FORCE VS. PERSUASION

We must live by universal values. There must be no exceptions in the Kingdom of Heaven. We should not force people in the transition or in the Ideal World to live by all those values, but we must teach them by our word and deed. We can't be contradictory. We can't say that men are subjects and then they are objects. We can't say that men must lead and then women must lead. We can't say men must protect women and then announce that our goal is to have the chief protector -- the Commander-in-Chief -- the President of the United States, be a woman.

The only who men who iron shirts should own dry laundry shops. The only person in a family who irons shirts should be the woman. We are to never switch the two. And we are not to have couples ironing shirts together at their laundry business and then go home and iron their family's clothes together. There is a strict division of labor in God's divine order for true love. Father felt he had to keep Mother at his side so all the members could feel the love of True Parents toward them, but it was a tactical mistake. Kids in day care, like his children, don't do very well. Day care is of Satan. Home care and home schooling is of God. Women should help each other teach each others children. Public schools are a main goal of Marx and Engels in their evil book, The Communist Manifesto. We do not need to get prayer in public schools; we need to abolish state run schools. Women's responsibility is to teach their children -- not give that responsibility to others. Fathers should also take some time to teach. Men need to be be spiritual leaders in their homes.

We need to live by absolute values -- by the spiritual laws of the universe. Our duty is to fight the good fight. Sadly, feminism is a cancer in the UC. Church literature is filled with feminist pollution.

BOLD -- COURAGE -- GUTS

Feminism must be cut out of the UC as ruthlessly as a surgeon cuts out cancer. Father often talks about how we are to have guts and not be wimps. It takes guts to stand up to "disorderly" sisters like Marilyn Morris and her "weak" husband, John who write against godly patriarchy in the UNews. The following links take you a critique of their feminist writings http://dpcopy1.tripod.com/1_community/community7b5.html and http://dpcopy1.tripod.com/1_community/community7c.html.) I pray that those who decide what appears in UC literature will have the courage to ask those such as the Morris's to recant their diabolical statements and begin printing articles and books that champion biblical family values. Feminists in the UC like the Morris' mean well in their put down of biblical family values, but we must also understand that words can hurt and evil teachings must be confronted. We should always strive to be diplomatic, tactful and dignified. We must always do our best to be patient, kind and loving toward our enemies as First Corinthians 13 says, but there is a flip side to the coin in that we must also be firm and tough when need be. It is difficult to walk the line of being both tough and tender. It is difficult to lead. As parents we have to be both disciplinarians and patient. We are not to be wimps or martinets. I am trying to walk that difficult line in my writings where I am critical on the one hand and give hope and respect on the other. I appreciate any criticism I receive. It helps me write better. If you do decide to write me with a criticism in form or content, I would appreciate it if you could be precise and direct me to specific lines I write and give me your idea of how to better express that point.

CARTER VS. REAGAN

Father had contempt for Carter and had the Times endorse Reagan because Carter was weak against communists. Feminism is the cornerstone of communism. The UC has been blind sighted. Communists and therefore, feminists, are not moved by weakness. They are emboldened by it. Those who want to fight the feminists who now rule the UC should understand that they must stand like rocks. They must be as lighthouses and not be intimidated by their opponents, no matter what their position or how close they sit to Father. They may be battleships and look powerful, but what are they next to a lighthouse? I chose the lighthouse as the image for my Web site because I am taking on the role of being feminist's worst nightmare -- in and and out of the UC. In doing so I have had the painful experience of being called a "dominator," "kook," etc. I hope you will join me in the greatest crusade in human history -- the crusade to eradicate the worst ideology that Satan has inflicted on this world. These are the Last Days so we live in total chaos. Father says he comes as a doctor. Doctors give the bad news of sickness and the cure is often unpleasant. It is very unpleasant to argue with arrogant sisters and wimpy brothers. One brother told me I have been brainwashed by the Christian Right. I have been called many names. This fight is brutal, and we can't focus on people's motivation. We have to expose falsehood with the light. We have to be "bold" and "of good courage." We have to give up the notion that everyone will love us. We have to be controversial and confrontational. We have to have tongues of fire. (I know. I know. First Corinthians 13 also).

