by telemetry11 67 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
By the way, how would this effect the Lopez judgement?
In this case the WTS was thrown out of court for refusing to turn over the list of known molesters after two separate courts ordered them to do so.
I'm sure Zelkin will know how to defend this judgement. But again....it's a marathon.
The decision will force them to do FS differently, and they know it.
You are wrong. The Appellate decision did not force the WT to do FS differently. All it did was to require the WT to comply with their existing policy. Can't you read?
The appellate decision was a subtle loss for the WT
Wrong again. I have already posted on this numerous times. It is a BIG loss of freedom because it means that now the Court is regulating WT church policy and requiring them to comply, and other things that you do not understand.
And that's final! Set in stone! Can never be changed!!!x
Says you. Even the US Constitution has been amended in that past.
x
Seriously, dude, why are you such a fan of "church confidentiality"? What is so goddamned important about it for you?
What makes you think that?
But let me tell you something, it was not so important to Plaintiff to sue for an injunction against WT confidentiality policy in the lawsuit. All they wanted was money for damages. That is what was shown at the trial and testified to by the Plaintiff while questioned by WT attorneys.
Religion must lose its protected status."If the person has a constitutional right to independence in making religious choices, the recognition of an evidentiary privilege is an apt means of protecting that autonomy. If any type of relationship deserves the protection of an enclave shored up with an evidentiary privilege, it is a consultive relationship dealing with this kind of choice."
Every lawyer who has ever sued a corporations has stated that money = change. It's one of the most powerful ways to encourage change. You can't put a corporation behind bars. If religion hides behind the first amendment, then attacking their source of power (money) is the best way to pursue change from the outside.
"Every lawyer who has ever sued a corporations has stated that money = change. It's one of the most powerful ways to encourage change. You can't put a corporation behind bars. If religion hides behind the first amendment, then attacking their source of power (money) is the best way to pursue change from the outside." - tim310rd
Money seems to be the only language that corporations understand.
I am surprised that they ruled that this was a case of clergy- penitent privilege. I thought I read a few years ago that this didn't apply to judicial committee hearings of Jehovah's Witnesses, although I could be remembering this wrong. Even if a JC qualifies I am surprised that they ruled that this was a case because Kendrick did not confess, or at least not totally, this was a complaint by the mother of the victim, so how does clergy-penitent priviledge apply?
If religion hides behind the first amendment, then attacking their source of power (money) is the best way to pursue change from the outside.
You are advocating violation of the laws of the USA. Inside the USA, freedom of religion is a Constitutional provision. Religion does not hide behind the First Amendment, it enjoys it freely, not covertly. Using any means with the intended purpose of depriving one of that right is a civil rights violation. Using legal proceedings to "atack money" from someone, and having an ulterior purpose not justified by the underlying legal action, is Abuse of Process.
Maybe somebody on the case should bring out how the WT teaches that it's 'safe' in their KH's and they have divine protection from bad people, molesters, etc.
WT can't have it's cake and eat it too. If they want to claim they have no obligation to warn people of molesters, etc, then they can't claim that it's members are safe and there is protection within it's confines. They need to start publishing and proclaiming that people inside can and have been just as bad as outsiders etc.
