International Cultic Studies Association
 Department: Group Report - Hare Krishna

Vol. 1, No. 1, 2001

Hare Krishna: news articles 1991

ISKCON in the News Articles from the Cult Observer 1984-1999 

1991

Vol. 8, No. 1  

Why Have We Betrayed Robin? (p. 5)

By Ronald Enroth, Ph.D.

In 1974, at the age of 14, Robin George was recruited by the International Society of Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON). During the next two years, leaders of the organization kept her whereabouts concealed from her parents, while denying her adequate food, medical treatment, and sleep. 

Soon after her ordeal was over, Robin's father died of a heart attack, which was doubtless related to the stress of trying to locate and free his daughter. Robin and her mother brought suit against the Krishna organization in 1977, alleging false imprisonment, brainwashing, emotional distress, and the wrongful death of Robin's father. After delays, the landmark case went to trial in 1983, ending in a multimillion-dollar award for punitive damages. 

ISKCON has appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, which as of this writing has yet to decide whether to hear the case. Several Christian organizations, such as the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), the National Council of Churches (NCC), and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, have filed a brief with the Supreme Court claiming that the punitive damages awarded in the case are "clearly destructive of free exercise of religion." 

As a sociologist of religion who has spent nearly two decades researching and writing about cults and new religions, I have followed this case from its inception, kept track of Robin George, and continue to be concerned. Five years after leaving the Krishnas, Robin became a Christian, and she and her husband are active in an evangelical church. They feel betrayed by the action of these Christian groups. 

While l strongly support the concern for religious freedom expressed in the brief, I believe that these groups' filing of an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief was misguided. While they stressed that their brief should not be viewed as support for the doctrines and practices of the Hare Krishnas, their action is at best confusing. At worst, it compromises our witness. I believe they have given indirect aid and comfort to enemies of the gospel. Controversial new religions will interpret such legal moves as support for their attempts to gain legitimacy. 

This was the case a few years ago when church groups filed a similar brief in connection with the Reverend Sun Myung Moon and his Unification Church. Moon's followers used the issue of religious freedom (in a case involving tax charges) to marshal sympathy from the mainstream religious community. They prominently quoted Jerry Falwell, Tim LaHaye, and other religious leaders in their publication to convey the impression that Christians were on their side.

In the ISKCON case, the Christian groups behind the brief argue that religious freedom may not survive "the crushing blow of punitive damages," and that any confiscation of Krishna assets would be "truly destructive" of the Hare Krishna religion. But what about the destructive impact on Robin George from her cultic experience and the premature loss of her father? Can any dollar amount compensate for such tragedy? And is the threat to religious liberty as grave as some evangelicals would have us believe? I am convinced that the awarding of punitive damages is not so much an attack on religious freedom as it is a reasonable response to illegal and unethical practices that are common to certain "cults," but not at all characteristic of the mainstream denominations that belong to the NAE and the NCC. 

Instead of expending effort and concern over the imposition of punitive damages in cases involving extremist religious groups, these organizations would better serve their constituencies by informing and warning people about the potential for spiritual, psychological, and even physical harm found in such groups. 

Ronald Enroth is a professor of sociology at Westmont College, Santa Barbara, CA. [Professor Enroth is also a member of the Editorial Board of the Cultic Studies Journal, which is published by the American Family Foundation, publisher of the Cult Observer.]  

International Cultic Studies Association
 Department: Group Report - Hare Krishna

Vol. 1, No. 1, 2001

Hare Krishna: news articles 1991

ISKCON in the News Articles from the Cult Observer 1984-1999 

1991

Vol. 8, No. 1  

Why Have We Betrayed Robin? (p. 5)

By Ronald Enroth, Ph.D.

In 1974, at the age of 14, Robin George was recruited by the International Society of Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON). During the next two years, leaders of the organization kept her whereabouts concealed from her parents, while denying her adequate food, medical treatment, and sleep. 

Soon after her ordeal was over, Robin's father died of a heart attack, which was doubtless related to the stress of trying to locate and free his daughter. Robin and her mother brought suit against the Krishna organization in 1977, alleging false imprisonment, brainwashing, emotional distress, and the wrongful death of Robin's father. After delays, the landmark case went to trial in 1983, ending in a multimillion-dollar award for punitive damages. 

ISKCON has appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, which as of this writing has yet to decide whether to hear the case. Several Christian organizations, such as the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), the National Council of Churches (NCC), and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, have filed a brief with the Supreme Court claiming that the punitive damages awarded in the case are "clearly destructive of free exercise of religion." 

As a sociologist of religion who has spent nearly two decades researching and writing about cults and new religions, I have followed this case from its inception, kept track of Robin George, and continue to be concerned. Five years after leaving the Krishnas, Robin became a Christian, and she and her husband are active in an evangelical church. They feel betrayed by the action of these Christian groups. 