Rev. Moon and his leaders have made fundamental errors by embracing the deadly ideology of feminism and not teaching that we should live in communities that honor traditional biblical family values. When members reject false teachings the movement will sweep the earth.

The well meaning efforts of the tiny few believers now are only an insane constant hitting of their heads against a wall. They have built a road to hell paved with good intentions. Unificationists need to drastically change their lifestyle and stop doing the same things they have done for so many years. Anything less is like rearranging furniture on the deck of the sinking Titanic.

OPTIMISTIC - HOPE

Do I have hope the Unification Movement? Yes. I am optimistic because Unificationists are with Father. In time they will embrace the whole truth. Let me give one example that I feel shows they are on the right track and will eventually give up their detours to feminism. In the May 1988 issue of the Unification News, Nancy Hanna wrote a powerful article praising Helen Andelin. There have been several articles praising the Andelin's in the UNews in the last few years. The movement's bookstore sells her book. They do not sell Friedan's. So, even though Friedan's book is praised sometimes in Internet chat rooms, Mrs. Andelin's book is far more popular.

In her article Nancy says that she is a missionary in Panama and leads a Fascinating Womanhood class. She writes:

UC GIVES MIXED MESSAGES

Twenty years earlier in a review of the book, she wrote that Helen was too extreme about women not working. The UM, including Father, give the mixed message of absolute traditional values and also that women need to be leaders in the marketplace. There is no mention of feminism in Nancy's latest article. Even if she teaches that it is all right for women to work outside the home, her corruption of Mrs. Andelin's core teaching will be seen as illogical and women are going to reject it because Helen's book is more powerful than any deviation Nancy comes up with. Nancy mentions Helen's site. Nancy probably pollutes her class with the "advanced" idea that some women, like Margaret Thatcher and Josette Shiner, have special talents and God uses some, if not many, women to lead men. I have hope for the UM because it embraces the biblical teachings of the Andelin's so enthusiastically. Eventually Nancy and the rest of the movement will give up the nonsense that women are to be on the Senate Armed Services committee like Patricia Schroeder and join Phyllis Schlafly in rescinding the law that now says women can be combat fighter pilots. Eventually Phyllis too will understand that she should not try to run for congress. Ultimately the UM and all mankind will accept the absolute values for men and women roles in the Andelin books because, as Helen writes in her web site, these values are of God.

CAUSE AND EFFECT

I feel that the root cause for the problem the UC has in witnessing and growing is that it has the cancer of feminism. The solution to this problem is to do surgery and cut it out. When people violate spiritual laws they pay a terrible price just as when they violate physical laws. For example, because Americans violate the law of health by consuming high fat food, there is an epidemic of obesity and heart disease. If we see a fat person we can assume he is eating a high fat diet. If we see a person with lung cancer, we can assume she is a smoker. But it is never exact when we judge. Some nonsmokers get lung cancer. We have to look to trends rather than focus on anecdotal or specific people when we judge. Nevertheless, we can't help but wonder when we see individual problems and feel we know the cause. I feel the Moon family is so dysfunctional mainly because of feminism. Mother was taken out of the home and Father did not spend enough time with his kids. But I do not feel confident in knowing why some of their children died. It is difficult to see cause and effect for specific events, but it is easy to see cause and effect for lifestyles.

