I wish I did have one for that would explain all the bull$#I& that has been forced on us. You live a day in someone elses shoes and you will know what I am talking about. God we were so nieve into thinking this was a true religion. I can't think of some of you who gave forty fifty sixty years of your lives to this beast. It's with that sadness that helps me to try and get over what we just came out of if you know what I mean. I guess what I am saying there's always someone worse off than me
Just received a phone call from bethel overseer and guess what?
by label licker 18 Replies latest jw experiences
-
-
Finkelstein
The most obvious and biggest problem with the WTS. is that its a modern day false prophet running through the operation of a publishing house
and most of its doctrines were established upon that specific operational endeavor. ( literature proliferation )
The reason why like myself and many others eventually leave this organization, what good stuff this organization has brought forth
is overwhelmed by its bad stuff.
For some people this is not what Christianity is supposed to be about.
Christianity is not about fraudulent commercialism.
-
JakeM2012
Interesting developments. I was curious about the legality of recording conversations. I thought the article below was interesting. (I apologize to those that hate copy and paste post.) The bottom line that I see is that if you are not party to the conversation, you have no right to record it. However, if you are involved in the conversation you have a right to record it, even without the other parties consent. Many states still maintain laws with one party consenting. This party could be yourself if you are involved in the conversation. Although some states do have two party consents if it is to be used legally.
The link for below: http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations
Recording Phone Calls and Conversations
If you plan to record telephone calls or in-person conversations (including by recording video that captures sound), you should be aware that there are federal and state wiretapping laws that may limit your ability to do so. These laws not only expose you to the risk of criminal prosecution, but also potentially give an injured party a civil claim for money damagesagainst you.
From a legal standpoint, the most important question in the recording context is whether you must get consent from one or all of the parties to a phone call or conversation before recording it. Federal law and many state wiretapping statutes permit recording if one party (including you) to the phone call or conversation consents. Other states require that all parties to the communication consent.
Unfortunately, it is not always easy to tell which law applies to a communication, especially a phone call. For example, if you and the person you are recording are in different states, then it is difficult to say in advance whether federal or state law applies, and if state law applies which of the two (or more) relevant state laws will control the situation. Therefore, if you record a phone call with participants in more than one state, it is best to play it safe and get the consent of all parties. However, when you and the person you are recording are both located in the same state, then you can rely with greater certainty on the law of that state. In some states, this will mean that you can record with the consent of one party to the communication. In others, you will still need to get everyone's consent. For details on the wiretapping laws in the fifteen most populous U.S. states and the District of Columbia, see the State Law: Recordingsection. In any event, it never hurts to play it safe and get the consent of all parties to a phone call or conversation that you intend to record.
Who must give permission to record a telephone or in-person conversation?
Federal law permits recording telephone calls and in-person conversations with the consent of at least one of the parties. See 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d). This is called a "one-party consent" law. Under a one-party consent law, you can record a phone call or conversation so long as you are a party to the conversation. Furthermore, if you are not a party to the conversation, a "one-party consent" law will allow you to record the conversation or phone call so long as your source consents and has full knowledge that the communication will be recorded.
In addition to federal law, thirty-eight states and the District of Columbia have adopted "one-party consent" laws and permit individuals to record phone calls and conversations to which they are a party or when one party to the communication consents. See the State Law: Recording section of this legal guide for information on state wiretapping laws.
When must you get permission from everyone involved before recording?
Twelve states require the consent of every party to a phone call or conversation in order to make the recording lawful. These "two-party consent" laws have been adopted in California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington (Hawai'i is also in general a one-party state, but requires two-party consent if the recording device is installed in a private place). Although they are referred to as "two-party consent" laws, consent must be obtained from every party to a phone call or conversation if it involves more than two people. In some of these states, it might be enough if all parties to the call or conversation know that you are recording and proceed with the communication anyway, even if they do not voice explicit consent. See the State Law: Recording section of this legal guide for information on specific states' wiretapping laws.
Can you record a phone call or conversation when you do not have consent from one of the parties?
Regardless of whether state or federal law governs the situation, it is almost always illegal to record a phone call or private conversation to which you are not a party, do not have consent from at least one party, and could not naturally overhear. In addition, federal and many state laws do not permit you to surreptitiously place a bug or recording device on a person or telephone, in a home, office or restaurant to secretly record a conversation between two people who have not consented.
Federal law and most state statutes also make disclosing the contents of an illegally intercepted telephone call illegal. See the section on Risks Associated with Publication in this guide for more information.
-
label licker
Interesting. When we spoke to our lawyer about it she stated that since it's religion is not government owned or run, lawyers will not get involved. What I don't get is if we were slandered outside of the religion then we could sue but because it's within the religion we don't have a case. That just doesn't make sense to us.
It would sicken me if we did sue and you find out it was a lazy uneducated bum that had more rights than us and we lose alot. Just to hand over what we have worked so hard for all our lives to these jerks. I don't think so. That's too big of a gamble. The fact they called all over telling people lies about us makes me sick everytime I think about it and makes me even more sick knowing our hands are tied. They are b@$t@rd$!
-
kurtbethel
Those recording laws apply to private conversations, buy what about a public talk? Would consent be required to record someone giving a public talk or sermon? You see, the Watchtower claims its people are performing a public ministry, and they have said so in print many times. Someon speaking in public does not have the same expectation of privacy that one would have in a private conversation.
Then there is that matter that in the USA the NSA has demonstrated that it is lawful to intercept, record and store any private communication.
-
label licker
I wonder if the same rules apply to those that would want to sue us. That because it's only within the religion and it's not government run that those whose names are on the recording couldn't sue . When I asked the lawyer it was for myself and my protection but I should be asking why doesn't that same law apply to my accusers. Can they really sue me if that's the case.
-
jgnat
The reasons that lawyers won't get involved in the "pseudo-legal" circus that the elders run, is that at least in the eyes of the law, religious affiliation is voluntary. You get your revenge by walking away from the madness.
So walk away and don't have anything more to do with those clowns. Talk to the hand because I can't see you.
-
mP
Send them on a drive to some place 1 - 2 hours away. Say you like hte place and then dont show up. Play that game a few times.
-
frankiespeakin
Don't sign anything! But if you want,, make them beg for it,, screw with them but don't play by their rules, or give them what they want.