The thing is, between the Elan Vital FAQs and some of the extremist premies who post here, we get such a weird view of the current state of the Rawat world. I for one find it interesting simply to find out how the other followers of Rawat come to terms with everything these days.

I do want to say something about Elan Vital's use of the term "hate group" to describe ex-followers who speak out against Rawat, as you seem not to have a problem with this characterisation. Well I have a big problem with this. Not only because I am being unfairly labeled, but because it minimizes a very serious problem which this word is supposed to be used to describe.

I live in Berlin, Germany, where in certain outskirts of town young men walk around with baseball bats and steel-hardened boots which they use to smash the heads of foreigners, gay people and anybody else they don't like the looks of. That's a hate group. They don't know their victims, their victims don't know them and have never done anything to harm them ever. It is mindless brutality based on intolerance.

While there are some outspoken posters on this forum, I doubt any of them hate premies and most of them don't even hate Rawat as far as I can tell. Some have anger towards Rawat, but that is something different. They have anger towards Rawat because they feel that Rawat has taken advantage of them or in some other way wronged them. That is not intolerance. Their feelings, though you may not agree with their characterisation, are based on their own past experiences and not on blind prejudice. They are angry with Rawat for what he did, not for what he is.

So you see, I do have a BIG problem with your view on this.

My personal feeling about all this, and I think others here share this view, is that I firmly believe in the right of premies to practice their faith (or practice their practice as you would probably rather have me put it) and would not want to see that hampered.