by hawkaw 589 Replies latest watchtower scandals
MacH.
Do you have a facsimile machine nearby??????
If you do I will Email you a suggestion tomorrow. I have to get going to swiming class for my little guy.
Take care and see you tomorrow or maybe later on tonight.
Hopefully Kent will come back and post the Brochure.
The WTS had to prove its loyality to the beast. I just can't get over that. Wow.
I bet someone is having a sleepless night in Brooklyn.
hawk
"The WTS had to prove its loyality to the beast. I just can't get over that. Wow."
Sorry, once I stop laughing, I'll say thanks again Hawk!!!
As you say, the info you have is from A! The information in the A! is then doubtful that that is what is really happening in the real world. The WTBS has it's own agenda on what this info means.
That is, my question is, is the UN really taking those steps angainst the Vatican? Where can this info be verified in "secular" pubs? -newspapers, online, etc?
But I would like to hypothisize something, if I may
Without reading the A! I do not now the angle of argument they are trying to make, but I think it is pretictable. But I would venture to guess that it might be...
If as the A! article is saying:
[the UN really wants to remove the Vatican and give it an NGO-DPI status,] does that suggest that the Vatican has too much control over the UN and the UN wants to depose that power?
After all The WTBS has tought for many years that the harlot (false religion, the chief part being Christendom) rides the scarlet colored wild beast (the UN). Thereby controlling the beast and having too much power and influence over it. This action would remove that control and power the Vatican holds over the UN.
The WTBS has also said for many years that this beast would turn on the harlot and devour it? Would'nt this action be the first step in that direction?
Dunno about the JW predictions, but I do know that there are only 2 nations in the world that have NOT become member states with the UN..
They are:
Switzerland
and
Vatican City
(Got this from my tour of the UN last month)...
wanna,
Have you stopped laughing yet?
I'm still stunned.
hawk
the vaticans status with the UN is as a 'nonmember state observer'
it participates and votes, like a member, and unlike an NGO. this is what the NGO coalition in question is objecting to.
mox
Was the WT part of the coalition lobbying for the change in Vatican status?
Path
Moxy:
The Vatican DOES NOT vote at the UN. That's why it is called an "observer".
ma: afaict, it can vote at policy-setting conferences. obviously there are many different kinds of UN-related votes. we probably hear most often about the votes of the general assembly, which is a totally different matter. the coalition of NGOs object to the vatican having a voice in policy, voting according to its views on for example, family planning, considered widely to be very backward. NGOs do not have this voice.
mox
Here's the text of Page 31, Awake!, October 22, 2000 in its entirety:
EFFORT TO OUST VATICAN FROM UN
The Rome-based news agency Inter Press Service (IPS) reported that "an international coalition of more than 70 non-governmental organisations (NGOs) has launched a global campaign to oust the Vatican from the United Nations." Presently, the Vatican is a permanent observer, or nonmember state, in the UN organization. The Vatican has had that status since 1964.
Why does this group of NGOs, which by the end of April last year had increased to 100 organizations worldwide, object to the Vatican's position in the UN? Because the Vatican, the NGOs argue, is a religious authority and not a political state. Frances Kissling, president of Catholics for a Free Choice, told IPS that the coalition does not oppose the Vatican's right to express its view, but "what is in question is the right of this non-state to occupy a position with governments."
Anika Rahman, director of International Programmes at the Centre for Reproductive Law and Policy agrees. IPS quoted her as saying that "if the UN treats the Holy See as a state with permanent observer privileges because of its religious authority, the world body is creating a precedent for similar claims by other religions." She added: "To ensure that the United Nations does not promote any particular religion, religious entities such as the Roman Catholic Church should not be permitted to particiate in this forum as a non-member state."
But what about the argument that the Vatican is a state and is therefore entitled to its present status? "That is semantic double-talk," responded Ms. Kissling in an interview. "We say that this is in essence a 15th century definition of statehood and that the Holy See is, in effect, the governing structure of the religion." She added that the terms "Vatican" and "the Holy See" are both "synonyms for the Roman Catholic Church."
Much of the resentment of the NGOs against the Vatican's current position in the UN is caused by the Vatican's view on population issues. For instance, the Vatican has used UN conferences such as the 1994 International Confernce of Population and Development, in Cairo, and the 1995 Women's Conference, in Beijing, to express its strong views against family planning. "Since the UN takes most of its decisions by consensus," notes IPS, "dissenting voices such as those of the Vatican have derailed negotiations on issues relating to population, contraception, women's rights and reproductive health care."
According to Ms. Kissling, "the appropriate role for the Vatican is that of a NGO -- the same as all the other NGOs representing Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Bahais and other religious organisations." The coalition wants UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and ultimately the UN General Assembly to conduct an official review of the place the Vatican occupies within the world's largest political body.
outnfree
Par dessus toutes choses, soyez bons. La bonte est ce qui ressemble le plus a Dieu et ce qui desarme le plus les hommes -- Lacordaire
