Eden One, I never said that your related posts are not opinions; I don't know one way or another but only that you say that they are opinions. The point of my post that you refer to is that I do not have any authority to determine one way or the other.
jehovah witness elder molest his daughter ... Lynn Gardner
by jaydee 46 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
EdenOne
An internet forum, by definition, isn't a court room. It's an arena of opinions. Why would you have to even raise that question here? Makes no sense other than stir confusion.
-
OrphanCrow
fisherman: I do not have any authority to determine one way or the other
Why not? By whose authority?
Why can you not make a determination using your own brain?
Who said anything at all about outside authority?
Do you not have your own authority to make a decision?
Do you not own your own brain? Who owns your brain?
Who is your authority? Yourself? Or someone/something else?
-
Fisherman
An internet forum, by definition, isn't a court room. It's an arena of opinions.
You are talking to the wrong person.
Why would you have to even raise that question here?
Why not?
Makes no sense other than stir confusion.
How?
-
EdenOne
He exhibits all the signs of someone who is used to let others exercise authority to think, form opinions, and make decisions on his behalf. Sound soo familiar ....
Fisherman's Disclaimer: But of course, that is merely my opinion, not a court-verified fact. So take that with a grain of salt.
-
Fisherman
Why not? By whose authority
We can debate back and forth whether or not Eden One related statements are opinions or not. I have already stated that I do not know.
I suppose that someone with authority could decide, but not me. And would have to ask Eden one and not me; I don't know.
-
EdenOne
I am in a position of authority to determine that my opinions are indeed opinions of my own. Unfortunately, you don't seem to afford such autonomy. But we can always wait until a court or the WT leadership makes that determination for you. Now, enough of this nonsense and back to the OT please ....
-
-
EdenOne
You know what, Fisherman?I like a good challenge.
Based on the available information, I am of the opinion that the Watchtower Society and the congregations that have been under their hierarchic supervision around the world, have sheltered pedophiles, failed to protect their victims, failed to report them to the authorities, and kept some known pedophiles in positions of authority within the congregations, endangering not only the members, but also the community at large.
Now, let the WT sue me for holding that opinion and publish it on an internet forum. Btw, I am in Portugal, Europe, just in case someone wants to come looking for me.
According to your link, a "public figure" (such is the case of the Watchtower Society) must prove in court that the plaintiff (me) showed "actual malice"—that I published with either knowledge of falsity or in reckless disregard for the truth.
In the interest of determining if there was actual truth, my legal team would then require the court to force the Watchtower Society to disclose all the information files about pedophiles that they keep on their headquarters around the world. I'm sure (as it has been seen by the Gonzales Campos case) that they will be thrilled and cooperative in doing so. In the interest of the truth, of course.
Bring in on!
-
EdenOne
The plaintiff in this case, would be the Watchtower, as I would be under the accusation of libel and defamation. (blame it on my late night post....). So, to be clear from your link:
"A public figure must show "actual malice"—that you published with either knowledge of falsity or in reckless disregard for the truth. This is a difficult standard for a plaintiff to meet."
I'm sure the Watchtower Society, known worldwide for its impeccable track record in defending the truth at all cost, won't have any problem in disclosing all required evidence to support a charge of defamation against me. So, by all means, Fisherman & Watchtower, bring it on!