so i had about had enough of reading jw's excuses online about wt child abuse and the candace conti nightline abc video about her case.
this is a really deep burning topic to me as i'm sure it is to many of you.
so today the gloves came off.
Im not going to comment on the whole scenario but what sister head in the clouds said about a molester being asked to phone in is absolutely, positively 100% false and wrong.
MAYBE it happened in her hall, but i strongly doubt even that.
Current policy is the KH is a public place and they are welcome.
This is Anticdotall but a CO even mentioned that pedo's need association and the hall is the "safe" place for that.
i call bull hockey on her story
as i sat through another mind numbing sermon this morning i could not help thinking that the speaker was a total clown.. lime green suit, white shirt, yellow tie, blue socks barely higher than his ankle, brown shoes, and an orange cast.
all that was missing was a big red rubber nose!
and of course everyone remarked what a wonderful talk he gave.
march kingdom ministry insert is about how the field service meetings will be shortened from 10 to 15 minutes down to 5 to 7 minutes.
they want the publishers to report more hours.
in my experience the problem isn't the length of the meeting for service but pioneers and publishers dogging it after the service arrangement.
first off, no, i don't have one.. but, was researching, and this article "when a loved one leaves jehovah" ( sep 1, 2006, p. 17 ), has a box "have you left jehovah.".
this box includes: "you cannot know if you will even be alive tomorrow.
(psalm 102:3; james 4:13, 14) one man who was diagnosed with a terminal illness said: this illness caught me serving jehovah full-time, with no skeletons in my closet.
if you answer 'yah', why do you so answer ?
dont be silly. none of the aged homo sapiens on the gb has shown any unique predatory instinct.
i would nominate either carcharodon carcharias or crocodylus porosus. lots of other worthy nominees though
are getting tattoos a disfellowshipping offense?
i know several jw's that have them but i always thought they were totally taboo.
what do you guys know about this?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b055dttx.
the government has announced plans to make it a legal obligation for social workers, teachers and councillors to report child abuse.
the churches' child protection advisory service has called for the proposed law to apply to churches.
great report by abc on the abuses in jw-dot-org land.... i hope it opens a "floodgate" of future news reports and exposes.
if you ask yourself, "why hasn't the watchtower leadership changed their policy on the 2 witness rule?
if one or more persons on the gb has victims out there that can't come forward because of the 2 witness rule, then that would explain the permanent road block to policy change that is obviously in place.
is it "possible"? of course its possible. wirhlut being overly sarcastic there are a great many things that are possible, but not likely.
you referanced an occam's razor, the simplest answer being the most likely. the simplest answer is that the gb are old men with power, beholden to the idea that they represent the one true god and the standard set is the right one. they also may fear changing policy now would would be to admitt they were wrong before and thus expose them to liablity. those seem to be the most basic, logical reasons rather some secret fear of being exposed via a rule change they can prevent.
that is not to say i think its impossible one of them could be a pedophile. they are human and its certainly possible. it just dosent seem the most likely explanation for their reluctance to modify church policy.
this is a must watch video.
it brought tears of laughter!.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx-akomec3q.
"he lyrics talk about the best choice I can make. As a Jehovah's Witness I know first hand the social pressure to conform is strong. The choice was made by the organization for the girl to skip college and the man to turn down the overtime job. It wasn't their choice"
yep. i also agree with simon on why struggling with doctrine is so hard. its not the main appeal for many.
do the individual article writers have persistently opposing views, or do they each just flip-flop between opposing views?.
what have you observed?.
in the old days (pre 1980's) it was very much individuals having views. now there a lot more standardization, a lot more people read, review and approve before publication. its why the articles seem so much more homogeneous, very bland. by the time they are written, scrubbed for controversy and approved by legal and the gb, they are tepid at best.
the truth of their views seems to be much more on display when they speak in public like the j w o r g talks, zone visits etc etc
