Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00051)

In response to messages about the wording of the first object of
TI:

I don't understand the essential difference intended in the
meanings of the first object of TI:

1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family, without
distinction of sex, sexual orientation, creed, class, or color.

*and* the first object of TSA:

1. To form a nucleus of the universal brotherhood of humanity,
without distinction of race, creed, sex, caste, or color.


Why is the loss of "brotherhood" of concern?  To me
universal=universal; brotherhood=family; and
humanity=human.  Is there concern about nucleus "within" rather
than "of"?

Personally, I'm delighted to see brotherhood dropped and a
genderless word such as family used instead.  If some feel the loss
of brotherhood in the wording smacks of being exclusive then I
should say that I've always felt left out by the writings and talk
about brotherhood.  Being in a body of female gender as I am, I
can't name myself a brother.

Virginia Behrens TI, TSA