by never a jw 25 Replies latest jw friends
Is it not a validation of his books that Watchtower never sued Ray Franz OR printed any kind of
rebuttal .
How to get a JWs head to implode .
Ask them to give you even ONE example of a falsehood in Ray Franz books . or
Ask them to point out even one error on Jwfacts.com .
Defamation of character is another subject.
And another road the WTBS doesn't want to go down:
Q Is it true that you stated in your magazine that people that leave your religion are 'mentally diseased?' Remember you are under oath.
Jeff T- Not to put too fine a point on it, but that is the difference I am talking about. Under the 1st amendement the JW can state those that leave are mentally diseased all day no problem. It's protected under the first amendement. If they strayed out to say Bro. John Q. Smith former member of the Governing Body is mentally diseased they are in a grey area especially if they do not qualify that opinion as opinion. Now, if someone is DF'd and they call that person's boss, landlord, or client (someone with a financial connection) and say hey, just FYI John Q. Smith is mentally diseased and that person's response is to fire, evict, or cancel a contract for that reason then their is grounds for defamation suits. The rule is the U.S. is it must have been something that was A) untrue and B) targeted at a specific relationship and C) it harmed the individual financially. As with most things, the problem is proving it. Most people would not want to be involved and would say their were other reasons for terminating the financial relationship.
England interprets their libel and slander laws at more liberally, which is why you see more celebrities going after tabloids in the U.K.
Cagefighter, I agree they can say that and we can't sue them for it. The problem for the WTBS would show up if they tried to sue (for example) me. Discovery would be a nightmare. In order to frame my defense I can ask them pretty much anything I want and they have to answer it. I have no doubt some Watchtower heavies have wanted to go after any number of people. I also have no doubt that their legal dept is telling them not to do it. The potential downside is way bigger than any possible upside, especially when a jury is going to see a big secretive religion trying to squash a little guy for speaking up.
The last thing the WTS wants is to shine its ever-brightening light on apostates through slander and libel lawsuits.
Why?
Because they can't risk having their braindead dubs made aware of the huge numbers of apostates and their compelling rebuttals of WT doctrine.
It would be the kiss of death for the WTS and Jehovah's Witnesses.
really glad that someone has asked the question , are we all thinking that we wished we had asked , I am !.I have wondered about this as I have once tried to get JWS to say that I must be lying when they were horrified that I said that the " should you believe " booklet was just aload of lies .
I said" well one of us , me or the booklet , is true which is it ? " hoping that they would say the booklet ,implying that I was the lier . . The cunning plan then was to challenge them to prove that . They didn't fall for it which made wonder if they had been told not to get into a situation like that where truth had to be verified .
I also said once that I would happily stand in the middle of the road and shout that the same booklet was a load of lies , cus I knew that the Watchtower would at least be reluctant to take any action for reasons mentioned in other posts . Again no takers , so are they briefed not to get into a situation like that cus the GB know that it might make them ask awkward questions ?
I do also use more subtle methods to try to help JW realise TTATT , I am not always so hot headed , just tried shock tactics those times , but alas they didn't work .
