stan livedeath: anything to add ?
I just updated the thread below yesterday....
darkspilver
JoinedPosts by darkspilver
-
17
Plymouth / Hull UK
by stan livedeath incopied from a facebook post :.
"heard on a youtube channel that " a purge " is taking place disfellowshipping quite a lot of witnesses in both hull and plymouth area,s ?".
anything to add ?.
-
-
darkspilver
-
161
Help! Mike & Kim videos all being deleted by Youtube
by mrmagic indue to watchtower flagging the mike & kim videos on youtube for copyright, youtube is giving them 6 days before they are shutting down their entire youtube channel.
can you help with a mass downloading program and then reuploading them on a mirror ?
would hate to lose all those good videos!
-
-
darkspilver
AverageJoe1: As to elder's letters (or letters to the congregation), here's my view, for what it's worth: they are not copyrighted. How can you copyright a letter?
It's an interesting question, and one that comes up mostly with letters written by famous people, rather than run-of-the-mill everyday correspondence, but it is the same principle.
FWIW, here's my view....
A letter consists of two distinct things:
1: the physical letter itself, ie. the paper it is written on; and
2: the actual words written on the paper.The recipient of the letter owns the physical letter, and can sell it to someone else.
The actual words of the letter though remain with the writer who retains copyright in the normal way.
In principle it therefore works the same as if you had bought (or had been given) a book or novel.
You can sell the physical book to someone else, but the author still owns (copyright) the words.
-
16
Are there any KH in Israel????
by James Mixon incurious , i was thinking about serving where the need is great..that would be a hard sale, that would be like me setting up a lemonade stand at the gate of a kkk rally...
-
-
darkspilver
James Mixon: Are there any KH in Israel????
Yes.
I understand they're generally meeting rooms that are located within mid-rise commercial or mixed-use buildings, rather than 'traditional' purpose-built, stand-alone style buildings - which is similiar to a number of KHs in both Europe and Asia.
Check out my post below from December 2016 which has a link to an online article about how the JWs operate in Israel - with pictures from two KHs!.
Article: https://imgur.com/ruTYVZo
dozy: No Christian groups are permitted to evangelise in Israel
See pictures in above article.
-
4
Looking for quote re: gay rights 1973-1974 WT/Awake
by cabasilas ini remembered recently an article i read in a watchtower or awake!
about 1973 or 1974. a woman gave her story of how she had rejected the fight for women's rights (it may have used the term women's lib or liberation) and became a jw.
she lived in nyc and i actually met her briefly when i was at bethel.
-
-
darkspilver
There was the following relatively major article presented as a 'first hand experience' in a 1974 Watchtower?
It was the lead/first article in the magazine. On the front cover the title was listed at the top above the titles of two other (unrelated) articles.
How Women Can Really Be LiberatedWatchtower, July 1, 1974, pages 387 to 393
“WOMEN, UNITE! SISTERHOOD IS POWERFUL!” This was the slogan of demonstrators at the protest against the Miss America Beauty Pageant in 1969 at Atlantic City. I was there, covering the demonstration for CBS News Radio. The assignment, received only by chance, proved to be a turning point in my life.
I was not a regular reporter. My position then was that of press representative, or publicist, for CBS News. However, protesters refused to talk with male reporters, so I was asked to cover the story, since CBS then had no female reporters based in New York.
I knew only a little about the women’s liberation movement at the time, and much of what I knew sounded extreme. But as I did research, I was surprised to learn that I felt the same way about matters as they did.
True, they were angry. They had complaints. But I think anyone with an open mind would agree that they correctly saw some problems and desired to make things better.
Before going to the Pageant, I interviewed, on CBS Radio, Robin Morgan, one of the organizers of the movement. She explained:
“The whole image of women as presented by the Pageant is a kind of mindless ‘sex object.’ The contestant is there to sort of smile and shut up, and show herself in a bathing suit. . . . We think the whole notion of parading up and down, sort of like a country fair, before judges who judge the meat, is depraved and is a barbarous ritual.”
The more I listened, the more I identified with these women and what they were fighting for. They seemed really sincere; it seemed to me that they were not just thinking of themselves, but were seeking to establish better, more balanced relationships with men.
As Robin explained, men were oppressed too by the cultural definitions of “masculinity” and “femininity”: “Men are oppressed by what we call the Hemingway mystique—that if you beat up women, shoot dumb animals, and if you drink a lot—then you are a real man.”
