Posts by Fisherman

116

News Flash: New Reveal Article

by Sugar Shane in

less than an hour old:.

https://www.revealnews.org/blog/how-child-sex-abusers-get-reinstated-as-jehovahs-witnesses/.

Fisherman

When you are talking child rape and molestation of any kind, I will dictate to anyone I please, thank-you-very-much. : )

Are you dictating the morality that a boy 16 or younger should not get married to a 69 year old man( It is legal )? Do you want to use legal means to force your morality upon others.

Child rape and molestation are a criminal charges that only a prosecutor can charge a person with. A victim or a witness do not have authority to determine what crime if any was committed, they can however accuse (or report even hearsay) someone of doing something for example, rape or molestation. Until the crime is proven, the accused is innocent and referred to as defendant not as criminal. My previous post explains that the 1st provides confidentiality to the church.The constitution also provides that teenage boys under the and of 16 can marry 60 year old men.

It does not make sense to be angry at the church from benefiting from the constitution. You can be angry with the 1st amndment. Tales, I posted more on this on BA's post on Bundy.

Tales I read your other posts, you are a very sweet person and I appreciate your feelings on this issue.

116

News Flash: New Reveal Article

by Sugar Shane in

less than an hour old:.

https://www.revealnews.org/blog/how-child-sex-abusers-get-reinstated-as-jehovahs-witnesses/.

Fisherman

How do you feel about this outlaw and why?

116

News Flash: New Reveal Article

by Sugar Shane in

less than an hour old:.

https://www.revealnews.org/blog/how-child-sex-abusers-get-reinstated-as-jehovahs-witnesses/.

Fisherman

Note: I meant to add that I see your point about how someone despicable as a child abuser who is repentant is entitled to spiritual confidentiality.

The 1st Amendment does not depend on whether the sinner is, or claims to be, or is judged to be, repentant. It provides confidentiality regardless (You better repent or we will report you to the police). And whether or not it turns out that he is repentant or not (which is not the business of the gov to adjudicate sins) he is still entitled to confidentiality under the 1st and so is the church.

116

News Flash: New Reveal Article

by Sugar Shane in

less than an hour old:.

https://www.revealnews.org/blog/how-child-sex-abusers-get-reinstated-as-jehovahs-witnesses/.

Fisherman

As usual, Fisherman doesn't understand what is going on, but I don't feel like starting a 50 page debate where everyone, except Fisherman, understands what the WTBTS is actually up to.

As usual DD does not understand what is going on. All he is able to do is make remarks about my post. (Oh that is so stupid, he does not understand, etc.) but he is not able to invalidate what I say.

116

News Flash: New Reveal Article

by Sugar Shane in

less than an hour old:.

https://www.revealnews.org/blog/how-child-sex-abusers-get-reinstated-as-jehovahs-witnesses/.

Fisherman

But let's say hypothetically a young teenage girl discloses to the elders that a well respected brother in the hall has raped her lets say several months earlier. She asks them not to tell anyone...to keep it confidential. Yet clearly, they can tell she is telling the truth.

Church ministers do not have the authority to adjudicate crimes. That is the subject matter of a Court of law having competent jurisdiction. Rape is a crime and if a person is found guilty of rape, he is guilty of criminal conduct, but in the US, a person is only guilty of a crime after a conviction and church ministers do not have the authority to determine guilt or innocence of a crime - but they can convict someone of sin

What should the elders do?

They should obey Caesar but by the same token the church enjoys confidentiality.

That is why an effective safeguarding policy needs to be implemented by Watchtower

Safe according to who's liking?

Physical protection of children is not the legal duty of the church but of the secular authorities. Government regulating church based activities is unconstitutional (but that is not for me to decide) and each case relating to church liability can be decided by the Court on a case by case basis. In the US, access to the Court system is easy as pie and lawyers will fight tooth and nail just to represent someone on contingency just as money is involved as it mostly always is when suing the church.

The 2 witness rule works for many types of sins. Circumstantial evidence and other forms of evidence is required in many cases where child abuse has taken place.

The role of the church is not to prosecute crimes. Church confidentiality is rooted in the 1s amendment. Governing how the church handles sinners establishes religion which violates a principle of the 1st Amendment which separates church and state.

I watch my kids. It is the responsibility of parents to protect their children and not to delegate that to the WT, elders or fellow congregants and to blame them when parents fail to do so. If you failed to protect your child in the first place resulting in him being harmed by another person or if you suspect a child is being harmed, why don't you go to the authorities and report it? -and also go to your minister for spiritual help. YoU should not trust anyone with your kids.

The church exist under us constitutional provisions. It does not exist to help prosecute crimes or to provide physical protection for children. That is the duty of Caesar.

116

News Flash: New Reveal Article

by Sugar Shane in

less than an hour old:.

https://www.revealnews.org/blog/how-child-sex-abusers-get-reinstated-as-jehovahs-witnesses/.

Fisherman

I wonder if Mr. Bundy is aware that even if a JW is repentant, they can still be DF'd? If something is well known, a dub can still get DF'd even though they say they are sorry. For instance, if an Eldub's wife takes some meds with alcohol at a social function and falls down or throws up, she can be DF'd.

So what!! Why should WT religion not be allowed to practice their religion their way on the basis that you do not like it or do not see it their way?

in the us, jw are not failing to report child abuse when they are accused of not reporting child abuse on the basis that church confidentiality privilege is rooted in the first amendment, so when JW are accused of not reporting (or failing to report it) as many state laws mandate it, WT has a legal basis under certain conditions -church confidentiality rooted in the 1st amendment.

