DiIulio

ticle February 12, 2001 The Weekly Standard The Minister of Ministries George W. Bush launches his faith-based initiative.

By Fred Barnes

Shortly after the inauguration, Vice President Dick Cheney explained to Stephen Goldsmith, the former mayor of Indianapolis, how the new White House office of faith-based initiatives would be set up. But Goldsmith, Bush's first choice to head the office, had his own ideas, a counterproposal that included bestowing cabinet status on the head of it. Cheney was surprised. "You don't make a counterproposal to the president," he said.

So John DiIulio, a Democrat, Catholic, scholar, and one-time adviser to Al Gore, became the assistant to the president in charge of faith-based initiatives. This is a signature project of the Bush presidency, touted early and often by Bush during the campaign. And DiIulio seems perfectly suited to run it: He knows more about grass-roots programs run by churches than anyone and believes fervently in them. Goldsmith, the odd man out, will be an unpaid adviser and chairman of the Corporation for National Service, which runs Americorps and other volunteer programs.

Bush and DiIulio are an odd couple and a mutual admiration society. Bush is from West Texas, DiIulio from South Philadelphia, where he still lives. Bush is low-key and eager to please. DiIulio is intense and intent on persuading. Both have Ivy League backgrounds, but while Bush was an indifferent student, DiIulio was a star pupil of James Q. Wilson at Harvard and went on to become a professor at Princeton and now the University of Pennsylvania. Both are working in new fields. Bush failed in the oil business but succeeded as president of the Texas Rangers baseball team. DiIulio's academic specialty is public administration, but he's made his name in criminology and social policy. Bush told an aide last week, speaking of DiIulio, "I love that guy." DiIulio said of Bush: "I have total faith in this man's heart." Oh, yes, Bush's nickname for DiIulio is "Big John."

The two almost didn't connect. DiIulio was known to Bush through his chief political strategist, Karl Rove. He is a prolific writer (including as a contributing editor to this magazine). "I'd read his stuff for years," Rove says. But when an aide to then governor Bush tried to invite DiIulio to a meeting in Austin in early 1999, he didn't respond. A half-dozen calls went unanswered. Finally, Goldsmith called, and he agreed to come. Normally, DiIulio says, "I don't hang with Republicans." And his experience with politicians had been unsatisfactory. "They invite you in, do 20 minutes, and hand you off." But, from their first meeting, he found Bush to be different. "He was engaged for the full two hours," DiIulio says.

What pleased DiIulio most was the absence of politics. Bush wanted to know what a faith-based initiative would involve and what programs might work. Later, in July 1999, Bush delivered a speech on compassionate conservatism in Indianapolis. That morning, he called DiIulio, who was vacationing at the Jersey shore, to thank him for his advice on the speech. It was only months earlier that DiIulio had met with Al Gore and advised the Democratic candidate on his own plans for supporting faith-based programs. Gore gave a tepid speech on the subject in May 1999.

The Bush-DiIulio relationship was sealed in June 2000 after Bush had won the Republican presidential nomination. Bush had come to Philadelphia for a speech, and DiIulio was asked to wait around to chat afterwards. They conferred for two hours, first just the two of them, then with Goldsmith and Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge. Once more, the subject was social policy, not politics. Bush was in "the what's good, what works, and think-big box," says DiIulio, which was what attracted him to Bush in the first place. As president, DiIulio figured, Bush would "surprise a lot of people. And he has."

What has DiIulio learned that others haven't about faith-based projects to aid the poor? He's been studying them for a half-dozen years, notably through his Center for Research on Religion and Urban Civil Society at Penn. First, he says, one has to be realistic about what, say, a church project can achieve. The chief characteristic of "highly effective outreach ministries" is that they form partnerships with other groups, often secular ones. Second, running these ministries does not conflict with saving souls, the main job of religious groups. On the contrary, such work can help "protect the religious and sacred characteristics of their organizations," DiIulio insists. Third, the country is crawling with small, unsung but effective programs that could reach more people if they had government and private funding.

"Washington can potentially play a useful role," DiIulio says. But it's not a slam dunk. The idea of building on grass-roots ministries is "promising but not proven." In other words, empirical evidence that lives will be improved is lacking. "From a social science standpoint, the jury is still out." However, DiIulio adds, "there's something going on here. It's what the good nuns said. Do the right thing in the right way and you'd be amazed what you can achieve." For DiIulio, strengthening local ministries and community efforts is "intellectually, morally, and in civic terms what I care most about."