Did she hate men? I wanted to know.
“I hate the John Wayne stereotype,” she answered. “So in that respect I am a man hater. But no, in general terms, we don’t hate men. I think that we want to learn to love ourselves, and learn to love people.”
This was different from what I had been told that the women’s liberation movement wanted. It was what I wanted. So it was not long before I was fully committed to the movement, and eventually I became a fighter for women’s liberation.
I still believe that both women and men need liberation, and I can truthfully say that I am working harder now than ever to show others the solution to the oppression of humankind.
Not all women are in sympathy with all the goals of women’s liberation. So you might wonder, What kind of woman gets involved in the movement? My own story is illustrative.
ACHIEVING WORLDLY SUCCESS
I was raised in Connecticut, in an affluent suburb of New York city, and went to a private all-girls’ school. Mine was an intellectual family with a literary tradition and a keen appreciation of the world of the mind.
I married at eighteen and had a son. The marriage ended in divorce when I was twenty-three. That left me looking for work, with a son to support.
I was offered jobs as a secretary, which I refused, reasoning that if I ever started as a secretary I would never get beyond it. I would have to start beyond it to get beyond it, job discrimination against women being what it is. I knew I had certain skills, but I was not given the serious consideration I would have been had I been a man. This experience hit me very hard, and opened my eyes to the problems of women in the job market.
Finally, almost by accident, I found someone willing to take a chance on me as a publicity writer for The Reporter magazine, a political journal. This led to the position as publicist at CBS News. Eventually I became manager of CBS News Publicity for the entire national news unit, the first woman to hold that position.
As an executive, I had a secretary and a staff of writers under me. And I knew everybody at CBS, from the president on down. I would see Walter Cronkite almost every day, since I would write stories about him as if he had written them himself. He would look a story over and approve it. Then we would feed it to editors in different cities across the country who would print it as if they had personally gotten an interview with Cronkite or as if he had written the article just for them.
This was a glamour job. I had status. I had money. I had youth and attractiveness. Since I had everything the culture teaches you to want, why, you may then ask, did I become a fighter for women’s liberation?
WHY WOMEN’S LIBERATION?
Although I was able to get a good job, I knew that relatively few women make out as well as men, due to job discrimination against them. So I became a fighter for women’s liberation because a principal purpose of the movement was to correct this situation.
Another reason why women’s liberation developed, and why it appealed to me, had to do with rising living costs and modern-day life styles. This meant that wives had to work to help support the family, and then come home and cook and clean and run the household too. Husbands generally refused to step outside their so-called “masculine” role to help, since they considered such chores “woman’s work.” We felt that this heavy physical burden on women was unfair, and women’s liberation wanted to change it.
Within the family arrangement, too, woman’s role has changed. We are not, like some of our grandmothers, raising fifteen children, making our own cloth, milking cows, baking our own bread, and so forth. The average family today has maybe two or three children, and that means that by the time a woman hits her forties, her children do not need her as much anymore. So just at the age that her husband is reaching his career peak, she is at home, often not knowing what to do with herself.
Even with all of this, woman’s lot might have been endurable were it not for the change in sex attitudes in the nineteen sixties. We knew, as women, that a large proportion of men were traditionally unfaithful to their wives. But now men were doing openly and without apology what they had previously done secretly, and they were pressuring women to adopt similar free-wheeling attitudes toward sex. Yet the average woman has a strong distaste for infidelity as a way of life. It goes against her grain. So the open promiscuousness of men led many women directly to women’s liberation.
We were also tired of being viewed as sex objects. Women hate it when their bosses, with power to hire and fire them, try to force them into sexual relationships. This is a widespread problem for women in the working world.
I was fired in 1971, and I felt that it was because I had refused to date my boss at CBS. When I brought the matter to the attention of one of the vice-presidents, instead of being outraged, as I was, he told me: “This is an everyday affair.”
He was right. The proposition was common. My response was not. I filed a $2-million lawsuit, charging discrimination in employment.
All of these, and more, are real problems that women face. They clearly need to be solved. But how? Women began seeking answers.
FORMING THE MOVEMENT
It was Betty Friedan’s book The Feminine Mystique, published in 1963, that articulated the malaise that women were increasingly feeling due to the way the changes of the modern world had adversely affected their lives. The effect of this book could be likened to a brush fire. Women all across the country began to realize that they were not alone in their discontent.
