Gavin and Yvonne Frost - Criminals or Liars?
April 7, 2008 – 2:11 pmCriminals or Liars?I think Gavin and Yvonne Frost are either criminals or liars. Please show me where I am wrong with my logic. Frost supporters are more than welcome to reply.
In the forward to chapter IV of the 2000 edition of The Good Witch’s Bible, the Frosts state:
“This chapter describes some of the more controversial practices of the old path taught in the earliest days of the Church and School of Wicca.”
The chapter was written by Gavin and Yvonne Frost, the founders of the Church and School of Wicca. We can thus conclude it was their teachings.
That chapter describes Fathers using home made dildos to get their daughters ready for sexual initiation into Wicca at what is described loosely as the onset of puberty. Of course this does not mean that Gavin Frost actually used one of those home made dildos on his own daughter. Nor does it mean he arranged for his daughter to have sex with another man as part of her initiation. He and his wife Yvonne could have written that instructional for a number of other reasons and their supporters are fond of saying there is no evidence they practiced their own teachings. For all we know, it could have been some sort of a sick joke.
http://ajdrew.blogs.pagannation.com/defrost-please-read/
Now we know from the recent arrest, trial, and conviction of Warren Jeffs, leader of FLDS, that it is criminal to arrange for sexual activity involving a minor.http://ajdrew.blogs.pagannation.com/2008/04/04/pedophilic-sex-cult-busted-in-texas/
We know that the Frosts had children who reached puberty after the book was written and before the disclaimer about legal concerns added in the 2000 edition. Finally, we know that in the 2000 edition the Frosts were very clear in stating that they have practiced what they taught.So, is there a way to see them as neither criminals nor liars? Is there any way that saying (in print no less) that they practiced the teachings of that book could be true if they did not do to their children what the book says should be done?
If their children say they were not initiated as described in that book, would that not make the Frosts liars? If their children say they were initiated as described in that book, would that not make the Frosts criminals?
Seriously, is there any other way to see this?
8 Responses to “Gavin and Yvonne Frost - Criminals or Liars?”
Show me EXACT text that says they PRACTICED what they taught.. Page number and chapter included. Ive read the Book. I never saw that..
SO NOW.. you LIE some more AJ..
This chapter describes some of the more controversial practices of the old path taught in the earliest days of the Church and School of Wicca.”…notice it says Practices of the old path Taught.. operant word being..TAUGHT.. it doesnt say..PRACTICES WE PARTICPATED IN..
Like i say.. your argument is weak AJ
By Shadowhawk on Apr 7, 2008
Now I think I understand your stance. You do not have a problem with the Frosts teaching what is in that book as long as they do not practice it. Yes? I mean we can not argue that the material is in the book and we can not argue that it is an instructional, right?
So if they said they practiced what they taught, well that would be different? I open the book and turn a few pages to find just the first reference (there are so many more elsewhere):
2000 Edition Forward page ii
“Gradually, though, some members of the Wiccan community have realized that we are in fact genuine Witches and that we live what we teach and believe”
I think that means they are criminals or liars. Either they did initiate their daughter that way or they did not. Either they did arrange for these initiations or they did not. If they did not, well then it does seem like they lied when they said that they “live what we teach and believe”.
But even without the confession, they state firmly that they are Wiccan and define the book as Wiccan. Not that I think Wicca means you like Pepsi Cola, but if -I- define the word Wiccan in print as one who likes Pepsi Cola and then -I- define myself as Wiccan, well if I do not like Pepsi Cola then I must have lied about either Wiccans liking Pepsi Cola or about being Wiccan.
By A.J. Drew on Apr 7, 2008
AJ
Don’t you love it when ideas come from posts????
As I said
[Anyone with any kind of morals will agree that harming children is evil.
Of course there will be those who will say “prove it was done”.
I believe if it wasn’t done and if that is not how Wicca was practiced then it should never have been written. It should never have been placed in a book for millions to read and still do today.
Yes we can say all we want about how people should know not to do that but there are always those who either don’t know that is not what one does in the Goddess’s religion or don’t care.
So I say that if that is not how the Frosts practiced then they lied in their book. If that is how they practiced it was and is wrong. If that is how they believed but don’t now they should say so.
Why put something like that in a book unless it is how you believe or it is just to sell the book and make money.
Any way you look at it, it is still wrong no matter the reason.]
It is also obvious that “some” have not read the book completely.
I wonder what would be said about the emails I recieved about the Frosts and some of their earlier doings?
By Rhiannon on Apr 8, 2008
Rhiannon - If it was not done, if children were not initiated via the wooden dildo / sex method described in Gavin and Yvonne Frost’s Witch’s Bible and later The Good Witches Bible, then I gotta figure Gavin and Yvonne Frost are liars and the Church and School of Wicca has perpetuated a huge fraud.
Here is the thing, the Frosts continue to ramble about how wrong society is with its sexual ethics and morals. I too find issue with many of the things greater society thinks is moral and ethical as well as what is not. As an example, many people do not think homosexuality is moral. I think there is far too little love in this world to say there is something wrong with any expression of love between consenting adults.
When it comes to their own children, I am sure the statute of limitations have run out. If the Frosts want to be taken seriously, not be thought of as frauds and liars, they should state publicly what they have participated in. Sure, people like me will be further sickened but that is not the point.
They go on and on and on about how horrible today’s sexual ethics are, but will they take a stand with their own even now that the statute of limitations has run its course? Nope, they will not. Instead they continue to hide behind the “no comment” shield like so many politicians.
Gavin Frost, did you lie and create a fraudulent instructional or did you participate / practice what you taught?
By A.J. Drew on Apr 8, 2008
They are, in my opinion, Sensationalists. Meaning that what ever they could or can do to create dramatic sensation for the purposes of self promotion, they will do. I have a suspicion that it may be profit driven.
This does, from a certain perspective, make them liars.
The continued inclusion of those chapters, the claim of following everything they teach, and so on are all examples (imo) of self promotion, and sensationalism.
By Corban Macpherson on Apr 8, 2008
Corban Macpherson – Interesting observation and I think it may have been so in the 1970s. But today they seem to want people not to know what the book contains. They have gone to the point of sending a lawyer after me who seemed to think that using quotes from the book to provide critical commentary was somehow in violation of copyright laws. He demanded I take down the passages or face possible action in federal courts. I told him to bring it on & nothing has come of it. He won’t even talk to me when I called him.
So I can’t imagine they are looking for sensationalism today as they seem more interested in covering up what they wrote, instructed, and claimed to practice. Of course I could be wrong and they could be egging me on to drive up book sales, but I don’t much care if people put a few coins in their pocket to see if what I am saying is true and I suspect that is the main reason anyone buys the thing today.
By A.J. Drew on Apr 9, 2008
A rose by any other name is still a rose…..
If you know what I mean
By Rhiannon on Apr 10, 2008
Now that I think about it? I should’ve kept my mouth shut.
By That Blasted Child Of Fire on May 10, 2008