When Bush collected a group of advisers in Austin in early January to talk about faith-based programs, DiIulio seemed unlikely to be Bush's pick. DiIulio skipped the meeting, instead taking his three kids to New York to see Beauty and the Beast on Broadway. Then on day five of the Bush presidency, he got a call from a White House aide offering him the faith-based job.

DiIulio was reluctant initially, particularly because of his friendship with Goldsmith. He also worried that Goldsmith's demise might mean a trimmed-down program. But in two days of talks with senior Bush aides, he became convinced the president intends to give strong emphasis to the program. The last problem was the title of the office. Bush aides wanted it to be the Office of Community and Faith-Based Initiatives. If that was the case, DiIulio said, they would have to get someone else to run it. He wanted the words Faith-Based to come first, since expanding efforts by religious groups is what's new and significant about the program. To get DiIulio on board, the Bushies gave in. A very smart decision on their part.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 06, 2001

Answers

I,m sure the POPE is rejoicing!! www.Revelationwebsite.co.uk/

here we goooooooo

-- al-d (dogs@zianet.com), February 07, 2001.

what,s yer pernt al? are cathoilics the debbil,s helper?

-- (Paracelsus@Pb.Au), February 07, 2001.

Bush was in "the what's good, what works, and think-big box," says DiIulio, which was what attracted him to Bush in the first place.

How refreshing. By all means, let's do what works, not what lets certain people and certain bureaucracies build empires whose highest priority (beneathe their BS) is to aggrandize their own power and wealth.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 07, 2001.

Uh, Lars:

The idea of building on grass-roots ministries is "promising but not proven." In other words, empirical evidence that lives will be improved is lacking. "From a social science standpoint, the jury is still out."

I'm all for testing via pilot projects. Ross Perot really got my attention with this suggested approach back in 1992. What I don't wish to see is these faith-based organizations become hooked on receiving public money. Again, I have no clue as to actual guidelines for this project.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), February 07, 2001.

The two men Bush is putting in charge of his religion plan, John J. DiIulio Jr. and Stephen Goldsmith, are both senior fellows of the CIA's Manhattan Institute and are colleagues of Charles Murray, author of the classic text of scientific racism, The Bell Curve. Most of Bush's advisors are also associated with the Bell Curve. As just one of many examples, Murray was a consultant on Tommy Thompsons' Wisconsin Welfare Reform program, which Bush will make the national model.

Whether you are a fundamentalist Christian, an Orthodox Jew, a devout Muslim or an atheist you might question what part the CIA rightfully has in a multi-billion dollar "religion initiative" or in any domestic US policy decisions. The best known modern example of government sponsored religion-based initiatives is Nazi Germany.

-- Welcome Your New Police State (get@used.to.it.com), February 07, 2001.

THAT'S where I heard the DiIulio name before. I had just read a couple of pieces over the weekend, explaining the connections between Murray and the rest.

A little nerve-wracking, if you ask me.

Then again, the connections between the Bush family and "Rev." Sun Myung Moon don't seem to bother the "supporters".....

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), February 07, 2001.

Rich--

I agree with the idea of pilot programs as long as they are not configured to intentionally fail. I doubt if the wildest supporters of "faith-based" expected it to immediately replace all existing federal programs. There are too many vested interests to prevent that.

I too would like to see more specifics. Personally, I think we should subsidize the Salvation Army's work except I don't want the government corrupting the Salvation Army. (put a billion on the drum, save another drunken bum)

"welcome your"--

Indulging in a little guilt by association are we? Did Thompson's welfare reform in WI improve the welfare situation in that state? (prior to Thompson, WI was so generous in its welfare that people from Chicago regularly bussed to Milwaukee to pick up a welfare check).

Enlighten me--how is the CIA involved?

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 07, 2001.

Patricia--

What's your hang-up with the Unification Church? I'm not aware of any Machiavellian manipulations by them. Are we their puppets? So what if they own the Washington Times?

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 07, 2001.

It's a cult, Lars and they are a mighty powerful political influence ($$$$$). Just kind of bothers me, is all.

Of course, some would say that I'm just "buying the spin" :-)

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), February 07, 2001.

thr=ecumenical-movement will suck-em all in. then we"ll have a 1 world-religion-satan will be happy

-- al-d (dogs@zianet.com), February 07, 2001.