In 1966 Friedan formed the National Organization for Women, designed to work organizationally for an end to discrimination against women. Soon similar organizations were being formed. The basis of the developing women’s movements was what were called “rap groups.” These groups of eight to ten women each would decide to get together every week to discuss women’s problems. These groups sprang up like mushrooms.
These were exhilarating times for me and for many women just discovering women’s liberation. We spent many hours hashing out what we felt about being women, sharing experiences and developing theories. We found that a lot of resentments that we had submerged began to surface and, as we all shared our unhappy experiences at the hands of men, we got madder and madder. But, at the same time, we drew closer and closer together as women.
This feeling of solidarity, of trust, of love, which we called “sisterhood,” was new to all of us, and beautiful. We had all grown up viewing other women as potential rivals for some male’s attention. Now we began to try to see one another as friends and co-victims who needed to depend on one another.
Often these “rap groups” developed into larger organizations. For example, my “rap group,” composed largely of women in journalism, formed the nucleus of what became New York Media Women. This group made headlines when it stormed the Ladies’ Home Journal demanding changes in story content and personnel policy to upgrade the image of women that the magazine projected.
The women’s liberation movement revolutionized attitudes toward women. In employment, in education, in sports, the discrimination against women has, to a considerable extent, been relieved.
Also, lawsuits had a tremendous impact on job opportunities for women, such as my own against CBS. When I worked at CBS, there was only one woman reporter on the worldwide national news staff. Within a few months of the filing of my lawsuit, they had five female reporters.
Although sizable accomplishments had been made, I soon saw serious problems within the movement itself and these began disturbing me.
WHAT WENT WRONG?
The ideals of women’s liberation seemed to me to be beautiful in theory, yet they were not working in practice. For example, sisterhood—one of our most cherished concepts—broke down as soon as women began to taste power. The theory had not taken into account human selfishness.
I witnessed several bitter power struggles in women’s groups, with women stabbing each other in the back as bloodthirstily as any man I ever saw. In New York Media Women, as in the movement as a whole, many women unmistakably manifested a “hustler’s” mentality—they wanted to be famous and successful, and they used the movement as their personal stepping-stone.
As the idealistic theories proved unrealistic, radical elements began to take the movement off in new and, to me, frightening directions.
For example, we focused heavily on rape as an issue. How can women protect themselves? The solution the movement came up with was karate and judo. I went along with this and trained in karate, because I was determined that I would never be at any man’s mercy.
I remember a group of us holding a planning session to discuss going out and maiming or even killing men that were known to have raped or beaten up women. We were serious. But would it have been morally right? To me it was not right—it violated everything I wanted to be as a person. It seemed that the movement was losing its moral thrust. It was willing to enforce change, regardless of the means. Another dominant theme of the movement disgusted me more than violence—that was lesbianism. I discovered, in time, that many of the women I had admired and who were taking over leadership of the movement were lesbians. Actually, the movement itself served to encourage women to become lesbians. Of course, that was not the original purpose of the movement, but this is what resulted.
The goal of women’s liberation had originally been to build better relationships between men and women, based on mutual respect. We had really believed that as soon as men knew of our grievances, they would acknowledge their validity and change. Instead, men were reacting to women’s liberation with hostility, mockery, and an entrenchment of attitudes.
Thus many women were finding that liberation meant losing their man. Many men simply walked out and found more “feminine” women. In turn, the women they left behind often gave up trying to relate to men. So when their men walked out on them, they too walked out—to another woman.
To me, however, lesbianism was perversion and a revolting practice. I was not going to fight for a woman’s right to be a lesbian.
EFFECT ON THE FAMILY
As a mother, I became disturbed over another developing aspect of the movement—the view of children and the family. Divorce was encouraged. Women who married and became pregnant were looked down upon as old-fashioned and bourgeois. Voluntary sterilization was considered a “liberated” action, all-women communes became the encouraged life style, and test-tube babies the dream of the future.
Encouraged by such views, many women began running away from their families. Recently I read some statistics by Tracers Company of America, experts on finding missing persons. In the early nineteen sixties the ratio of husbands to wives deserting their families was 300 to one. By the late sixties, it had become 100 to one. Today it is one to one! Now women are doing the very thing for which they had hated men.