I can't help but judge conservatives like Phyllis Schlafly and Lynne Cheney for having a child become gay because these two women spent so much time away from their home. I applaud their passion for conservative causes, but they paid a high price for leaving the home. Generally, those families that live by God's values as taught by the Andelin's have happier families than those that do not. I am reluctant to judge too many particular cases, though. If I die in a car accident or whatever, I don't think anyone would know the spiritual causes anymore than I would know if an opponent of mine were in an accident. What we can do is study those who live by feminist values and those who live by traditional values and see if we see a pattern. I see one when I look around me. And even though it is not scientific, my wife and I can testify that we have been far happier because we stopped listening to the published advice of feminists in the UC such as Nancy Hanna, Cheryl Wetzstein, Marilyn Morris, and others and embraced biblical family values. I pray that you will too.

By standing up to the writings of feminists in the UC I have been accused by some of being "antagonistic," "hateful," and "angry." When they write against me they are not accused of being the same. They are seen as the epitome of reason. I wish I didn't have to take on this role of critic, but I cannot let their evil statements go unchallenged. I love the sinner and hate the sin. I love these sister's motivation, but their teachings are of the devil. That does mean they are the devil and I hate them. I pity them and feel sorry for all those who have been brainwashed by their political correctness -- including my family that suffered because we followed their teachings and almost lost our family doing so. I do not "condemn" these sisters as much as I condemn their ideas. They are dedicated, loyal and loving sisters just as all feminists -- male and female -- are in the UC. But I will not stand by as they trash biblical family values as saying that patriarchy and capitalism are heartless. Their ignorance of what I am trying to say must be confronted. Their accusations that godly patriarchy is old stuff and all things are new, that I am saying women are less than men, and all I want is for women to be hermits isolated from anyone and used and abused as a sex slave for men who only want to procreate for power and never honor and value women's talents, will be critiqued by me. And hopefully others will join with me and stand up to their false accusations also. I am not trying to re-create some idyllic past; I am trying to show that there are some truths that we have forgotten in our sick society in our spiritually sick and pathetically small church.

RELIGION IS EMOTIONAL

Religion and politics are very emotional topics. Some members become very emotional and threatened by what I write. Recently the the Pope publicly criticized homosexuality. A news article said it this way, "Pope John Paul today slammed a gay rights march in Rome as an 'offense to Christian values,' prompting outrage from gay groups for his condemnation of homosexual acts as being 'against natural law.'” Words like "natural law" and "outrage" are about as emotional as you can get. There are strong words used by the writer of this article who sees the debate as warlike. The Pope, he says, "slammed" and the gays felt "outrage." The article goes on to say, "The Pope’s unexpected and forceful remarks drew a stinging response from Italian gay rights activists who accused the Vatican of fueling homophobia." Now we have the words "forceful," "stinging," and "fueling homophobia."

Then we read, "Rightist politicians, many of whom had tried to stop or postpone Saturday’s 70,000-strong World Gay Pride march, applauded the Pope and hit out at members of the center-left government who had joined the parade. One of them described the march as 'a depressing spectacle.'” Note the words "right", "left", "hit" and "depressing." The article goes on to say that the Pope calls homosexuality "disordered" and he feels "sadness" for these sinners. He says the Catholic Church “could not keep quiet about the truth” and had a duty to “distinguish between good and evil.” Homosexuals should be treated with compassion and respect and should not be subjected to “unjust discrimination.”

A gay rights activist was quoted as saying, “The Pope is mistaken when he says homosexuality is unnatural. Who decides what is natural and what is not?,” he asked.

The Church says that Scripture calls homosexual acts “acts of grave depravity.”

I had a debate with a brother in an Internet forum and it went something like the above. I was told that most of the members on the forum were against me and therefore I should realize from this that I was wrong. What is the logic of saying that just because a small group of Unificationists are the majority means that they are automatically right? This is a weak argument. We judge what is right and wrong from what makes sense, not from how many believe something.

