March 15, 2012 WT on jw.org now

by Gayle 32 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  WTWizard

  Sure, they are cracking down on certain types of porn. I can understand the certain forms of porn that are illegal, namely kiddie porn (which shouldn't even be produced in the first place because they are exploiting children, using threats and extortion, to produce it). But, viewing XXX-rated material (or R-18) is not necessarily going to create a problem that didn't already exist.

  And, what about that rubbish about having to explain in detail what happened during a judicial committee hearing? Couldn't "I almost did it but realized how stupid it was" or "I did it a few times before realizing how stupid it was" be enough? Do the hounders really need to know how close it was, or the exact acts, so they can make a decision? To me, that is as bad as reading a porn story.

  And worse, what about the hounders that, during a hounding call, pull a child aside, molest that child, and then threaten that child with disfellowshipping if they report it to anyone else? That, to me, is as bad as the people producing the kiddie porn (though they don't distribute it, the damage is done by producing it). Not a peep about disfellowshipping that kind of scumbags, never mind getting them reported to the police.
• 

  thetrueone

  Once again just as in the past the WTS's . fear mongering and compulsive ignorance about matters concerning human sociological behavior

  goes to print. Their insinuation that masturbation and viewing pornography causes homosexuality is so off the Truth its

  not even funny. Todays leading WTS editors have been indoctrinated with the WTS past ignorances so what do they do, they just

  reiterate the BS they were taught by the idiots who writing articles for the WTS. decades ago.

  Oh well it all cultivates power, control and money for those old boys, if they didn't do that they wouldn't be in their lofty position

  in the organization in the first place.
• 

  wha happened?

  I just remembered something. I do remember having a talk with an elder right before the wedding date. He warned me about bedroom activities that "should not mimick homosexual behavior as practiced in ther world". My only comment was, "You do realize I'm marrying a sister right?" He then on about how some acts in the bedroom is mimicking homosexual behavior. I was like whatever
• 

  undercover

  I do remember having a talk with an elder right before the wedding date. He warned me about bedroom activities that "should not mimick homosexual behavior as practiced in ther world".

  Does an elder still sit down with the couple before the wedding and give this little scriptural and godly advice?
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  Haven't they realized yet that if they're going to believe in the Noah's ark nonsense, they MUST believe in evolution. They believe that the millions of species alive today all descended from a few dozen animals that survived in a floating warehouse for a year. Jehovah's Witnesses are the most radical of evolutionists to believe absurd fairytales like that.

  And I think the Writing Department must spend hours sitting around talking about sex.
• 

  Mickey mouse

  Does an elder still sit down with the couple before the wedding and give this little scriptural and godly advice?

  Yes, the elder conducting the ceremony is supposed to establish that no fornication has occurred.
• 

  thetrueone

  carry on as if on a christian crusade to stamp out blowjobs.

  Good one
• 

  thetrueone

  No Blow Jobs and no Doggie style , no wonder most JWS marriages fail.
• 

  AGuest

  If they would get out of people's bedrooms (may you all have peace!)... they might not have as great a "problem" with porn among their members (no pun intended) as they do. Gotta be a tad bit of voyeurism underlying all of that "concern."

  Funny, is it not, that the ONLY one "concerned" about such things in the NT was Paul, an unmarried man? No one else even went there, save Christ concerning what "ends" a marriage. But he didn't address the details of such topics otherwise, nor did the others (at least, not in great detail or the extent "Paul" did... and the WTBTS does). Okay, so Christ is recorded to have said, "Go... make disciples... teaching them to observe all the things *I* commanded you." But what did he "command"? STOP judging, go RELEASING... FREELY FORGIVE... etc. Not, "Go sit yourselves in the minds, hearts, hospital rooms... and bedrooms of others and make sure they don't 'sin'."

  Lot of closet pornos "sitting in judgment" of others, IMHO. Like murderers... who lead the "search" for their victims' killer. As Paul asked the Romans (after he finally GOT it and started telling folks to STOP judging):

  "Do YOU, however, the one teaching others, not teach yourself? You, the one teaching 'Do not steal,' do YOU steal?"

  These "Pharisees" should really beware and take note... and worry about cleansing the inside of their OWN "cups". 'Cause there's really something to that whole "Stop judging... because with the SAME judgment you are judging, you will BE judged" thing.

  But what hypocrite sees the truth in that?

  Closet voyeurism...

  Peace!

  A slave of Christ,

  SA, who finds it interesting concerning what "sin" my Lord may have been referring to as to those who brought a woman caught in adultery before him... when he said, "Let the one of you WITHOUT sin cast the first stone." Could'a been any sin, yes. More likely, though, it was the same KIND of sin as they wanted him to judge the woman for. (John 8:1-11)
• 

  sd-7

  So, I guess this means I really can buy the 2012 Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue after all! I'll have to pass on "Gang Bangers!!!! Vol. 5", though... Seriously though, so I guess this also means no girl-on-girl porn, too. Hoo boy--the organization is going to lose at least 10% off that one alone. Terrible! Terrible!

  But now I know which porn to limit myself to if I want to stay in Jehovah's clean organization, though. I think I'd reached my limit, so far as the elders knew, with admitting to man-and-woman-sex. Hmm. Wow, if I'd remembered the girl-on-girl stuff I'd seen, I would've been in a judicial committee long before last year! Go figure. They would've been on me like white on rice after this article! Good thing I went and did the real thing and got out before this!

  The thing that gets me about this is, how can there be varying levels of seriousness when it comes to this? So it's not as bad to watch a man and a woman actually commit fornication--not like simulate it in a PG-13 movie, but actually do it--but it's DF'ing if it's gay or lesbian sex? They would've been better off taking a harder (pun intended) stance on this, but maybe they knew judicial committees would go up by 300% and there'd be no time to wire $$$ to the Society if that happened...

  There's so much running through my head right now (okay, this is getting to be Adult section with just the dirty puns as it is!). I just can see the judicial committee. Teenage Robert, baptized at 16, now admits to viewing hard-core pornography.

  Elder: So, uh, how serious has it gotten?

  Robert: Uh...it's a...well, there was this one where Sandy Summers and Jana started kissing each other....

  Elder 2 [shifts in his seat]: Go on.

  Robert: And...well, she, Jana starts going down on Sandy...[holds head in his hands]

  Elder 3: Going down. I'm not sure what that means. You mean as in, homosexual oral sex?

  Robert: ...Yes.

  [Silence as elders look at each other.]

  Elder: Okay, um, we're going to need to meet with you again....

  --sd-7