SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT re: Riley Trust Tobacco Compan Stock & WTS (page 2)

TheListener

Woe!!

I didn't know the society owned tobacco stock and military company stock!!!

Unbelievable!!

just kidding

So, Eduardo, if I understand what you are saying, that because the WTS is the beneficiary of the Trust - and receives the dividends as a charitable donation - they are not required to investigate the source of the donation that they are, in effect, receiving as a gift.

Could the HMRiley Trust for WTS be liquidated or dissolved? Or is this an irrevocable gift? Honestly, I don't know enough about how Trust Funds work to know the answers to those questions.

However, I remember being required to return gifts to people when I was a young JW. Even Christmas gifts from my non-JW grandparents. It wasn't the actual "gift" that was the problem. It was the "taint" from it being associated with a "pagan" observance. It wouldn't have been right to return the gift to the store and take the money instead. No, I had to Take A Stand For The Truth™ and use the opportunity to Give A Witness™ and insult my grandparents in the process. I was all of 10 years old and I was told that if I didn't I wouldn't be allowed to go in service or give talks anymore... that's how "serious" it was for me to go through with it.

When I was in my teens, a boy I met when I was on vacation with my family gave me a necklace; he mailed it to me after we returned home. It wasn't just any necklace. It had a crucifix on it. Again, I couldn't have just been polite and said "Thank you for the lovely gold necklace." I couldn't just wear the chain and discard the crucifix. I had to return the entire "gift", and Take A Stand For The Truth™ and use the opportunity to Give A Witness™ to this boy, and ultimately insult him.

I think this is where so many of us see hypocrisy in the HM Riley Trust situation. Many of us have been required by the "superior demands of divine law" to refuse "gifts" based on an apparent "taintedness" of the gift - either a portion of the gift was Contrary To Bible Principles™, such as the cross on the necklace, but not the chain itself - or gifts that were not wrong in and of themselves, but were associated with practices and observances that were Contrary To Bible Principles™. And yet to know how many people are disfellowshipped for using tobacco, and the WTS willingly accepts donated money that is even partially a dividend from companies whose business is in some way Contrary To Bible Principles™ - it's unthinkable to our sensibilities.

We've had it hammered into our Bible Trained Consciences™ that "a little leaven ferments the whole loaf", and we have people expelled from JW congregations for using tobacco, even though it's a minor "sin" compared to murder or child molestation, and yet the WTS happily accepts donations from a documented source that is partially Contrary To Bible Principles™. This is what is offensive to our sensibilities... that we have been expected to Take A Stand For The Truth™, even as young children, while adults - people who set the rules and standards for us to follow - are not willing to do what they expect of their followers. It creates resentment toward the leadership - and I would think that an ethical individual would see that this loss of trust in leadership and resentment that a situation like this would foster would not be worth the $1200 and change that was added to the WTS's wealth by way of the HM Riley Trust while it held Philip Morris stocks.

carla

Word games, exactly. It doesn't matter how they profit, if they own it, bought it outright or received it as a trust. It doesn't matter. They choose to profit from it. Now saying, 'they didn't know', hmmm, where have I heard this before? Oh I know, the UN scandal. If we knew they certainly knew.

The fact is they destroy entire families and generations of families because someone smokes. And you cannot see this as hypocritical? They destroy families if someone makes their money doing something on a military base yet they profit from war. And you don't see this as hypocritical. I don't care if they bought it themself, then don't destroy human beings for doing something you are not willing to do yourself!

I don't think people here have a problem with them owning the stock or even receiving monies from it, the problem is that they hold their members to higher standards than they themself are willing to submit to. The word Pharisees come to mind here?

The callousness of jw's and family relationships never ceases to amaze me. JW's are the ultimate 'throw away society' only they throw away people like the rest of society throws away garbage.

Narkissos

LOL @ TL.

I think it is all in the interest of the WTBTS when xJWs heap up warranted and unwarranted criticism against it. It is so easy to point at the obvious exaggerations and unaccuracies and then dismiss the whole thing as "apostate lies".

