by cedars 25 Replies latest watchtower scandals
I think I might try ringing the relevant office of HMRC and explaining the situation to an actual person to get an idea of what the response will be. I've had experiences in the past of writing to the HMRC with a straightforward question and not getting a response for months.
I must admit I was very frustrated that the Gift Aid amounts aren't in the public domain in the first place, and I have to go hunting for them...
"This is obviously why the official line from Mill Hill is that blood transfusions are a decision for each individual. If a JW was to get DFd for giving consent for their child to have a transfusion it could make an intresting test case."
Unfortunately this will never happen. No JW is DF'd any more for accepting a transfusion. Instead it is decided that the person has disassociated themselves by their actions. Of course, the announcement is identical and they will be shunned in just the same way, but the ORG can continue to claim they did not DF the ex-member.
The way it works these days in the Org., everyone makes their own personal choices and is responsible for the results. Of course, if you make a choice the Org. does not approve of you will be DF'd or disassociated so there is not really a choice at all. It's the same way they teach their God works. Everyone has the freedom of choice to worship Jehovah or not - but of course they will die if they choose not to.
cofty and cedars that is interesting about JWs already being singled out for consideration by the commission. But I don't think attempting to use the tight fiscal situation in the UK as an argument against JW charitable status is a smart move because it is transparently opportunistic on the part of the organisation's opponents. Better to stick to the genuine concerns about the real harm that the JW religion reaps on families and lives it comes into contact with as well as the lack of community or charity work by JWs.
Public Benefit
The Trustees confirm that they taken into consideration Charity Commission guidance on public benefit in exercising their powers and duties, and this is amply demonstrated in the report that follows, in particular:
1. Bible literature we have supplied without charge to congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the UK, has been distributed, gratis, by those congregations, to interested members of the public in their local communities, in the following quantities: 17,180,000 copies of Watchtower and Awake! and 1,180,000 Bibles and Bible study aids.
2. Our conventions for Bible education were widely advertised by personal invitations delivered to the public nationwide.
LOL!!!!!
1. Don't KMs in Britain explain the donation system that people should pay for what they take and cover the placed publications when they don't get a donation from the householder? Also, this isn't anything special to British dubs, as the whole world is on donation basis thanks to Jimmy Swaggart fiasco. Now, JWs NEED WTS publications to practice their "faith" so I don't understand why should the public pay for that part nor do I understand how the public benefits from paying for someone to have free religious crap?
2. How exactly does this benefit anyone???? 99% of people get annoyed by JWs coming to their doors in the first place, so really if JWs just stopped pissing people off with their invitations the whole world would be better off. #2 is a public dis-service.
Could other religions claim charitable status on basis they provide free seating at their churches and people can partake of the religious rites? For JWs having wts publication is a rite just like communion is for a RC.
Cedars and others who try to get the charitable status take away from IBSA, I wish you all the best, maybe media would like to know the that the public is paying millions to WTS for a "service" of annoyance to 99% of Brits.
2. Our conventions for Bible education were widely advertised by personal invitations delivered to the public nationwide.
Ah so that's why we have the pointless convention leaflet campaigns, inviting people who are not interested to travel 50 miles plus to a convention site where they would be treated with extreme suspicion when inevitably they don't have a convention badge.
Believe me, if ordinary members of the public knew just how much attendants get in a flap about anyone who turns up at the venue without a badge card, they wouldn't bother!!
But I don't think attempting to use the tight fiscal situation in the UK as an argument against JW charitable status is a smart move because it is transparently opportunistic on the part of the organisation's opponents. Better to stick to the genuine concerns about the real harm that the JW religion reaps on families and lives it comes into contact with as well as the lack of community or charity work by JWs.
I wish the British media worked that way, but unfortunately it's just cash, politics, deaths and horrific injuries that get their attention nowadays. I don't feel it's being opportunistic to highlight the fiscal arguments, it's merely being pragmatic.