For you, Lars:

Manhattan Institute/Chase Bank Bush, CIA and Nazis:

(a) NY Times January 29, 2001 New Bush Office Seeks Closer Ties to Church Groups

(b) NY Times Monday, May 12, 1997 Manhattan Institute Has Nudged New York Rightward "...the institute was founded as a free-market education and research organization by William Casey, who then went off to head the Central Intelligence Agency in the Reagan Administration."

(c) NY Times June 12, 2000 Bush Culls Campaign Theme From Conservative Thinkers "Gov. George W. Bush has said his political views have been shaped by the work of Myron Magnet of the Manhattan Institute."

(d) for many articles on this subject see http://Baltech.org/lederman/spray/

(e) Daily News 12/7/98 Chase Banked On Nazis - Report "The New York- based bank controlled by the Rockefeller family closed Jewish accounts even before the Germans ordered them to do so and did business with the Nazis while they were sending Jews to the gas chambers, Newsweek magazine reports in this week's edition. And while the U.S. was at war with the Nazis, Chase also apparently helped German banks do business with their overseas branches, the magazine reported...The relationship between Chase and the Nazis apparently was so cozy that Carlos Niedermann, the Chase branch chief in Paris, wrote his supervisor in Manhattan that the bank enjoyed "very special esteem" with top German officials and "a rapid expansion of deposits." Niedermann's letter was written in May 1942 - five months after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and the U.S. also went to war with Germany...And subsidiaries of Ford and General Motors have been accused of forcing thousands of Jews, Poles and others to work as slave laborers."

(f) "The Bush family fortune came from the Third Reich," - Sarasota Herald-Tribune 11/11/2000 -Former US Justice Dept. Nazi War Crimes prosecutor John Loftus-who is today the director of the Florida Holocaust Museum. http://www.newscoast.com/headlinesstory2.cfm?ID=35115

-- Welcome Your New Police State (CIA@Bush.com), February 07, 2001.

Patricia--

My knowledge of the Moonies is nil and my interest is even niller. My impression is that they were a psuedo-Christian cult who peeked in the 70s. If they are currently a major player then I must give them credit for maintaining a low profile. IMO they are as relevant today as Hare Krishnas. What do you think the goals of the Unification Church are?

"Welcome your"--

Thanks for the response. I find your references underwhelming. Didn't we have this Bush/Nazi "conversation" once before?

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 07, 2001.

Patricia--

My knowledge of the Moonies is nil and my interest is even niller. My impression is that they were a psuedo-Christian cult who peeked in the 70s. If they are currently a major player then I must give them credit for maintaining a low profile. IMO they are as relevant today as Hare Krishnas. What do you think the goals of the Unification Church are?

"Welcome your"--

Thanks for the response. I find your references underwhelming. Didn't we have this Bush/Nazi "conversation" once before?

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 07, 2001.

They have (rather quietly) become a multi-billion dollar "political force to be reckoned with". Money does indeed "talk" in this country.

I had a friend some years back whose family and an organization that does this as their business (name escapes me) had to kidnap her brother in the late 1980s from them. That took about three months to set up. Then it was almost a year of "de-programming" HELL. The guy was basically a prisoner in his parents' home for that time. They paraded in a steady stream of family, former friends, girlfriends, etc., who were, for the first few months, subjected to a steady stream of hate from the guy. They were ultimately successful, and he went on to do the usual -- marriage, kids, mini-van, etc. But it was a severe drain on the family.

Most aren't so lucky. So yeah, I have a kind of personal thing against cults in general, and the Moonies in particular. But the "Rev." Sun Myung Moon is a close friend of Bush, Sr. That's who arranged a good many of Sr.'s speaking engagements after he left office (the overseas appearances, anyway -- they commanded the most in fees to Bush/Moon). Speculation is that he made millions from those appearances, most of which were in front of Unitarian Church audiences. The actual amounts are incredibly difficult to nail down due to Bush Sr.'s OWN wealth. The wealthy are quite good at "hiding" their money. (Yes, tinge of jealousy there...)

Call me paranoid, but it's a little too cozy for my tastes.

