|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Jan 25, 2010 18:42:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Jan 25, 2010 19:36:21 GMT -5
Vyckie, I'm a little worried about the way this is worded: Though leaving any abusive situation is never as easy as “pick up and go,” those who want to depart a spiritually abusive situation must not only leave husband, father, or entire family, they must also leave God and community.There seems to be an implication that they "must" leave these things, making it sound as if THP would not encourage a husband-wife joint exodus, or a change of faith rather than a loss of faith, if those solutions were possible. Since I know THP would not rule out those solutions, I wonder if there is a clearer way to put this? I assume we want to continue to have the support of non-patriarchalist Christian groups, and we don't want to scare them off-- and they will be scared off if they think THP is actively "evangelizing" people away from Christianity altogether. Perhaps if it said something more like: "Though leaving any abusive situation is never as easy as “pick up and go,” those who want to depart a spiritually abusive situation often find themselves forced to not only leave husband, father, or entire family, but also their religious communities and God-- or the only idea of God they have ever known." Just a thought, FWIW.
|
|
|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Jan 25, 2010 19:51:42 GMT -5
Vyckie, I'm a little worried about the way this is worded: Though leaving any abusive situation is never as easy as “pick up and go,” those who want to depart a spiritually abusive situation must not only leave husband, father, or entire family, they must also leave God and community.There seems to be an implication that they "must" leave these things, making it sound as if THP would not encourage a husband-wife joint exodus, or a change of faith rather than a loss of faith, if those solutions were possible. Since I know THP would not rule out those solutions, I wonder if there is a clearer way to put this? I assume we want to continue to have the support of non-patriarchalist Christian groups, and we don't want to scare them off-- and they will be scared off if they think THP is actively "evangelizing" people away from Christianity altogether. Perhaps if it said something more like: "Though leaving any abusive situation is never as easy as “pick up and go,” those who want to depart a spiritually abusive situation often find themselves forced to not only leave husband, father, or entire family, but also their religious communities and God-- or the only idea of God they have ever known." Just a thought, FWIW. KR ~ I see what you mean ~ that sentence does need some work. We do not want to give the impression that we only support exiting QFers who are leaving their husbands or their God. :: working on rewrite ::
|
|
|
Post by cereselle on Jan 26, 2010 11:44:25 GMT -5
Good call, KR.
|
|
|
Post by kisekileia on Jan 26, 2010 12:34:47 GMT -5
It's certainly not necessary to leave God in order to leave QF, but it may be necessary to change one's conception of God.
|
|
|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Jan 26, 2010 13:25:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by cereselle on Jan 26, 2010 13:42:38 GMT -5
I'd say "Many will remain Christian" rather than "most."
|
|
|
Post by kisekileia on Jan 26, 2010 20:07:58 GMT -5
I like what you have now.
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Jan 26, 2010 20:37:11 GMT -5
Yes, that's very clear now, Vyckie. Thanks!
|
|