>Not to mention the no-sex thing being a bit hard on reproducing the
>cult - literally.
And Charles wrote:
>CB: There's a straight forward vulgar materialist explanation for
>the Shakers' decline. They had the superstition of not believing in
>having sex.
Well... The ban on sex was a constant throughout Shaker history, so it needs to be tweaked before it can do work to explain Shaker decline in the twentieth century. (If the ban on sex was such a turn-off, as it were, then why did so many thousands of people become Shakers in the first place?).
I was told once (on a visit to the Shaker museum in New Hampshire) that there are still seven Shakers left in Maine -- is this true? And if so, how are they getting on?
Chris. --
----------------- Chris Brooke <editors at voiceoftheturtle.org> The Voice of the Turtle <http://voiceoftheturtle.org>