Worldwide, it is a human right that "despicable" child abusers should be able to get confidential spiritual help same as they can get legal help. But international Courts will will decide if WT has done something wrong or illegal not me.

As far as whether it is wrong for WT to have child offender databases or adulterer databases, or homosexual databases, (or of tax cheats, killers, thieves, etc) you can believe that it is wrong if you like, but if you do not like it, it is not your business to dictate morality to the WT.

Whether or not it is legal for WT to have such databases of sinners who's sins are also crimes has to be decided in the Courts, albeit how the church handles sinners and confidential information they have on them is church business and confidential whether you like it or not.

IN THE US, how do you feel about a 16 year old boy ( sometimes lower than 16 with parental consent) marrying a 60 year old man? I don't like it and neither do JW, but we respect the the constitutional rights of others, and although WT freely publishes their moral views, they do not dictate it to others or resort to legal tactics or use the law to encroach upon or thwart the rights of others, neither do they advocate or aid and abet the government to change laws and/or punish those who practice a different morality so as to push JW morality JW's way.

70

Freddy Franz, One of the smartest men of his day????

by DwainBowman in

back in my teen years this story swept through jw land, that according to, the guinness book of records , freddy franz, was listed as one of the seven, most intelligent , men in the world.

dose anyone else remember this?

i remember trying to look it up, but never found anything in print, and ii point that out once or twice , and was told a co, had told about it, and he wouldn't lie!

Fisherman

What's surprising is that Russell pulled it out from previous Adventist preachers, then Franz used it 1943 and then again in the late 1960's , what balls ! but I guess that's part of being a WTS. head in pandering to the public's ignorance

Fink you are just repeating yourself. I have already posted with an example that the 6000 years teaching is logical. IT makes sense to conclude that 6000 years after the creation of man would start the beginning of the milenium and that still makes sense now. WT dating methods are also logical and have basis. People with other theories can disagree with their own theories but WT dating methods are not outlandish.

To remain in intellectually honest one can not make such a chronological dating from the bible or any archaeological evidence

Says you Fink. The WT has published their reasons and basis for WT dating. That is their position. You do not have to agree or feel that they are honest.

He didn't really have a strong understanding of the bible from a academic theological perspective..

You believe that theological academic education is essential to understand the Bible message. JW disagree and I disagree. Mathew 11:25; Luke 8:10 That is our position

If he was so intelligent why did he interpret an ancient Hebraic dietary law into one that isn't associated with the human diet ?

Your question is rhetorical. You are actually stating an opinion.

Fink, you post your remarks and your feelings about WT doctrine but tat does not invalidate them, and neither have you invalidated WT dating or doctrines with your theories about them. But as you admit, that is another topic and I might be lured into such a discussion at another time another thread. And you have not invalidated FF intelligence with your remarks about him. It is a pointless discussion. Look at the points I showed about WT growth. Remarkable leadership - FF for example. What have you got to show?

70

Freddy Franz, One of the smartest men of his day????

by DwainBowman in

back in my teen years this story swept through jw land, that according to, the guinness book of records , freddy franz, was listed as one of the seven, most intelligent , men in the world.

dose anyone else remember this?

i remember trying to look it up, but never found anything in print, and ii point that out once or twice , and was told a co, had told about it, and he wouldn't lie!

Fisherman

But to comment a topic yourself and then respond with "I am not mentally inclined right now to discuss it" implies that I raised the topic. I didn't; You did

Steve, I did not start the Topic of blood on this thread. Fink did.. Blood was an off point Fink used to discredit FF. I did not mean to imply you staeted the discussion on blood knowing full well that Fink started it. And my reponse to the blood part of Fink's post is qualified by my refering to discussing blood on this thread as Marvin Shilmer Topic.

But in general, gallons of blood are never shoved down a patient's throat but instead are intravenously administered. But I guess you knew that, huh?

Steve it was just a figure of speech to illustrate forcing a BT on a JW who does not want it because he believes that a BT is the same as eating or consuming blood. In that sense they are shoving it down a jw throat when he does not want a BT.

70

Freddy Franz, One of the smartest men of his day????

by DwainBowman in

back in my teen years this story swept through jw land, that according to, the guinness book of records , freddy franz, was listed as one of the seven, most intelligent , men in the world.

dose anyone else remember this?

i remember trying to look it up, but never found anything in print, and ii point that out once or twice , and was told a co, had told about it, and he wouldn't lie!

Fisherman

Do you know how quickly people die when they suffer traumatic blood loss as in vehicle accidents and injuries at work or home?

Of course I know.

That is another topic steve, and I am not mentally inclined right now to discuss it. Perhaps another time another thread. But I already posted in another thread that a person must be prepared to die if they refuse BT. Albeit, I would still want the freedom to choose what treatment I want for my body and not have gallons of blood shoved down my throat if that is not what I want.

70

Freddy Franz, One of the smartest men of his day????

by DwainBowman in

back in my teen years this story swept through jw land, that according to, the guinness book of records , freddy franz, was listed as one of the seven, most intelligent , men in the world.

dose anyone else remember this?

i remember trying to look it up, but never found anything in print, and ii point that out once or twice , and was told a co, had told about it, and he wouldn't lie!

Fisherman

I do not deny that either man was an accomplished speaker and could give a talk from memory.

So why didn't you say that from the very beginning in response to what I posted? But instead you challenged what I said and I after a showed you that what I said was correct, you agree with me and and then get on a different horse and challenge me on another point. Case closed.

I have already formed an opinion about the man.I know that no one could give me more information than I what I already have.

These were the charismatic men of an era of JW history. JW leaders today are respected because they are JW leaders but they are not viewed with the same awe and esteem sort of speak as those charismatic men were back then.