NATURAL LAW

This brother felt my stance was like how the Pope in the article was portrayed. I was seen as slamming, as being outraged, as being forceful. This brother felt he was giving a "stinging response" to my fueling femophobia. I was hitting out at the disorder of the sadness of the depressing situation of Unificationists who were violating natural laws for marriage. I could not keep quiet about the "truth” and had a duty to “distinguish between good and evil.” To this the brother told me in so many words "Who decides what is natural and what is not?" He didn't feel I should have the chutzpah to feel so confident about deciding what is depravity and my tone was one of know-it-all arrogance. Headwing, he said, was a middle way between right and left and there were many ways husbands and wives can order themselves.

EXTREME

He told me, or as the news writer above would write if he witnessed our debate would say, "hit" me by saying I was "extreme" in my views. Instead of "criticized" me or "challenged" me, he chastised me severely for inventing a philosophy of my own that I say are Father's and therefore should be church law. My confidence was seen by him and the majority as offensive and arrogant by those who feel my views are against Unificationism.

Aubrey Andelin told me on the phone that some criticized him just like this brother was critical of me as trying to impose his own views on people. Mr. Andelin said he was merely saying what God's view was in the Bible. This reminds me of the quip that the Bible says there are Ten Commandments -- not Ten Suggestions.

LIMITING

This brother said I was against equal pay for equal work. This is one of the sneaky ways feminism gets its hook in. I go into this in another place in my writings (or should I say I rip into this concept with the ferociousness of a hyena attacking a wounded gazelle) and show that this is an intellectually bankrupt idea. My fellow Unificationist brother says we are not united because he believes in equal career opportunities for those who are qualified and I am not. He is correct if that means the government forces people to do as they define what it means. If that means affirmative action, then I'm against it. He says any job is fine for a woman and I am wrong in limiting women expressing femininity. He worries that I want to make my views the secular law as well as the spiritual law. He is wrong to worry. I am a libertarian and against government regulation. This brother said I was a disturbed person because I was in a minority and would not see the light of the majority. To my stance that I have a clear game plan, he called it harsh and reactionary.

SOAPBOX

One sister got so angry at me challenging (or should I say brutally denouncing) her view that it was fine for women to be police officers she swore at me saying, "I don't give a [F-word] what you think. Get off your soapbox."

We cannot compromise and find some middle way to harmonize the Left and Right on the issue of homosexuality and I don't believe that we can compromise on biblical family values. This is not John Godwin's philosophy, it is God's. Yes, we are to be peacemakers but we make peace by elevating people up to God's standard, not compromising our beliefs to find some gray middle that no one is happy with. There are many issues that are black and white issues, good and evil, right and wrong. The UC should wake up and see they have gone into Canaan and are now worshipping the feminist idol of "equality."

Marilyn Morris writes in the UNews that there are no roles for men and women. This is the core reason why the UC cannot get members and keep the ones they do get. If we don't know that men and women are fundamentally different, then how can God bless us with growth in membership? How can we restore the fall if we deny that men should dominate women? It is as much against natural law that women lead men as that women marry women. You can call me names and accuse me of being arrogant, but that isn't going to stop me from pointing out right from wrong.

Christians can call Father arrogant to think he is the Messiah and get upset at him saying that Jesus did not walk on water because he was man born out of an adulterous affair between his mother and Zachariah, but that doesn't mean a thing. Hearing Unificationists tell me that there are no God given roles for men and women is about as intimidating as saying I should join the flat earth society. I always try to argue with logic and I try to denounce sin and not the sinner, but no matter how hard a pioneer tries to say things with tact, it is seen at the minimum to be upsetting and to some dangerous. I am on a crusade to get women to stop competing with men in the marketplace and start being "domestic goddesses" as Helen Andelin writes. I am saddened that Cheryl Wetzstein writes like Roseanne in the UNews and that Tyler and leaders will not rebut her satanic views. Overall I am excited, not sad, because the truth is out there and it will eventually overtake the Cheryl Wetzsteins someday. I feel a sense of urgency because Father has taught me to be a fanatic to save this world. I pray this book will save the UC and then a UC united on absolute values can be the greatest force for good in history and end the scourge of divorce and unhappy marriages.

---