But I loved and enjoyed my son. A chronic source of grief to me was the fact that my job necessitated my being away from him so much. I worried about how he would turn out if a series of baby-sitters raised him, and I wished I had another choice. The women’s liberation movement simply was not answering the basic questions: What happens to the children if both parents work? And, deeper, what happens to them if both parents refuse to be parents anymore because parenthood interferes with their personal pursuit of happiness?
I was confused and disillusioned. Women’s liberation did not have the answers. But what particularly saddened me was that I had fought so hard to involve other women in a movement that was having such bad effects on their relationships both with men and with their families.
Still, liberation was clearly needed. We women had correctly identified real problems that contribute toward making life miserable for millions. What, then, were the solutions? I did not give up looking.
AN UNEXPECTED SOURCE
A friend suggested that the Bible had the answers. I was skeptical to the extreme. To a women’s liberationist the Bible is just a book written by a bunch of men—reflecting men’s negative attitudes toward women. But I decided at least to investigate. I knew how so many had misrepresented what women’s liberation was all about. Therefore I realized that it would be unfair to pass judgment upon the Bible without first studying it.
I had never before read the Bible. So one day I picked up a copy and happened to open it to Isaiah chapter fifty-four, where I began reading: “‘For your Grand Maker is your husbandly owner, Jehovah of armies being his name . . . For Jehovah called you as if you were a wife left entirely and hurt in spirit, and as a wife of the time of youth who was then rejected,’ your God has said.” How could this God Jehovah know about such womanly feelings? I wondered. The delicacy of the image moved me to want to find out more about what kind of God this is.
The person who directed me to the Bible, although not being one of Jehovah’s witnesses, said that they were the only ones who taught the Bible straight. So in May of 1971 I contacted a local Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses and arranged for a Witness to study with me. The answers given gradually began making sense.
The Bible’s emphasis on love and the need to consider the worth of fellow humans really appealed to me. For example, these scriptures are only a sampling of many that impressed me:
“Become kind to one another, tenderly compassionate, freely forgiving one another just as God also by Christ freely forgave you.” Do “nothing out of contentiousness or out of egotism, but with lowliness of mind considering that the others are superior to you.” “In showing honor to one another take the lead.”—Eph. 4:32; Phil. 2:3; Rom. 12:10.
Nothing is said about this advice applying only to women; no, this is how people, male and female, should consider and treat one another. I was all for that!
I had become disgusted with the world’s view that men “had” to fly from flower to flower like bumblebees—immorality supposedly being natural for them. Now I discovered that the Bible says, ‘No! Do not do that! Marriage is to be kept honorable!’ Further, Romans chapter one condemns homosexual conduct, terming it “obscene.” What a relief!
HUSBANDS AND WIVES
“But,” many women are sure to ask, “what about the scripture that says, ‘Let wives be in subjection to their husbands as to the Lord, because a husband is head of his wife’”? (Eph. 5:22, 23) When I first read it, this was distasteful to me too. I wondered, How could having a husband as her head be anything but enslaving to his wife? However, the person with whom I was studying urged me to consider the full picture and not to judge the principle stated in this scripture by what I had seen among men in the world.
It was shown to me that Christian husbands, too, have a head to whom they are in subjection and that they are under orders to treat their wives just as Jesus had treated his earthly followers. (1 Cor. 11:3) Ephesians chapter 5 says about this: “Husbands, continue loving your wives, just as the Christ also loved the congregation and delivered up himself for it.” I thought to myself: If husbands really did this, if they loved their wives so much that they would willingly die for them, there never would have been a women’s liberation movement!
Also, I was shown where the Bible commands husbands to assign honor to their wives. (1 Pet. 3:7) Now this idea of headship began to be a little more acceptable to me.
But, I still wondered, if this was what God, the inventor of marriage, wanted husbands to be like, how did everything get so mixed up? I learned in my study that when man sinned in the garden of Eden, he brought on himself a host of problems, including sickness and death. But, in reading the Bible account, I was appalled at the punishment Eve received: “Your craving will be for your husband, and he will dominate you.”—Gen. 3:16.
What a repugnant thought! Did this mean that in order to accept the Bible I would have to accept domination as woman’s lot? No, as I studied deeper I learned that God has in mind very soon to begin the restoration of man and woman to their original perfect state. Sin, sickness and death will be removed forever. (Rev. 21:3, 4) Did this mean, then, that this domination by sinful men would end also?