While l strongly support the concern for religious freedom expressed in the brief, I believe that these groups' filing of an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief was misguided. While they stressed that their brief should not be viewed as support for the doctrines and practices of the Hare Krishnas, their action is at best confusing. At worst, it compromises our witness. I believe they have given indirect aid and comfort to enemies of the gospel. Controversial new religions will interpret such legal moves as support for their attempts to gain legitimacy. 

This was the case a few years ago when church groups filed a similar brief in connection with the Reverend Sun Myung Moon and his Unification Church. Moon's followers used the issue of religious freedom (in a case involving tax charges) to marshal sympathy from the mainstream religious community. They prominently quoted Jerry Falwell, Tim LaHaye, and other religious leaders in their publication to convey the impression that Christians were on their side.

In the ISKCON case, the Christian groups behind the brief argue that religious freedom may not survive "the crushing blow of punitive damages," and that any confiscation of Krishna assets would be "truly destructive" of the Hare Krishna religion. But what about the destructive impact on Robin George from her cultic experience and the premature loss of her father? Can any dollar amount compensate for such tragedy? And is the threat to religious liberty as grave as some evangelicals would have us believe? I am convinced that the awarding of punitive damages is not so much an attack on religious freedom as it is a reasonable response to illegal and unethical practices that are common to certain "cults," but not at all characteristic of the mainstream denominations that belong to the NAE and the NCC. 

Instead of expending effort and concern over the imposition of punitive damages in cases involving extremist religious groups, these organizations would better serve their constituencies by informing and warning people about the potential for spiritual, psychological, and even physical harm found in such groups. 

Ronald Enroth is a professor of sociology at Westmont College, Santa Barbara, CA. [Professor Enroth is also a member of the Editorial Board of the Cultic Studies Journal, which is published by the American Family Foundation, publisher of the Cult Observer.]  

International Cultic Studies Association
 Department: Group Report - Hare Krishna

Vol. 1, No. 1, 2001

Hare Krishna: news articles 1991

ISKCON in the News Articles from the Cult Observer 1984-1999 

1991

Vol. 8, No. 1  

Why Have We Betrayed Robin? (p. 5)

By Ronald Enroth, Ph.D.

In 1974, at the age of 14, Robin George was recruited by the International Society of Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON). During the next two years, leaders of the organization kept her whereabouts concealed from her parents, while denying her adequate food, medical treatment, and sleep. 

Soon after her ordeal was over, Robin's father died of a heart attack, which was doubtless related to the stress of trying to locate and free his daughter. Robin and her mother brought suit against the Krishna organization in 1977, alleging false imprisonment, brainwashing, emotional distress, and the wrongful death of Robin's father. After delays, the landmark case went to trial in 1983, ending in a multimillion-dollar award for punitive damages. 

ISKCON has appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, which as of this writing has yet to decide whether to hear the case. Several Christian organizations, such as the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), the National Council of Churches (NCC), and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, have filed a brief with the Supreme Court claiming that the punitive damages awarded in the case are "clearly destructive of free exercise of religion." 

As a sociologist of religion who has spent nearly two decades researching and writing about cults and new religions, I have followed this case from its inception, kept track of Robin George, and continue to be concerned. Five years after leaving the Krishnas, Robin became a Christian, and she and her husband are active in an evangelical church. They feel betrayed by the action of these Christian groups. 

While l strongly support the concern for religious freedom expressed in the brief, I believe that these groups' filing of an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief was misguided. While they stressed that their brief should not be viewed as support for the doctrines and practices of the Hare Krishnas, their action is at best confusing. At worst, it compromises our witness. I believe they have given indirect aid and comfort to enemies of the gospel. Controversial new religions will interpret such legal moves as support for their attempts to gain legitimacy. 

This was the case a few years ago when church groups filed a similar brief in connection with the Reverend Sun Myung Moon and his Unification Church. Moon's followers used the issue of religious freedom (in a case involving tax charges) to marshal sympathy from the mainstream religious community. They prominently quoted Jerry Falwell, Tim LaHaye, and other religious leaders in their publication to convey the impression that Christians were on their side.

In the ISKCON case, the Christian groups behind the brief argue that religious freedom may not survive "the crushing blow of punitive damages," and that any confiscation of Krishna assets would be "truly destructive" of the Hare Krishna religion. But what about the destructive impact on Robin George from her cultic experience and the premature loss of her father? Can any dollar amount compensate for such tragedy? And is the threat to religious liberty as grave as some evangelicals would have us believe? I am convinced that the awarding of punitive damages is not so much an attack on religious freedom as it is a reasonable response to illegal and unethical practices that are common to certain "cults," but not at all characteristic of the mainstream denominations that belong to the NAE and the NCC. 

Instead of expending effort and concern over the imposition of punitive damages in cases involving extremist religious groups, these organizations would better serve their constituencies by informing and warning people about the potential for spiritual, psychological, and even physical harm found in such groups. 

Ronald Enroth is a professor of sociology at Westmont College, Santa Barbara, CA. [Professor Enroth is also a member of the Editorial Board of the Cultic Studies Journal, which is published by the American Family Foundation, publisher of the Cult Observer.]