Posts by IT Support

43

Unofffical Jehovah's Witness Website Censured

by Kenneson in

jw
friends

this poor fellow got in trouble with the watchtower society over copyright laws and got reprimanded.

instead of standing up for his rights, he just "kisses xxx.

" read his acquiescing response.. http://www.desinger.com/scriptures/conclusion.html

IT Support

Lostreality ,

Almost makes me want to start a JW site, just to see if they pull that sort of crap on me...

What a brilliant idea!

7

Need a WT-letter about Child Custody Materials

by Henriksen in

some years ago the legal department of the watchtower sent out a letter about child custody materials.

i strongly need a copy af this letter (if possibly with a date) for documentation.

if you have a copy of this letter, please mail me a copy.

IT Support

Hi Elsewhere,

Thanks for that link to the .pdf. However, I tried printing it out and keep getting an error.

Page 1 prints ok, then this is on the next page:

ERROR: ioerror OFFENDING COMMAND: image STACK: -dictionary- -savelevel-

Does this also happen to you? Is it possible to 'rebuild' the pdf?

Thanks.

4

Has there been a change?

by IT Support in

newspaper article from ghana

according to him, one to two units of blood was taken from the patient and replaced with intravenous fluids.

the bleeding during the surgery would, therefore, be diluted blood.

IT Support

Thanks all for your comments. I understand that there's not been any change in the 'West.'

However, consider what we already know:

the Society agreed to unique, country-specific rules for Bulgaria (though, of course, they now deny it);
there is a constant struggle between the 'hawks' and 'doves' in Brooklyn over autologous transfusions.

So the Ghanaian newspaper article could be explained in one of two ways:

(1) The consultant anaesthetist simply misunderstood the WT policy.

This is possible but unlikely because:

this is a major teaching hospital, and is the main hospital for West Africa;
the bloodless surgery program was specially designed for JWs and, although not stated in the article, it would be hard to believe that WT Ghana branch's Hospital Information Desk would not have been closely involved in developing such a significant program for JWs.

(2) WT 'doves' are testing a new policy in West Africa.

The reasons for thinking this are:

as the majority of JWs are either unaware of, or choose to ignore, the Bulgaria situation, WT leaders think they have 'got away with' containing a change of policy within a single country;
therefore WT leaders (or at least the 'doves,' who want to reform the organisation into a more mainstream Christian religion) now feel more confident introducing a minor reform in a remote part of the world, where it would most likely be overlooked;
even the GB 'hawks' want to get rid of the blood policy, but need to do so without losing face (i.e. their authority) or being swamped with lawsuits: this would be a good way of 'testing the water';
even if it all goes horribly wrong, it is not such a major reform that it could not be easily deniable or explained away to upset JWs as a 'misunderstanding';
if there is no outcry or serious defections from among the 'rank and file,' the policy could then be safely introduced in the rest of the world.

Does anyone on JWD have any 'inside' information on what went on 'behind the scenes' in Accra?

Are there any other possibilities? Or am I just being too conspiratorial?

7

Need a WT-letter about Child Custody Materials

by Henriksen in

some years ago the legal department of the watchtower sent out a letter about child custody materials.

i strongly need a copy af this letter (if possibly with a date) for documentation.

if you have a copy of this letter, please mail me a copy.

IT Support

Henriksen,

See Freeminds' Lying In Court: a review of the Watchtower's booklet, "Preparing For Child Custody Cases"

http://www.freeminds.org/legal/custody.htm

Hope this helps.

8

UK Charity Commission - new rules

by IT Support in

i was browsing the uk charity commission website and came across an

interesting document

all charities must also be for the benefit of the community or an appreciably important section of the community .

IT Support

Earnest ,

Apart from the identification of the Watchtower Society as a charity, there are a number of congregations registered as charities (I counted 34 at http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/ ).

The government requires any organisation that wishes to benefit from Deeds of Covenant (now, I think, replaced by Gift Aid) to be registered as a charity. The Society recommends that most congregations register to benefit from this provision. I suspect probably 90% of congregations would be registered (though I'm not sure how many that should make the number of registered congregations!).

Whether or not it would serve any purpose to challenge that status is a moot point but I wonder how many would be able to defend it.

I agree with your second comment: very few, if any. As for your first point, once the charity status of WT, IBSA and other subsidiary organisations are revoked, I would expect the congregations to follow automatically.

4

Has there been a change?

by IT Support in

newspaper article from ghana

according to him, one to two units of blood was taken from the patient and replaced with intravenous fluids.

the bleeding during the surgery would, therefore, be diluted blood.

IT Support

This is from a newspaper article from Ghana :

According to him, one to two units of blood was taken from the patient and replaced with intravenous fluids. The bleeding during the surgery would, therefore, be diluted blood. Dr Aniteye, who is also a lecturer at the University of Ghana Medical School, said after the surgery, the blood taken was put back.

I presume this is wrong, and WT isn't 'test running' a new policy here before rolling it out worldwide?

Does anyone know?

14

How's this for an effective anti-Watchtower media campaign?

by nicolaou in

jw
friends

bear with me, you'll soon see where this is going......... i was listening to radio 5 live (uk) this morning.

a chap was being interviewed about a campaign he has started in brighton to save his local football club and its ground - full story here.

what he and his friends have done is release a record!

IT Support

nicolaou ,

Great idea!

ColdRedRain ,

And how about we make the proceeds go to silent lambs?

Brilliant.

But in all honesty, we're too scattered across the globe for us to spawn a #1 hit.

Surely that's the whole point of the Internet? Remote collaboration made easy.

8

UK Charity Commission - new rules

by IT Support in

i was browsing the uk charity commission website and came across an

interesting document

all charities must also be for the benefit of the community or an appreciably important section of the community .