Yes. I joyfully learned that while the loving headship principle will remain, the selfish domineering by men will cease. Viewed in this context, would not having a husbandly head as loving as Christ be pleasant?
Not only that, I learned that I did not have to wait for Jehovah God to transform the earth into Paradise. Christian men, true Christians, are supposed to be striving to live up to God’s righteous standards right now. Were they?
ONLY THEORY?
I was urged to attend the meetings of Jehovah’s witnesses regularly and to associate with them and their families, and see for myself. I was amazed. They really practice what the Bible teaches. Then I began to see why.
Each one of them believes the Bible to be true—that the Creator of the universe actually inspired humans to write it. So the Witnesses sincerely try, to the best of their abilities, to live by God’s Word. As a result they do treat others kindly and with compassion, and husbands do work at loving and honoring their wives.
Moreover, I saw that when they pray to God, ‘Our Father in heaven, let your kingdom come,’ they really believe that God’s government will rule the earth. They really believe the Bible when it says: “The God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. . . . It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite.”—Dan. 2:44.
LIBERATION WORTH FIGHTING FOR
I could see that Jehovah’s witnesses believe that the smashing of this system by God is near and that soon now deserving humankind will be preserved into a righteous new order. As I thought about it, this became reasonable to me too. For surely the Creator must be appalled by the gross selfishness and immorality that pervades every part of this world! And I was convinced that humans by themselves cannot correct this situation.
As I continued to study the Bible, I became more convinced that what God will accomplish will be far beyond what we in women’s liberation could ever have hoped to achieve. For under God’s kingdom not only will women’s problems be solved, but the Creator will see that all humankind is liberated from every form of oppression, including even sickness and death. This is what he has promised in his Word, and there is every reason to believe that he will keep his promise.
So I am still a fighter for the liberation of both women and men, but in a different way. Instead of spending many hours each week in “rap sessions” or fighting legally to improve women’s rights, I use my time showing people that their only real hope for happy living is in applying in their lives the fine principles of God’s Word. This is the only way that will lead to true liberation in the paradise “new earth” under God’s righteous Kingdom rule. (2 Pet. 3:13) - Contributed.
-
41
JW Elder fired from bank for privacy violation regarding fellow JW employee
by Zoos in"thou shalt spy on and report your brothers and sisters to hq.".
https://www.tv6tnt.com/news/local/industrial-court-finds-there-are-limits-to-freedom-of-religion/article_5a485b94-a327-11e7-9c32-57b15184bc6a.html.
editor's note: due to the nature of this story we've changed the names of the parties involved.
-
-
darkspilver
freddo: Mind you I suppose that "Jane" in using the company computer system to engage in or record herself engaging in sexual activity was breaking the company rules herself. Having said that - as what she did wasn't illegal.
How do you know?
This episode apparently took place in Trinidad and Tobago.
I understand that the Trinidad and Tobago Sexual Offences Act, Section 13, states that: "A person who commits buggery is guilty of an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment - (a) if committed by an adult on a minor, for life; (b) if committed by an adult on another adult, for twenty-five years; and (c) if committed by a minor, for five years."
Take care. Different countries. Different laws.
-
75
Apostasy: The Movie - Directed by Daniel Kokotajlo
by darkspilver indaniel kokotajlo's new film apostasy has it's world premiere at the toronto international film festival in september 2017. apostasy.
family and faith come into conflict for two jehovah’s witness sisters in manchester, when one is condemned for fornication and the other pressured to shun her sibling.. this fresh, unadorned first feature from director dan kokotajlo carries an unmistakable note of authenticity from its very first scenes.
set in a jehovah's witness community in england, the film's strength and power lies in its directness.. apostasy depicts the growing rift in a family — a mother and two daughters — who are rigorously devoted to their religion.
-
-
darkspilver
Apostasy has just had it's European Premiere at the San Sebastian Film Festival (22 to 30 September 2017, see earlier posts in this thread) - and two more reviews have been published online - from The Playlist and Screen Daily (their second review of the film).
PLEASE NOTE: They are both fairly long, and are more 'indepth' than previous reviews, and go more into the actual story. Therefore, depending on how you wish to approach the film, they may contain what you consider to be spoilers that you would prefer not to know about before seeing the film for yourself. The extracts below are 'spoiler-free'.
REMINDER: As previously posted in this thread (see above), the UK PREMIERE of Apostasy takes place next week as part of the London International Film Festival (4 to 15 October 2017). There are just three public screenings, and the first one - on Sunday, October 8, 2017 - is already completely SOLD OUT.