The big thing JWs need to see is that the WTBTS is a huge "worldly" corporation with huge assets and considerable financial revenue. That part of it indirectly comes from economical activities which the WT's teachings condemn deserves little more than a humourous footnote imo. Twisting or magnifying a detail to make it strike the headlines will only succeed in concealing the main topic to most JWs.

tijkmo

By treating every inquiry as if it were a vendetta the Watchtower organization unwittingly empowers the darkest suspicions in everyone whose questions are regarded as demonic character assainations. What they hate (accountability) is explaining themselves humbly as custodians of the trust of others. They do not act as (faithful) "discreet" slaves. They act as bullies and power merchants awash in crude oceans of mysterious cash. If they wish to escape this (mis)characterization they have only to open their books and their haughty hearts

here here

tijkmo of the couldnt have put it better myself class

MissBehave

Eduardo's post is very informative and I understand his points about the technicalities of the situation in that the WTBTS was never the investor. They just received a charitable contribution no matter the source. However, Scully makes a very important point about accepting a gift in good conscience and therein lies the dilemma. Joe Drug Dealer on the street could make 10K selling crack cocaine and then deposit the cash in the contribution box at his nearest Kingdom Hall which the WTBTS would rightly accept. It was made as a donation and the "source" of the money is a non-issue. The difference in the Philip Morris situation is that there is indeed a paper trail. The documentation seems readily available but I highly doubt that they would do any research before depositing the money. And I'm sure the check from the Riley trust didn't have a notation on it that "hey, brothers, we made some of this dough on smokes". Not that even if it did do I think they would return it.

I can volley back and forth in my mind on this issue and play devil's advocate for every aspect, but the true bottom line here is the Almighty Dollar $ign. Money is money no matter where it comes from and they want it.

kid-A

Frankly Oro, I really dont think anyone gives a rat's ass. Whether or not the WTBS invested in Phillip Morris is small change in comparison to the thousands of innocent children that have died as a result of their perverse blood policies. Not to mention the untold number of families that have been ripped apart by the policies and practices of this cult you so vigilantly defend. They have lied and manipulated and deceived since 1879 and I suppose anyone serving as their apologist would inhabit the same moral universe as these manipulators, con-men and liars.

p.s. Have you got 'dopey' (aka dozy) working as a "paralegal" troll in your office now??? LOL

undercover

any witness with a modicum of financial nous can quickly see through the invalidity of the argument

I don't know any...

...but to be fair, that's because I've never met the financial wizards and lawyers behind the scenes who are actually running the show.

itsallgoodnow

Yet they don't hold themselves to the same standards as they do their own people.

Yes. There does seem to be a real double standard on what the WTS gets away with compared to what a rank & file member is allowed to do. "We're imperfect humans", they say when their prophecies fail to come true. I think the "scriptural" view (if you are into that legalistic stuff) is "false prophets", but the scriptural view of anything only applies to the rank & file membership, not the leaders.

In reply to original post in this thread... when a JW apologist's argument makes the convenient assumption that apostates are all over this tobacco stock issue, they are misrepresenting the position of most apostates for the purpose of more easily attacking them. I'm sure this is obvious to everybody, but I want the person who argued this way to understand why I consider his or her argument to be irrelevant. I know some people have talked about this tobacco stock issue, but I never felt it held much weight. I understand if their policy is to accept contributions in any form and not trace the background of every source of money received, or every estate, stock, etc. they become the beneficiary of. I think that is fairly reasonable, and therefore an irrelevant argument against the WTS. There are bigger issues that hold far more weight to be concerned with. It would be interesting to hear what you have to say about something more relevant.

Hellrider

Thank you for setting this straight, Oroborus. I think it`s morally disgusting that the WTS received tobacco money before 2002. The ban on smoking for the members goes back to 1975, I believe. So they should have never accepted these stocks/money or whatever from mrs. Henrietta anyway. As far as I know, you are never forced to accept money or stocks given to you. But at least they don`t have these stocks anymore. But they did! And they cashed in on it! Therefore, the critique against the WTS on this point still stands.

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT re: Riley Trust Tobacco Compan Stock & WTS

Share this