''Sociologists have found that the number of "vociferous critics" is always very small and that most people that move on had either a good experience or at worst, indifferent. Hence, proportional saying should include those that moved on without having a negative experience.''
MY COMMENT: Sociologists, like Eileen Barker, have also found that the vast majority of the people involved in cults are only peripheral , short term or superficial members. The concern about possible harm does generally include them. Naturally these superficial or short term members do not care much about the matter and will not bother to criticize their former group but of course their testimony can be included but should be weighed according to the depth and length of involvement. ''You may tale responsibility for your actions, but the people in this Forum don't. I may understand why you may have had problems in "moving on" from that Sai Baba, but there is nothing that is stopping these people from doing so, besides an obsessive trait that they have developed, each for his/her own reasons. Most people that want to stop practicing K, do so.''
MY COMMENT: If you have been very deeply and very sincerely involved then simply move on as if nothing has happened is almost impossible. I disagree with your assesment of the members of this forum. For example, Mike Finch does not put all the blame on Maharaji and his cult but takes responsibility for his actions.
''How "reliable" can be the testimony of a wife in a divorce proceeding? Reliable may be wrong word, "tainted" would be better.''
MY COMMENT: True, the ex-member needs some time to think about his experience but after this time there is no reason to assume that her testimony is unreliable or even tainted.
Andries