Faith Divides Family In Deeply Moving ‘Apostasy’ [San Sebastian Review]The Playlist, Friday, September 29, 2017
A piercingly humane and deeply moving glimpse into a community that for all its preaching and evangelizing remains largely a mystery to outsiders, Daniel Kokotajlo‘s debut film “Apostasy” insinuates us with sorrowful grace into the lives of a family of Jehovah’s Witnesses as they experience a series of challenges that amount to a familial Armageddon. A story told without condescension but astutely comprehending the cruelty of a faith that demands Abrahamic levels of sacrifice from its adherents, the picture is a remarkably assured and understated piece of filmmaking, showcasing not only a first-time director who has arrived fully-formed, but three exceptionally authentic performances from the women at its slow-breaking heart.
It seems as though “Apostasy” is mostly going to be concerned with Alex’s coming-of-age within the confines of her faith... Dramatic (though never melodramatic) events conspire to reshape the narrative of Kokotajlo’s film in unexpected directions, shifting the emphasis from Alex to Luisa and finally to Ivanna, with not a single false note struck between any of the actors. One particularly shocking development almost serves to subtly remind us that our own faith in cinematic narrative is as fundamental as that of a Jehovah’s Witness in the stories of the Bible, and just as much cold comfort when life fails to abide by those rules.
Kokotajlo keeps formal fireworks to a minimum, using the restrained palette, eloquently off-center framing and shallow-focus close-ups to root us in a tightly controlled naturalism. As a result a simple device, such as having Alex speak her prayers aloud while scenes play on around her, has a heightened effect: this is a world in which prayer is as tangible and real as conversation, just as articles of faith are taken as articles of fact.
The director is himself a former Jehovah’s Witness, and the film feels informed by both sadness and anger at an institution that can force such impossible choices on its believers.
READ FULL REVIEW: https://theplaylist.net/apostasy-review-jehovahs-witness-20170929/
'Apostasy': San Sebastian ReviewScreen Daily, Friday, September 29, 2017
An audacious debut from first-time British director Daniel Kokotajlo is set in the Jehovahs Witness faith of his own childhood
Little understood and often mocked, the Jehovah’s Witnesses have the spotlight turned on them in intimate British drama Apostasy – and what's revealed is deeply troubled. Written and directed by Daniel Kokotajlo, himself a former Witness, this powerful feature debut occupies territory little charted in contemporary UK cinema, on the cusp between traditional social realism and a more European type of austere formal stylisation. Built around three intense, controlled female performances this story of family in conflict with faith delivers an emotional payoff all the more telling for being so rigorously calibrated.
The film, though shot in the kind of locales familiar from so much school-of-Loach drama, derives a fresh visual feel from Adam Scarth’s rigorously composed Academy ratio lensing, intensifying street scenes, claustrophobic interiors and intimate close-ups alike.
With a palette that emphasises browns and beiges to suggest a constrained, airless world, the film feels strikingly European in flavour: it’s close to two German dramas about young women and religious extremity, 2006’s Requiem (stylistically) and 2014’s Stations of the Cross (thematically). In domestic terms, its affinities are with that handful of directors that push UK realism towards its artistically challenging edges – e.g. Lawlor and Molloy (Helen) and Duane Hopkins (Better Things).
READ FULL REVIEW: https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/apostasy-san-sebastian-review/5122789.article
-
13
"... climate of disfellowshipping in Hull currently... " - Hull Daily Mail
by Nicholaus Kopernicus inarticle from the above news paper... .
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hull-east-yorkshire-news/hull-jehovahs-witnesses-speak-out-444185.
maybe boe in north east england having an attack of zealous fervour!
-
-
darkspilver
UPDATE
Terrifying Jehovah's Witnesses 'witch hunt' deepens to include 'shunning' non-membersHull Daily Mail, Thursday, September 28, 2017
Former Jehovah's Witnesses in Hull say shunning has 'stepped up' since speaking out
Former Jehovah’s Witnesses who spoke out against the organisation say the religious group is encouraging more people to shun them.
Former members in Hull described how they were asked to leave the group and shunned, leaving them isolated from loved ones, because they questioned elements of the doctrine preached by the religious group.
Now, members say the practice of shunning, which follows a form of ex-communication known as 'disfellowship', is also being extended to non-members.
