Damn, this guy is good. Why can't we get one of this side of the pond?
Lisa
WTSComplainstoGuardianBatesRepliesFloggingCase
by Lionel_P_Hartley 41 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
Lionel_P_Hartley
Here's one quote I found ostensibly taken from the Guardian directly, but probably taken from these people (or someone else) since the ellipsis abusage is identical - http://www.evolution-facts.org/a10a.htm
*** ce 24 2 Disagreements About Evolution-Why? ***
at http://www.evolution-facts.org/a10a.htm we have:26 However, many advocates of evolution feel that they do have sufficient reason to insist that evolution is a fact. They explain that they are just arguing over details. But if any other theory had such enormous remaining difficulties, and such major contradictions among those who advocate it, would it so readily be pronounced a fact? Merely repeating that something is a fact does not make it a fact. As John R. Durant, a biologist, wrote in The Guardian of London:
“Many scientists succumb to the temptation to be dogmatic, . . . over and over again the question of the origin of the species has been presented as if it were finally settled. Nothing could be further from the truth. . . . But the tendency to be dogmatic
persists, and it does no service to the cause of science.20. The Guardian, London, “Beginning to Have Doubts,” by John Durant, December 4, 1980, p. 15.
In spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, dogmatic evolutionists maintain that their theory has been proven and there are no alternatives.
Anyone seen the original? The two quotations, including the way the reference is formatted are essentially identical."Many scientists succumb to the temptation to be dogmatic, . . over and over again the question of the origin of the species has been presented as if it were finally settled. Nothing could be further from the truth . . But the tendency to be dogmatic persists, and it does no service to the cause of science."
— John Durant, "Beginning to Have Doubts " The Guardian, London, December 4, 1980, p. 15.
LPH
ps: I separated the quote out in the WTS article for easy comparison - originally it was all one paragraph on the CD.
-
bluesapphire
Steve Bates Rocks!
"Larry and Constance Slack were not devout Jehovah's Witnesses as some
Leon Slack is using theocratic war strategy. He very well knows that once a witness, always a witness according to them. YOu are always obligated to follow all their rules even if you don't attend the meetings. You are not officially considered not a witness unless you are DA or DF. And if his brother was going to at least the Memorial, he is counted on the annual report and bragged about as being one of the 15 million attendees last year.
reports
said. Larry has not been a practicing (sic) Witness for Jehovah for
many years.
He was baptised as...a teenager many years ago. For the last 10 years
they have
not shared in our worship services, although there were a few
relatively short
time periods that they would sporadically show up at meetings with the
congregation."What a bunch of rubbish. I love Steve Bates' way of dealing with these liars!
-
TheOldHippie
I find it odd that Steven Bates so openly shows his disgust for the Witnesses; in so doing, the result is that one is not interested in reading his articles on these matters, as he has so pre-conceived ideas, is so biased, that it is impossible to get thru to him with counter-information. A strange way of being a journalist, in stead of being interested in bringing out accurate information he is interested in critizing only. Strange.
-
outnfree
I think Mr. Bates was an unbiased, objective journalist as regards the Witnesses until he came up against Witness double-speak and 'technical truth telling' (i.e., deceit!) for himself. (And took the time to try to truly understand what it is they teach about the world.) He now questions their honesty and disdains their methods of trying to control the flow of information or to put favorable 'spin' on unfavorable "press".
Beautiful letter, Mr. Bates, and perhaps Mr. Brown would have been better served to have written a post Chicago-incident press release quoting from the Family Happiness book IMMEDIATELY after the story broke, trying to show that Bible teachings do differ from what the papers say Mr. Stack actually did. Of course, the WT might STILL have to squirm when forthrightly questioned on just what obedience to the "headship principle" actually means to Jehovah's Witness families around the world...
The results of the twisting of that scripture to the extreme by too many Witnesses globally IS digusting, TheOldHippie.
outnfree
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts -- John Wooden
-
outnfree
Lionel,
I almost missed reading this piece because I thought it was Mr. Bates response to the WTS on his UN articles. Perhaps you could modify the Topic subject so people realize this is new news?
Thanks for considering my suggestion.
outnfree
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts -- John Wooden
-
Lionel_P_Hartley
Old Hippie:
Stephen Bates is a Catholic journalist who writes for the Tablet and the Guardian - he's written about problems in the Catholic Church such as child abuse. He actually sued the editor of the Catholic Herald and stated that he'd donate some of the compensation to Catholic charities - charities guaranteed to incense the editor of the Herald - for reasons I'll let you discover - all I've said, and more, is available just by reading his articles at the Guardian web site. Does that make him biased against the Catholic Church?
He's opinionated and doesn't like being lied to by the likes of Gillies and JR Brown of the WTS Public DISinformation office. But he's scrupulously fair in his journalism. Unlike much of the US press - which often repeats articles supplied by APS etc - it is accepted - indeed expected - in the British press (and here I mean the quality papers) that articles need not be bland.
But, I ask again - what specifically has Bates said in his articles that is incorrect or misleading - apart from such things as his subeditor deleting the word "coloured" from the scarlet-coloured wild beast?
LPH
ps: outnfree - good idea - done!
-
OhHappyDay
Great!!!
Stephen Bates FOR PRESIDENT!!
I adore that guy!! -
LittleToe
I'm afraid we don't have a president, but he'd get my vote for "Prime Minister".
I'm blown away at how well written his reply was. Can't you just tell that he's a writer by profession? -
ozziepost
Brilliant! Absolutely fabulous stuff!
Mrs Ozzie and I would like to offer to sponsor Steve Bates as a new Australian!
Cheers,
Ozzie"It's better to light a candle than to curse the darkness."
Anonymous