IT Support

Earnest,

(iii) the advancement of religion

Thanks for pointing out the following:

With regard to the first three heads [i.e. including the advancement of religion], we can assume (subject to evidence to the contrary) that benefit will result from bodies for the... advancement of... religion.

With WT, we can't assume anything.

However, that assumption may be challenged (see, for example, the decision of the Commissioners of 17 November 1999 in relation to Scientology).

In this case, the Charity Commissioners rejected the Church of Scientology's application for charity status. The second (of three) reasons for the decision was:

"(b) That even were CoS otherwise established for the advancement of religion, public benefit should not be presumed given the relative newness of Scientology and public and judicial concern expressed ? ie the presumption of public benefit available to religious organisations as charities was rebutted (section 8, pages 40 to 43);" (page 1)

It is significant that the Charity Commissioners took note of public concern about the Church of Scientology. That they were allegedly formed for the "advancement of religion" is irrelevant and it cannot be presumed any such religion would be given charity status.

Which, after all, is how it ought to be.

Further on, on page 40, the document states:

"The Commissioners would take a wide view of the question of public benefit and would take into account a number of factors in this connection. These would include whether there was evidence that the organisation?s purposes were adverse to religion, were subversive of morality, failed to confer recognisable charitable benefits, focused too narrowly upon its adherents or extended to too limited a beneficial class."

Is the Watchtower Society (a) adverse to religion, (b) subversive to morality, does it (c) fail to confer recognisable charitable benefits, and is it (d) focussed too narrowly upon its adherents?

(a) adverse to religion: WT's opposition to 'Christendom' and 'Babylon the Great' is well known and documented.

(b) subversive to morality: WT's "theocratic war strategy" damns them by their own words. Their inhumane treatment of those who are expelled from or leave their religion, plus their disdain for 'worldly' persons who do not accept their 'Kingdom message is contrary to civilised behaviour.

(c) fail to confer recognisable charitable benefits: even when there is a disaster, WT does not dip into its own funds to provide relief, but asks congregations to send them funds, some proportion of which--and who knows how much--will undoubtedly reach the intended recipients.

(d) focussed too narrowly upon its adherents: the only body to benefit from their charitable status is Watchtower Society.

In each case, WT fails.

Going back to Earnest's helpful quotation:

Details of the particular circumstances may show that no benefit would in fact arise.

So each individual religion's "particular circumstances" would have to be examined: not a prospect I would expect WT leaders to embrace.

Or it may be that people could not back up their claim of benefit by evidence that we or the court could evaluate.

Precisely.

Or it may be that the relative benefits and disadvantages... showed that the likely outcome would be a net detriment to the public.

While some here most likely would disagree, I think that there is some degree of benefit to the public from JWs preaching activity. E.g. I think some benefit is derived by the elderly and housebound by the social contact they have with Witnesses visiting their homes. But it is very limited, and greatly outweighed by the disadvantages: "the likely outcome would be a net detriment to the public."

If it is so challenged, those trying to register the organisation as a charity must provide factual and positive evidence that benefit may result.

That would be an interesting read.

Additionally, even though there may be a benefit, that could in some cases be outweighed by a greater harm to the community in some other way by putting the purpose into effect.

Where to start? Shunning, hate, blood, paedophiles, mind control, mental ill-health...

Public benefit cannot be demonstrated and no presumption of public benefit would survive if, taking into account all of the relevant facts and circumstances, on balance the purpose tends to the net harm of people.

It doesn't look like WT has a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding. Awww.

Can we help them along the way??

8

UK Charity Commission - new rules

by IT Support in

i was browsing the uk charity commission website and came across an

interesting document

all charities must also be for the benefit of the community or an appreciably important section of the community .

IT Support

I was browsing the UK Charity Commission website and came across an interesting document which says:

all charities must also be for the benefit of the community or an appreciably important section of the community

A further document says:

What can you do if already-registered charities don?t demonstrate that they?re providing public benefit?

If individual charities aren?t delivering public benefit, we will clearly need to take further action. This might include helping the charity change its activities so that it is benefiting enough of the community to show public benefit. We might also use our powers to enforce change.

Wouldn't it be fun if we could prove that WT are not providing any benefit to the public?

What do you think?

13

WT Letter about elders' sins

by IT Support in

someone recently posted a topic which included a link to a wt letter to bodies of elders.

the letter stated that if an elder confessed to having committed a serious (i.e.

disfellowshippable) sin a number of years ago, and nobody knew about it, he need not be removed.

IT Support

TheListener ,

Thanks for confirming the letter's existence!

I'd forgotten all about the letter until a week or so ago, when (so I thought) someone referred to it here on JWD. I was convinced I had downloaded a .pdf file of the letter from a link on the post... <sigh>

The letter to the body of elders was not one specifically dealing with child abusers. It dealt with any member of the servant body who committed a sin some time in the past. This would include fornication, drunkenness, loose conduct, etc.

That's exactly as I remembered it.

Gamaliel and pillsbury ,

Thanks for the quote, I'd forgotten that one. It's excellent, but not the one I was thinking of.

Do you know whether anything similar appears in the newer Organized book, which was released in 1983?

From what I can see, it seems to have very little specific detail, but which is now filled in by confidential letters to the bodies of elders!

Voyager ,

Thanks, but that's not it. The one I'm thinking of was fairly general in the sins it referred to, rather than specifically referring to a single issue like child abuse.

Buster ,

It's not impossible, I guess. Though I distinctly (if I'm not going prematurely senile!) remember downloading a scanned WT letter, rather than reading about an elders meeting that may have discussed the same situaion.