Sai Slurs, Part Two

Sai Slurs / Part One / Part Two / Part Three / Part Four / Part Five / Part Six / Part Seven / Part Eight /

Part Nine

 

Posted: Sunday September 21, 2003

Author: Barry Pittard

Email:
bpittard@beachaccess.com.au   

Note: Many of the Sai Slurs that appear in this series are culled from sentiments expressed by SSB devotees - written in a flood of Prema (spiritual love)?! - addressed to the author and are typical of other emails addressed to other former devotees active in the ExposÚ. In the case of this author, no devotee has ever received, nor will ever receive, other than a courteous reply in those cases where the writer is clearly a sincere person, and nasty emails get no response at all. My position is typical of former devotee activists, who refuse such paths as hatred and slander, the exceptions being two or three individuals whose activities the rest of us will have nothing to do with.

 

You’re a homosexual/suppressed homosexual yourself and you are bent on pointing at someone else instead of yourself.

 

Destiny has not decreed that experience for me. However, in my reading and observation most homosexuals, just as heterosexuals, deplore paedophilia, and care deeply for the safety of children. The question will always be: are Sathya Sai Baba and his accomplices answerable to the laws that govern the rest of us or not? Homophobia is not the prema or spiritual love of which they so much speak, but discriminatory hatred. They assume that homosexuals in general are dishonest and slanderous. Some, with profound ignorance, conflate homosexuality with pederasty. In fact, were homosexuals to accuse anyone of such paedophile abuse, they (of any group) would know all too well that they would necessarily attract, even worse, the voices of hatred and prejudice. Hence, we should all the more applaud anyone from any such persecuted minority group who speaks up.

 

 You are liars and slanderers

 

The world Sathya Sai Organisation lifts not a finger to curb the devotees who so constantly attack and slander former devotees who simply ask that this organisation respects conventional civil standards of openness, duty of care, cooperation with lawful investigation, and the need for complaints mechanisms. One thinks immediately of the aspersions cast by, and dishonest evasions of, top Sai Slurers such as Indulal Shah, M. Goldstein, Thorbj÷rn Meyer, S. Piculell, Ashok Bhagani, T. Ramanathan, Jegathesan, Leonardo Gutter, Al Drucker, … One thinks of how many accounts we have of young men or their supportive families or friends who have tried to raise with these or other top leaders their shocking accusations (many of which are now affidavited with national law enforcement authorities). Why would we go to such efforts if we could not stand as reputable citizens before the foremost civil authorities in our various countries?

 

These devotees think they can get away with a plethora of vicious and nasty Sai Slurs on many discussion boards on the Internet, epitomised by contributions of those such as Lisa de Witt, Annica, Bon Giovanni, Chris Parnell, Sathyastra, Achuthan Choi …, to name notorious cases ... The question will always be: are Sai Baba and his accomplices answerable to the laws that govern the rest of us or not?

 

Sai Slurrers attempt to take the focus away from the issue at hand and turn it against anyone who dares to raise concerns.  However, exposure of their in-denial psychology is vital - especially by experienced ex-participants who are successfully coming out of it - and is almost the only reliable means of understanding the how’s and why's of the willful blindness to facts, the self-imposed censorship, and the doctrinal confusions and delusions of persons in such a trance-state. In groups like Alcoholics Anonymous, it has long been found that frequently the most effective support comes from those who had formerly succumbed to alcoholism.

 

Almost invariably, Sathya Sai Baba's apologists commit the shabby logical fallacy of argumentum ad hominem - directing their attention to a person rather than carefully examining the arguments the person is presenting. This is demonstrated constantly on message boards and in emails sent to his critics, etc. In fact, although many persons from many countries and walks of life present the ExposÚ case, suddenly we are considered to be slanderers and liars – even though for years Sathya Sai devotees did not assail our character as they now do after we have disaffiliated ourselves from Sathya Sai Baba and all his works. They are blind to this massive inconsistency.