They basically preach of the "evils" of America and the American way of life (with particular disdain for the wealthy!). Oh the hypocrisy when one discovers that the good "Rev." is a billionaire and the Unification Church owns or shares ownership in thousands of American interests (making him even MORE "fabulously wealthy)! The irony is that while their members are stripped of all their worldly belongings and all their ties to everything-American are completely severed, the good "Rev." not only lives a life of massive wealth and luxury, but partakes in many of the finer "American" things life has to offer. He also "hob-nobs with the stars", as it were.

Some "disdain", huh?

Additionally, and I don't remember if he's personally done this or if it's been through the U.C.'s various holdings (such as The Washington Times), but millions of dollars have been donated to the Republican Party and many of its candidates for various "influential" offices.

If you are interested (and you already stated you aren't!), just plug "Unification Church" into any good search engine (e.g., Google) and start plodding through the thousands of returns. No exaggeration -- THOUSANDS. You'll get better results with that than if you used "Moonies" -- those are mostly, but not all, the wacko sites. Many of the sites are just anti-Moonie drivel, but there are quite a few gems in there that actually back up the "speculation" with facts. I was kind of surprised to read all this stuff.

But like I said before, I've been accused of falling for "spin" and being "biased", so who's to say?

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), February 07, 2001.

Thanks Patricia, I'm not up on any of this. I'll check a few links on Unification Church. Guess I'd better investigate the Unitarians too.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 08, 2001.

(At least!) one thing was kind of unclear in what I wrote....."...most of which were in front of Unitarian Church audiences...".

Not accurate the way it reads. After all, the actual members of the church have no worldly possessions (especially dreaded evil *money*). I don't recall if the sources where I read this information indicated just *who* the audiences were for Bush Sr.'s speeches. It might be important. If I find specifics, I'll post them.

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), February 08, 2001.

I have investigated the Unitarians and have determined that they are dangerous because many of their members die from pathological boredom.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 08, 2001.

I was afraid of that, Lars. How do you suppose we should proceed?

rotflmao.....

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), February 08, 2001.

Lars, one more little interesting tidbit on the "Rev." Moon.....

(Yes, I know it's Joe Conason; but the facts are still there and no matter how you "spin" it, facts is facts.)

Put Ye No Faith in Bush's Ministers is the link. But the paragraph in question is right here:

"There were a few ominous hints of what Messrs. Bush and Rove may intend during one of the Washington gatherings that celebrated the Bush inauguration. At an enormous “prayer luncheon” held in the Hyatt hotel ballroom on Capitol Hill on Jan. 19, the featured speaker was none other than John Ashcroft, then in the midst of those difficult hearings concerning his nomination as Attorney General. The former Missouri Senator—who wrote the first federal “charitable choice” legislation a few years ago—told the assembled multicultural divines that he had just been endorsed by a street musician who played “Amazing Grace.”

The luncheon was also addressed by Stephen Goldsmith, the former mayor of Indianapolis appointed to oversee the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives. “This is an administration that will clear out the regulation problems, clear out the legal problems,” he vowed. What made Mr. Goldsmith’s pledge slightly eerie was the luncheon’s sponsorship by the Washington Times Foundation. The foundation is yet another tentacle of Sun Myung Moon, the would-be messiah who went to prison for federal tax evasion and illegal commingling of his business and spiritual interests. At the luncheon, the Unification Church leader received an award for his “work in support of traditional family values” (which presumably did not include spiriting young people away from their homes to serve his cult). Before returning to whatever palatial compound he currently inhabits, Mr. Moon reminded his fellow ministers that “religions tell us to fast, to serve others, to be sacrificial.”

OK, two factual problems with this (but I suspect this was written back a couple of weeks): Goldsmith is only an "advisor" now and was Ashcroft in the middle of the hearings before the inauguration? I don't remember.

Not only did The Washington Times **sponsor** this "event, this gathering (at which the "speaker of honor" (gag) was Ashcroft) gave the "Rev." Moon an award for "family values".

(BTW, did you also know that UPI, the former "news agency", was also bought by the same arm of the Unification Church that owns The Washington Times? Certainly explains why NewsMax uses them as a source all the time.)

It just gets cozier and cozier all the time.....

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), February 09, 2001.

The Rev. Moon pretty will fits my picture of what a religious leader really believes. He's doing on a grand scale what Koresh was doing on a small scale -- skimming off everyone else's possessions and bonking all the better looking women, but all very piously.

If only there were some way to separate responsible fiscal and administrative policy from religious claptrap. Faith as a silent, internal, personal guide is fine. As soon as it starts getting politicized, grab your wallet and run away quick! "Formal" faith is institutionalized coercion and intolerance. Definitely a step in the wrong direction.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), February 09, 2001.

