongst BKs.
Does and should the BKs promote unlawful acts and protect those that carry them out or should they investigate and report them? Simon took a personal stand acting in support of another Brahma Kumari leader's personal interest ... should not his own, and others like him, personal morality come into question?
Miriam Subirana's personal bad conduct and Brian Bacon's business benefits with BKs and the BKWSU would be another example as they are in contradiction of what the BKs say they are about and demand of lower ranking BKs.
We should be bound by the law but not worried about the BKWSU's reputation. If a BK leader is utterly hypocritical or abusive, then it is a matter or public interest and service to speak out about it. 5. Refrain from publishing personal information of individuals involved in BKs - If you are fighting against an organization that's fine and focus should be on issues not people - please consider the harm it can do to those individuals involved particularly those who are not the leaders.
There is no such thing as an organization, there are only individuals. Especially when it comes to the BKs where the organizations are generally just artificial and temporary fronts.
Why would we chase charades? Don't chase the charades, chase those that are projecting them.If the individuals who carry out the actions wish to avoid analysis and criticism, or avoid being discussed, then all they have to do is leave the BKWSU, or remove those individual or organizational defects from the BKWSU.
We're doing the BKWSU a service offering them honest feedback about their effect on others and society.