Adrienne Van Den Tooren, of west Hull, said: “Witnesses are now contacting non-Witnesses telling them to have nothing to do with us.
“Witnesses claim we are mad and have been banging down the doors of Kingdom Hall.
“The policy and procedures in place make Jehovah’s Witnesses an organisation of abuse and oppression. Every area of life is controlled and monitored by the organisation.
“After the article was published a family member told me I had been silly and ridiculous and will now have nothing to do with me."
READ FULL ARTICLE: http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hull-east-yorkshire-news/terrifying-jehovahs-witnesses-witch-hunt-541793
-
192
Question for SBF
by Fisherman inslimboyfat, it appears that wts is going, gone digital.
can you show your view what is wts next move after they are completely gone from kings county and settled in warwick?
- this thread is your if you want it..
-
-
darkspilver
slimboyfat: Which makes me wonder actually. Are people listening on the phone counted as attending the memorial these days I wonder?
Yes.
I understand that the underlying key principle is: If the person is listening or viewing the congregation meeting LIVE, as it happens, either 'in-person' or via an 'audio link', then they are counted as meeting attendees. BUT if they listen or watch a recording of the meeting at a later time then they are NOT counted.
The audio link may also include video and may be provided by hard-wiring, the telephone, the radio, or by the internet. The important principle is that they must be listening to the congregation meeting LIVE - this therefore has provided a strong incentive for congregations to introduce telephone/internet links in order to 'increase' the meeting 'attendance' (!)
Of course the congregation themselves may be listening to a recording (ie the 2018 Special Talk video) - but those listening in via an audio link would be counted as congregation meeting attendees provided they listen to the same recording live along with their congregation and using the congregation's own 'tie-in' facility.
If a person 'time-shifts' the meeting by listening to a recording at another time, then they are NOT counted. Some congregation (used to?) record the meetings (on a tape or something?) and give them afterwards those unable to attend (such as the elderly or the ill) so they could be listened to later - none of these people would be included in the meeting attendance figure/s.
There are a number of bespoke KH 'live listening' solutions available and they generally allow you to input the number of people listening on a particular device or telephone (ie, if there was a husband and wife together, they could listen using one device, but input the figure '2', so that the congregation could have an 'accurate' count.)
For the Memorial the same principles apply. I understand that the 'exception' would be with partakers.
If a partaker was unable to attend the congregation's Memorial, AND was unable to listen live, they would NOT be counted as an attendee. BUT the elders would visit the same evening, after sundown, have a brief scriptural discussion and allow them to partake of the emblems - they would then be counted as a Memorial partaker for that congregation (but NOT as a Memorial attendee).I would expect this to be a fairly rare occurrence effecting only a few, and some elder bodies may decide to 'fudge' it and include them as attendees anyway as they counted as partaking - I don't think this is a big issue considering the presumably very low numbers involved.
(TBH, with the increase in the use of telephone link-ins, I would expect a publisher / elder to sit with the (ill?) partaker at their home and help them to be able to listen LIVE to the Memorial together (and therefore be counted as attendees) and then either have their own emblems for the partaker to use at the same time as the congregation, or for the elders to visit with the emblems afterwards.)
-
14
Sandra Melgar convicted of murder in husband's brutal stabbing
by darkspilver infyihouston woman convicted of murder in husband's brutal stabbing.
wednesday, august 23, 2017jurors discount her claim that intruder was responsiblemelgar maintained her innocence in the dec. 22, 2012 killing, which occurred the day before the couple's 32nd wedding anniversary.http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/houston-woman-convicted-of-murder-in-husband-s-11954131.php.
sandra melgar guilty of killing husband, faking home invasion on houston couple's anniversary night.
-
-
darkspilver
The Australian weekly magazine, Who (the sister magazine to the US magazine People) has published the following article as a 'double-page' spread in last week's PRINT edition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_(magazine)
It appears that the article is based on the one that appeared in the US People magazine (see post above in this thread) BUT looks like it has been completely re-written.