I realize that this "faith-based initiative" BS is a far cry from "institutionalized coercion" (well, maybe not THAT far) but I just think it can't come to any good ends. A few questions:

Aren't Conservatives V.2000/1 against "handouts"? How is this NOT considered "handouts"? What's the "logic path" one must negotiate to reach such a conclusion?

How does this differ from the same amount of government money being given to government agencies whose job it is to administer such programs, sans sermons?

How is it that the Administration feels the "faith-based" receivers of said funds WILL be able to separate the "sermons" from the "ministering", yet Planned Parenthood is unable to separate pregnancy options (e.g., "counseling") from mentioning abortion as an option?

How is it going to be possible to separate church from state when the OFBI "leader" talks about "expanding efforts by religious groups"? Am I the only one who sees that this will, in effect, have "government" (or "state") SUPPORTING "faiths" (or "churches")?

I don't remember; have any guidelines for the distribution of these funds been released yet? Who decides what organizations get funds? How are those decisions made (e.g., on what basis; what criteria)? Will the Unification Church be eligible? (Wouldn't THAT be a scream.)

And finally (hooray!), just how blatantly idiotic is it to give "Rev." Moon an award for his "family values"?

(And you genuinely wonder why I question "disconnect", Flint?)

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), February 10, 2001.

Flint--

Moon is over eighty years old and he is still boinking the babes in the choir? Bravo!

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 10, 2001.

Here is another link direct from the Moonies themselves...http://www.un ification.net/news/news20010120.html

What else needs to be said? If this is the state of Spirituality in America God help us.

-- (doc_paulie@hotmail.com), February 10, 2001.

Yipeee!! Gubmint Religion!

I can't wait to be approved by Dumbya and Asscraft so I can sing Heil Hitler and put my donations in their basket!

YIPEEEEEE! We can all be saved just like Dumbya!

-- (oh boy oh boy @ oh boy. oh boy!), February 10, 2001.

How come none of the memes want to comment on this?

How bout you folks who claim you are Christian? How is it possible many of you can follow a man(Moon), who claims Jesus Christ a failure, and He, the Reverand Moon is the true Messiah? You say you don't, well your leaders most definitely do, how do you explain it?

-- (doc_paulie@hotmail.com), February 10, 2001.

Patricia:

I suspect that religious conservatives and libertarian conservatives do not overlap except that the media have given both groups the same label of "conservative". Libertarian conservatives would like to see the role of external regulation reduced to a necessary minimum. Religious conservatives want to shove their own religion down everyone else's throat because they have a hotline to God and know better than you do what's best for you. Religious conservatives don't care whether it's the church or the state that does the coercing, or how much it costs, just so long as they get to dictate the program.

The problem is, single member districts pretty much require a 2-party system, when we currently seem to need three parties -- the libertarian (less government, lower taxes), the theocratic (church and state the same), and the liberal (Big Brother is the answer, who cares what the question is). The "disconnect" you see is artificial, a result of assigning the same label to two of these "parties", despite wildly different goals and philosophies.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), February 10, 2001.

Flint, "there you go again" :-)

Where did I mention anything about Libertarians? I didn't and here's a clue why: I **know** there's a difference; and the last I looked, the Liberarians aren't the ones who are either in power or responsible for this OFBI (and other) nonsense.

See the difference?

As to my lumping together two supposedly different kinds of "conservatives", well I did. Kind of. Actually, it was the Bush campaign (and Bush himself -- go figure) who did this. Did they not campaign on a platform of "compassionate conservativism"? And in doing so didn't they blur any so-called lines between "religious" conservatives and "regular" (non-Libertarian) conservatives?

I seem to remember their entire campaign centered around such things as "restoring honor and dignity to the White House" (snicker), and a return to "family values" and "morals" and the like (assuming of course that none of these things actually applies to the Bush Family and Friends ;-)).

Now that I think about it, it sounds a whole lot like the platform of the Christian Coalition and other such groups. Well, what do you know about that?

As to the "disconnect" that you claim I've "artificially" constructed, how is it at all possible I've constructed it when the questions I posed (which are based on the actions of the current Administration and not anyone's interpretation of what they may or may not do -- IOW, it's a "done deal") point it out rather clearly?

