Sorry Morph! I was writing a reply at the same time but 100% agree
Jehovah's Witnesses to settle sex-abuse case - San Diego Reader (California, US), Friday, January 12, 2018
by darkspilver 104 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
_Morpheus
Also , and i hesitate to point this out because you seem easily triggered, there was no attempt to “tax them for something they wernt doing”.
They most definitely were selling literature.
Thats why they filed an amicus brief when the jimmy swaggert matter was being considered. The wt org understood the ruling most definitely would apply to their org and therefore filed as an interested party. If the ruling were inconsequential they wouldnt have bothered to file an amicus brief as it would be pointless. They also wouldnt have changed from selling to donations following the ruling, would they? If they had a legal leg to stand on they would have fought it as they have fought countless legal matters over the last 100 years.
Bob, in sorry but you come accross as somewhat young or perhaps new to the organization. Your grasp of even recent organization history is tenuious at best. Im young and lived through everything we've talked about but you seem to be drawing from rumors or half overheard stories.
-
Bobby2446
It’s waayyyy of topic now....
-
_Morpheus
Look, I am not going to argue over something of little consequence that’s about 30 years old. You have your views, and I’ll have mine
im sorry you think this is an argument bob, as i said this is a discussion board and without talking its just blank pages, right? This is a simple exchange of ideas.
Also, your once again moving the goal posts. You make false statments and when i point out the blatant inaccuracies you decide that it no longer matters.. unfortunately for you it does matter. Motives are everything, bob. these things arnt matter of opinion, they are simple facts.
the sad truth is that you seem to think we disagree and we dont, at least as far as the org being in finical trouble. We agree they arnt. We agree that they have purposefully moved to a more digital format. Perhaps if you were a bit less defensive we could have a more enjoyable dialogue
-
Bobby2446
It was THIRTY YEARS AGO! Move on. As you say, they are not in financial trouble today, so what happened then has no financial consequences that we are seeing today. No current GB member was on the GB in 1990, and the WT has been legally reorganized since. Jesus dude...
-
freddo
"Hate-rant"
Tee-hee.
If you thought that was a hate-rant, Bob, you came up the river on a lily leaf.
"Hate-rant"
-
_Morpheus
It was THIRTY YEARS AGO! Move on. As you say, they are not in financial trouble today, so what happened then has no financial consequences that we are seeing today.
bob, your jumping to an incorrect conclusion there. It has everything to do with today. The supreme courts ruling that said the wt could be taxed for selling religious literature hs huge impact on everything the org has done since. They were forced to adopt the donation arrangment. That arrangment eventually proved not to be sustainable and the changes we today are the result. Even the org reconizes the value examing the past. Thats why they wrote the book “proclaimers of gods kingdom” which covered the first 100 years of the organizations history.
-
Bobby2446
Defensive. No, just not going to argue/discuss something that happened 30 years ago under a different leadership and different legal and financial structure. It’s irrelevant now.
-
_Morpheus
Also also, bob, your sort of right technially but not really when you say nobody on the current gb was on the gb in 1990. My old buddy gerrit losch was on the service comitte and was sitting in on every meeting of the gb in 1990. He was part of the decision making process on the switch from selling to donations. So technically right but not exactly. Im also not sure why who was serving on the gb at the time matters?
-
_Morpheus
Lol but its not irrelevant, as i clearly showed. The results of those decisions echo in a strait line to today.
I do however find your view on “different leadership” a bit strange. Jehovahs witnesses dont look to the governing body as their leaders. They claim but one leader, christ jesus as head of gods kingdom. They say the organization is spirit directed, not man directed. No matter whos name is on the letterhead, jesus is head of the congregation. Im not sure why your identifying the gb or its individual members as unique in the leadership direction of the org. Its all christ jesus leading jehovahs people.