Cold-blooded Killer or Victim?WHO, Monday, September 25, 2017, print edition pages 52 and 53
A US jury finds Sandra Melgar guilty of fatally stabbing her husband for money - but she insists he was killed in a deadly home invasion
It was supposed to be a joyous party. Friends and family of Jaime and Sandra Melgar arrived at the couple’s Houston, Texas, home on Dec. 23, 2012, planning to help the couple celebrate their 32nd wedding anniversary. But once Jaime’s brother and his family let themselves inside the house through an open garage door, they instantly knew something was very wrong. They could hear a woman screaming for help, drawers were pulled out in the couple’s bedroom and jewellery boxes were strewn around the bathroom. Jaime lay in a pool of blood in the closet, dead from 31 stab wounds. The screams were coming from Sandra, who was in a separate closet, loosely bound by her wrists and ankles. She said she believed they had been victims of a home invasion, but that she had suffered a seizure and had no recollection of what happened. “It haunts me every day,” says the couple’s only daughter, Elizabeth Rose, 32. “I wish I had more answers.”
Authorities think they already have the answers - and that they all point to Sandra. During a three-week trial in August, prosecutors charged that Sandra, now 57, fatally stabbed her husband, Jaime, 52, with one of their kitchen knives and then staged a break-in so she could benefit from a $US250,000 life-insurance policy. On Aug. 24, jurors agreed and found Sandra guilty of firstdegree murder, sentencing her to 27 years’ prison. “There just isn’t any reasonable evidence that it was anybody else but her,” says Harris County district court chief Colleen Barnett. Sandra continues to maintain her innocence and her defence team plans to appeal her conviction. Her daughter is standing by her: “A gasp went through the courtroom when the verdict was read,” says Rose. “It was a complete shock.”
At the trial, prosecutors cited inconsistencies in Sandra’s story and introduced evidence suggesting Jaime was already dead when he was tied up. They also pointed to a cloudy fingernail on Sandra’s right hand indicating that she had used cleaning solution to wipe up evidence at the crime scene. But the defence counters that homicide detectives decided Sandra was guilty from the start and ignored leads - such as a swathe of blood on a safe - that may have pointed to other suspects.
Those close to the Melgars wonder how the couple’s 32-year marriage could end so violently. The pair lived a quiet, comfortable life, with Jaime working as a computer programmer for a school district and Sandra running her own medical billing and coding business. “They liked to go out and have dinner,” says Rose. “They’d hang out with friends. Sometimes they would stay at home and have drinks together and watch a movie. They evened each other out pretty well.”
So how could a seemingly perfect relationship end in murder? Even the prosecutors don’t have a concrete answer. “There were no disputes between them really,” says Barnett. “But when I listened to her statement to the police, I could tell that there were some sore spots.” At trial a witness testified that Sandra’s religious beliefs - the Melgars were Jehovah’s Witnesses - oppose divorce. “They were not allowed to divorce unless the spouse has committed adultery, which Jaime had not done,” Barnett says. “I think that was part of the motive.”
As the case heads to appeal, Rose says she will keep fighting to prove her mother didn’t kill her father. “They were happy together,” says Rose. “I feel like I have lost everything. I am always going to question this.”
-
41
JW Elder fired from bank for privacy violation regarding fellow JW employee
by Zoos in"thou shalt spy on and report your brothers and sisters to hq.".
https://www.tv6tnt.com/news/local/industrial-court-finds-there-are-limits-to-freedom-of-religion/article_5a485b94-a327-11e7-9c32-57b15184bc6a.html.
editor's note: due to the nature of this story we've changed the names of the parties involved.
-
-
darkspilver
OrphanCrow: I am not entirely sure of this, but I think that some European countries (Germany maybe?) require medical doctors to be transparent concerning their religious affiliation. I would like to see this policy put in place everywhere. I cannot imagine anything much more disturbing than finding out that I was getting medical advice from a doctor that has affiliations with the Watchtower Society and the Jehovah's Witnesses.
That's interesting OrphanCrow. So you mean having a JW doctor labelled as a 'Jehovah's Witness', a Jewish doctor labelled as a 'Jew', a muslim doctor labelled as a 'Muslim', and so on - Hindu, Roman Catholic, Atheist etc etc.
How would you propose they be labelled? Maybe a simple symbol or graphic? Could be made into a badge or something? Worn on the jacket pocket? Added to the outside of the building?
You may find that you'll get support if you also include ethnicity into the equation too.
Why only doctors though ? Bonnie_Clyde's post highlights that this religious/ethnicity labelling could have a role in other (non-medical) aspects of life.
OrphanCrow: I think that some European countries (Germany maybe?)
Yes, I think some European countries have tried this kind of religious/ethnicity labelling thing?