Flint, please discuss what I actually wrote and not what you think I meant to write. Sorry, but there is no way this one wasn't crystal clear.

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), February 11, 2001.

Cult schmult!

A "cult" is just a religion that folks don't like. Wooptee frickin doo, cult my ass.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), February 11, 2001.

Patricia:

I was trying to, honest. I have no more use for all this bogus, intrusive religiosity than you do. This is what makes my political choice (my vote) so damn difficult. I do NOT want to vote for anyone who beats me with a bible. I do NOT want to vote for anyone who wants to reward failure and penalize success because it's "fair" that way. But there are only two parties (for any practical purposes), so this is Hobson's choice.

I oppose the war on drugs, and so do the Democrats. I am pro-choice, and so are the Democrats. I oppose the introduction of religious groups into government, or funding them with tax dollars, and so do the Democrats. However, most strongly of all I believe we have much too much government, and tax dollars are being spent like water where they should never be spent at all, and some of the most expensive government programs are clearly making worse the very things they are supposed to cure, and the Democrats want to do EVEN MORE of this!

And to combat runaway Big Brotherism, I must despite myself vote in favor of these damn self-righteous bible-brained fools. As Jimmy Durante used to say, what a revolting development.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), February 11, 2001.

Uncle Deedah -- Ignorance is bliss, until reality pops up and bites you on the ass.
You just might want to start paying a little attention to what is happening in front of you, because it's hapening a lot faster these days since the average satisfied with his life American can't be bothered to think outside of his comfort zone.

I remember how the VietNam war snuck up on my generation, one minute it was a news quip, the next, male 16 and older was fighing for his life.

War is big business, supporting the toys of war is an even bigger one. What are most wars faught over? Religion. But with the freedom of religion in this country we are too thinned out to pull everyone under the same religious umbrella so we can fight for "our" religion against others. What do they do about it? Unite us in one major religion. Then they can justify fighting others in the name of supporting "our" religion. But that cannot happen here, too diverse a population. Unfortunatly weh have just had the good ol boys of the old mentality coerse their way back into controll-for a fast minute, to do all they can to get their ideas into action. The fact that it was almost inconcievable that they would manage was exactly what allowed them to get there. The country was taken by surprise. 30 years ago we were fighting the old southern mentality about minorities and women being lesser humans, today, the the excesses of social programs and the generational abuse of them, along with the continiously slackening social moral values, the disconnect between the haves and have nots, the impressions that those are have nots are so by choice, the lack of visable bias, and many other things have brought us to a place where money and self interest and instant gratification are the priorities of the general population.

Scientology was started on a bet.

Society can be manipulated and they don't teach sociology in high school any more. The Y2K fear was an excellent example of social manipulation, inadvertant as it started out, there were plenty of people waiting around to take advantage of the situation.

Control is a form of Power, and there are those who desire Power like a drug.The form of control the Bush camp has been using and continues to use works like a charm. Spin. And they prevent people from thinking they are doing it by blaming their opposition of doing the spinning whenever inconsistancies are brought up. Pretty neat trick huh? Accuse your opposition of doing exactly what you are doing. Al Gore and his camp gave the American public credit for being able to see through it, unfortunatly he gave them more credit then they deserved.

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), February 11, 2001.

Deedah,

I don't know how this organization operates now, but I can tell you that in the 70's in LA they were notorious for 'harvesting' individuals for the organization's benefit, taking their possessions, brainwashing them against their famlies - while trying to soak the family for money at the same time, yadda yadda. The individuals who made it out & were 'deprogrammed' were never the same, IMO.

There were many flavors of cults operating at that time & in a similar manner. A notorious Christian cult in Texas used to send buses up to the excitement and craziness that happens before the Rose Parade as part of their recruiting campaign. I imagine the same schtick would work at other parades & public events just as successfully. They would send out their pretty young girls to approach the folks who mingle through the crowds all night long, getting cold & hungry. The girls would say 'do you wanna come meet my friends, they're really nice. Come on, we've got hot chili'. Once you've fed 'em & flirted with 'em, it's not too tough to have 'em follow you onto the bus by the next morning.

Heck, the Spainiard Fathers used some of these same tactics with the natives here not all that long ago.

Though I think I understand your intention with your cult/religion statement, I've gotta disagree with it in this context. Sometimes it's much more about saving an organization & less about saving souls.

-- flora (***@__._), February 11, 2001.

