They're defending civil suits and criminal? They should be wise to just abandon their anti-saint policy. Defending that policy is just plain untenable in any court. -Buck
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba <no_reply@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Bottom line is that you are justifying the unjustifiable. > > > > Neither the TMO nor anyone else has the right to tell > > > > people what to believe and who they can visit as spiritual > > > > teachers. This policy is a technique used *by the fearful* > > > > to make others afraid and control them. *Especially* if > > > > Maharishi regularly made exceptions to his own ill- > > > > conceived rule when he was alive. > > > > > > > > The other bottom line is that if people about to take the > > > > TM-Sidhi course were told *in advance* that they would > > > > never again be allowed to see any other spiritual teacher > > > > and still participate in the group practice of the Sidhis, > > > > no one would sign up. They'd take one look at the policy, > > > > murmur "Cult" under their breath, and walk away. It takes > > > > a real, case-hardened cultist to either accept the policy, > > > > or justify it. > > > > > > I agree with Turq, especially on the last paragraph, I never > > > heard of anyone being banished when I got instructions for > > > meditations. That would constitute the, "cult," word. > > > > > > The practicing of the TM-Sidhi's is supposed to be innocent. > > > Also, one is supposed to go about their business as usual, > > > just incorporating the program into one's daily routine. > > > > > > Let's keep it that way and occupy the domes! Right, Buck? > > > > More proactively, it seems to me that this would be > > the basis for a successful class action lawsuit. > > > > *No one* was ever told before learning the TM-Sidhis > > (a *huge* component of which is being able to practice > > them in a group) that they would be banned from such > > groups if they saw other spiritual teachers. > > > > This "oversight," combined with a present-day policy > > that says and enforces just that, could probably be > > seen as constituting fraud on the part of the TMO. My > > bet is if anyone has the balls to file such a lawsuit, > > you could find any number of lawyers willing to take > > it on. Heck, ACLU lawyers would probably do it for > > free. > > > > And my bet is that if such a suit were filed, the > > "policy" would go away overnight. There is no way that > > the TMO could conceivably win such a suit, and they'd > > be terrified to allow it to reach court, and thus the > > eyes and ears of the press and potential big-name > > shills like Oprah and Ellen. > > > > "shills like Oprah and Ellen." LMAO > > > You are on to something very big here, Turq. > 501c3 status, foundations, corporations...this will work! > The only way they could get out of it, is if they domes were to house a > controlled group, for scientific purposes, only. > > I have not ever been denied a dome badge, so I do not think I could qualify > to bring such a "suit," and I do understand many who are banned, may have > only written a book about something Vedic, which is not trademarked > information by the TMO. > > Hmm..You book writers, there is an answer and Turq came up with a very great > suggestion. Get on it! >
