May 8, 2000

Hi David,

Dan will likely provide a response to your questions, but as I was involved
in these developments I'll provide my understanding also.

Sometime last week, after a discussion with Marilynn, I suggested we adjust
our response to UF by making the changes you have noted. It seemed to me
that these were relatively small matters on which we could yield without
doing any great damage to our website. The purpose was to try to break the
deadlock of suspicion and distrust by going further than strict obligation
would require, and providing abundant tangible evidence (from their
perspective) of a sincere desire to improve the situation between the two
organizations.

I find the current situation increasingly intolerable. The endless bickering
and demonizing which accompanies much of our organizational effort is
inconsistent with my understanding of the values and ideals the book holds
up before us as standards to strive for. I see no way out of this impasse
unless and until one of the parties decides to take a different route. In
this case that suggests viewing them with sympathy, as friends, not enemies;
and, as one sometimes does for friends, giving them things they have asked
for simply because they have told you that it is important to them.
Obviously, this has its limits; but these few items did not seem to exceed
those. Perhaps the sentiment can be expressed by the saying: "He who would
have friends must show himself friendly."

Recent trends of organizational relationships have not been good. Ideally,
one would expect all reader-believers of The Urantia Book to show increasing
tolerance and mutual regard for one another. But things appear to be moving
in the opposite direction, perhaps towards another unhappy exercise in
litigation. The cause and standing of The Urantia Book in the world can only
suffer damage from such developments. How can we expect anyone to take the
book seriously when those who are its most ardent advocates cannot remain at
peace with one another.

We are caught in a vicious circle, leading most likely to more failure and
disappointment. Somehow, someway, we need to break out of these patterns by
establishing in their place better and more cosmically sound methods for
dealing with our problems and struggles, before they once again take us all
into the pit. In my view that must necessarily involve an increase in
genuine sympathy and understanding towards all. At the moment the Fellowship
seems to understand this better than the Foundation; therefore, the
Fellowship has the obligation to provide the necessary leadership. The
yielding on these points was suggested in that spirit.

Perhaps the situation is already too far gone for this to accomplish
anything useful. Perhaps the sentiment is too romantic and impractical. I
don't believe that is the case. Certainly as an isolated gesture this will
lead nowhere. Implicit in this approach is the continuation of a genuine and
sensitive effort to replace what is by something better. If we do not follow
through sincerely and consistently it will go nowhere, or even worsen, as
with some of our past efforts in these matters.

In any case, this is my rationale for giving them what they have asked for
on these points. For better or worse it represents my best understanding of
these difficult matters. Others may have a different perspective on the
matter.

In affectionate friendship,
Steve


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Kantor
> Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 3:39 PM
> To: dmassey@std.saic.com; stevedre@idt.net;
> mkulieke@falcon.dist214.k12.il.us; mgawryn@home.com
> Subject: Re: Response to 8 April discussion
>
>
> Dear Dan;
>
> I just returned from a few days out of town on some family matters to
> review your final submission to Urantia Foundation.  I am disappointed to
> find several items conceded to Urantia Foundation that we had not
> discussed.
>
> Here are those items:
>
> Item 3: "We anticipate their replacement by authorized translations as
> those become available and can be prepared for web presentation."
>  -- I had
> specifically requested that this wording not be used, that we would
> certainly publish their translations and even foreground them.  However,
> the ability to publish other translations of specific papers, sections or
> even the entire book are critical to providing the kind of service to the
> readership which I think we want to provide.
>
> Item 12: "However, in the spirit of goodwill and cooperative relations, we
> will remove this graphic rendering of the name of our planet pending
> further discussion and clarification of the Foundation's concerns about
> this and similar matters."
>
> Item 17: "While we do not understand why such presentation of the
> concentric-circle symbol in the context of authentic historical document
> would be objectionable to the Foundation, in the spirit of cooperation, we
> are willing to block out the image in question."
>
> Item 20: "Nevertheless, in the spirit of maintaining friendly and
> cooperative relations with Urantia Foundation, and since the Foundation
> appears feel strongly about the display of this document, we will
> remove it
> from the site."
>
> I would appreciate it very much if you could provide me with the reasons
> for submitting on these issues.  I am particularly disturbed by your
> indication that we would remove the Translator's Contract as you note in
> item 20.  This item is a real smoking gun in terms of illustrating their
> control mentality.  I would appreciate knowing why you have consented to
> remove it.
>
> I understand that if there are particular legal issues involved in these
> items or if you have a specific strategy in mind it might be best to
> proceed as you've indicated.  However, in the absence of
> knowledge of such,
> I feel compelled to ask for your reasons.  I assume your response this has
> already been sent...
>
> Thank you for any help you can provide on the above.
>
> David
>
>
>
>
>
>
>