Lars,

I don't know if you've caught the current series in the SF Chronicle about folks who grew up within certain religious groups, but I thought you might be interested:

"Children of a Lesser God THE PATH: Coming of new age for alternative religions"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? file=/chronicle/archive/2001/02/11/MN144051.DTL

"Children of a Lesser God THE MOONIES: Looking to its youth for survival"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? file=/chronicle/archive/2001/02/11/MN144052.DTL

"Life as Moonchild Far From Blessed"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? file=/chronicle/archive/2001/02/11/MN52098.DTL

~

"Leaving the Fold Third-generation Scientologist grows disillusioned with faith"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? file=/chronicle/archive/2001/02/12/MN171898.DTL

"When Scientology Is Passed Down Second-generation disciple dedicates his life to the church"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? file=/chronicle/archive/2001/02/12/MN59564.DTL

"Scientology Founder's Family Life Far From What He Preached"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? file=/chronicle/archive/2001/02/12/MN115109.DTL

~

"A Test of Faith Allegations of past child abuse threaten Hare Krishnas' existence"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? file=/chronicle/archive/2001/02/13/MN86735.DTL

"Growing Up in the Hare Krishnas Couple have mixed views about upbringing in sect and continuing to keep their faith"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? file=/chronicle/archive/2001/02/13/MN120924.DTL

~

The fourth & final section of the series will be tomorrow's:

"Children of god "Moses" Berg attracted thousands with his prophesies about Christianity and free sex. Now the children born from those unions are living his legacy."

-- flora (***@__._), February 13, 2001.

Flora--

No, I didn't see any of that. Thanks for the links.

History is replete with odd sects and cults that flourished for a generation or two or three and then vanished. Are there any more Shakers? Too bad, they made great furniture.

There is a small town not far from here, New Harmony, IN. This town was the location for two (not simultaneos) Utopian cults during the 19th century. One cult was ultra-Christian and one was Socialist. Neither lasted.

I don't understand why DP and Patricia get so exercised by the Unification church. Just another cult, IMO. Twenty years from now a footnote to history. Shoot, they can't even muster a decent mass-suicide.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 13, 2001.

Maybe you would Lars if ya did some research. Course this may lead to a condition called Freedom. You will have to give-up your cozy rut, take risks, and generally piss away time pondering what "eat me" means. I know, seems without value. Much easier to be a doorstop.

Maybe you can enlighten me to why this Moonie connection DOESN'T bother you?

-- (doc_paulie@hotmail.com), February 13, 2001.

Lars, what you call "just another cult" has been around by now for about thirty years (longer?). *I* don't understand why the connections with Moon DON'T bother you.

Check out this link. It might surprise you to discover just what they own. (And BTW, one of my former favorite bookstores is on that list. I was heartbroken.)

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), February 13, 2001.

Lars,

{I think the Shakers dropped the ball on the sex thing}

As for intense personal reactions, I can speak for myself that the experience of losing a truly brilliant, talented and wonderful friend to one of these outfits, & darn near losing another one just because he had an impulsive adolescent moment, tends to color my views.

Mind you, I still go to eat at Elizabeth Claire Prophet's 'Inn of the Seventh Ray' when I visit a certain friend in LA. They have the same canyon location & purple decor - pretty nostalgic, but kinda crazy when you think of the bunker deal they had going in Montana{?}. Unlike some mischevious friends, I was never remotely interested in the Scientologists who used to troll their 'psychological tests' on the sidewalks. The only chilling experience I've ever had with a Krishna was with a beautiful young woman at LAX. Other than that they used to have some fine restaurants - but the servers seemed like indentured servants to me. Strange when you look at them & think 'that's probably somebody's Bobby from suburbia'. I knew some folks from Majaraji Ji's group, The Shiva Orchestra. They were a fine group of educated international musicians - blissfully happy ones at that. To bring back a timeworn phrase, I didn't "Get It".

I'm afraid I'm not that much of a pack animal, & have a somewhat jaundiced view toward organized religion in general, though I am fascinated by belief systems & man's efforts to explain the unexplainable.

Doc has spent time in LA, maybe he was exposed to the some of the same groups or predatory experiences. You had to know yourself well at the time & have a ceratin amount of luck to not hit pitfalls, some of them potentially serious.

Many of my ancestors helped to establish churches in their hometowns, though the diversity of denominations that I descend from astonishes me from this standpoint. The separation of church & state is very dear, and shouldn't be cast off lightly. I am very uncomfortable with the idea of tax dollars going into the coffers of religious outfits - even if it is to supposedly dish off some of the welfare burden to the private sector. It definitely goes against the grain. {On a fiesty day, you might even get me going on the tax-exempt status aspect}.

Sorry I've slipped off track - I knew that you someitmes read the Chron, & wanted to bring these to your attention.

-- flora (***@__._), February 13, 2001.

LOL!! Talk about brain washing! Sheesh.

All of this talk about cults is just so much horseshit. Here's a cult for you...A charismatic leader surrounded by adoring worshipers, worshipers who have pooled their worldly goods and in many cases have turned their backs on their families to follow that charismatic leader, who was known as Jesus.

One man's cult is another man's religion, and all this blather about adults being brainwashed and following a "cult" (aka unpopular religion) is just plain old un-American horseshit.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), February 13, 2001.

A question for the aficianodo of horseshit semantics:

Does that include the nike shod "Heavens Gate" group? How about Jim Jones' "Peoples Temple"?

Sorry, dude - when we are talking about government support, I can draw a line without a problem. {Oddly enough, gov support checks for individuals is was what bankrolled the Peoples Temple}.

I think we're talking past each other here.

-- flora (***@__._), February 13, 2001.

It certainly does include them. Either you have dominion over your own body or you do not. Either you are free to join any group, no matter how wacky, or you are not. Either you are free to associate with whomever you desire, or you are not. Either you have freedom of religion, or you do not.

And speaking of odd, isn't it odd that the Jonestown tragedy resulted because well meaning people hounded those "cultists" even after they had left this country so that they could live as they wished?

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), February 13, 2001.

How do you know they didn't move because of the cost of living?

I'm all for freedom of religion, sorry for not expressing that more clearly. I am also for freedom of speech and thought, and the separation of church & state.

-- flora (***@__._), February 13, 2001.

I am forming a cult. Here's the deal. I get to screw all the women. Everyone calls me Uberlars. I decide who does what work. I keep all wealth.

In return, I personally deliver you to Heaven's Gate pure of soul and ready to meet God.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 13, 2001.

Doc--

Watch out who you're calling a doorstop. We are powerfull. We are everywhere.

I am not bothered by the Moonies for the same reasons I am not bothered by the NWO, the Free Masons, the Bilderbergers, the tri-lateralists, etc. This may be a cozy rut but it's my cozy rut.

BTW, what does "eat me" mean?

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 13, 2001.

Lars:

What does "eat me" mean. Eat Me

It appears that Doc is, knowingly or unknowlingly, pushing the latest PETA line. *<)))

Cheers,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), February 13, 2001.

Thanks Z. A Holstein heifer, right?

I don't think Doc is mellow enough to be a vegetarian. He sounds more like a raw-meat person to me.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 13, 2001.

Patricia--

I got 65200 hits on Google for "Unification Church". I looked at some of this one and nothing alarmed me.

Granted, I didn't check the other 65199 links and I barely checked this one. But I was looking for documentation of a significant conspiratorial threat and nothing jumped right out at me. What I did find was how kooky his beliefs and practices are. And yes, I believe that cults, maybe especially this one, have destroyed lives and families.

Moon is 80. How dependent is the UC on this aging charisma? What do you think will happen when he dies? How many people are in the church? I saw one statement that "there are more than a half million worldwide". That is pretty meager seems to me.

I will examine more but I can't dig in like you guys. Like I said before, I don't think it's a high-priority issue. Anyway, I'm starting my own cult. Want to buy some flowers?

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 14, 2001.

I believe that cults, maybe especially this one, have destroyed lives and families.

Kind of like Christianity, Judaism, and Islam?

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), February 14, 2001.

Unc--

Their is a difference between a cult and a religion. That is why there are two words. The distinction does blur at times. Another thread?

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), February 14, 2001.

Today's juicy installments - {I think I may escape Deedah's wrath today by calling this outfit a sect}:

"Escaping a Free Love Legacy Children of God sect hopes it can overcome sexy image"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? file=/chronicle/archive/2001/02/14/MN64543.DTL\

~

"Daughter of Family's Founder Renounces His Teachings"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? file=/chronicle/archive/2001/02/14/MN196276.DTL

-- flora (***@__._), February 14, 2001.