Maybe it is required that all of those presenting parts, all wear black suits. This way, their bodies blend into the background so that they effectively become, talking heads which are floating in space.
Similar to Famous People Players.
i've seen some depressing color schemes at the kingdom and assembly halls in my lifetime, but this one could be the worst.. a family member just sent me an email to tell me she had nice day at the assembly.
she attached a picture of the stage to show me a friend of hers who had a part.
other than the platform itself which had cream carpeting it was nothing but various shades of black!
Maybe it is required that all of those presenting parts, all wear black suits. This way, their bodies blend into the background so that they effectively become, talking heads which are floating in space.
Similar to Famous People Players.
so, my son bought me a device that allows me to look up and watch anything i want.
i remember years ago , i enjoyed the television show hee haw on sunday evenings.
i naively thought it was wholesome family entertainment.
Maybe TRE Gentry became confused, and thought yesterday was April Fools Day.
the jw lawyer clearly stated that disfellowshipping only applies to spiritual association, but everyday family contact is ok..
the exact point is that David (the lawyer who lied) never specified that and therefore misled the Supreme Court.
Not necessarily a lie, but more didn't tell the Whole (complete) Truth.
Consider, when a witness is sworn in to the witness stand, the person is to vow to: 'Tell the truth, the whole truth ...' The court makes a distinction between truth and whole truth.
Example:
Q: When you entered the room, did you turn on the four lamps?
A: No! (when the person did perform that action)
While that answer would be technically true if one of the lamps was already burned-out so only three came on, it would not be the whole truth.
first post here and looking for advice and help.
sorry in advance for it being so long :(.
i'm a happily married woman (no kids) who is a non-jw, presbyterian to be precise.
Spacegirl,
Happy you reached a compromise, at least for this Christmas.
It's a small victory for me
None of us want to create conflict between you as it's wonderful that you both found love, but, marriage is supposed to be an equal partnership.
Your husband wasn't a practicing JW while you were courting as he didn't decide to return to that religion until after you were married. Did he discuss with you before returning, how his decision to return could (will) impact you?
You are the woman he first accepted and fell in love with, celebrations and all. Since Christmas has been a lifelong tradition and remains important for you, and although you haven't changed your religion, beliefs or views of the holiday, it seems you are continually making compromises for the religion he decided to return to.
I didn't say compromise for 'him' or his 'beliefs' since any changes to JW beliefs as dictated by Watchtower, he is expected to immediately change his views to comply with.
As he was well aware and accepted you celebrate various holidays which you would be continuing to celebrate after marriage, what compromise has he really made for you?
Although you had both agreed to individually observe and practice your own beliefs, you now consider an ability to have a Christmas tree in a secondary (hidden) room in your residence, a small victory.
What compromises for the JW religion will you be making next, while considering what little you can do in a hidden manner, without support or the ability to enjoy these occasions with your husband, as a victory?
we all know that this cult will drive those trying to leave to desperate measures, and today by brother was very nearly one of those statistics.
he slashed his thigh with a kitchen knife and was bleeding out until he called the police.. i got a call on my way home from work from a police officer, coincidentally it was one of my old friends from school who's now a cop.
he told me my brother is in hospital after an attempted suicide and has lost some blood but will be ok. but i should get to the hospital as he's asking for me.
Pale, you mentioned 'his' mom chose carers for him.
Does your brother need carers and if so, is there a possibility for you to become his advocate or guardian and therefore, you (and he) choose who will provide his care?
we all know that this cult will drive those trying to leave to desperate measures, and today by brother was very nearly one of those statistics.
he slashed his thigh with a kitchen knife and was bleeding out until he called the police.. i got a call on my way home from work from a police officer, coincidentally it was one of my old friends from school who's now a cop.
he told me my brother is in hospital after an attempted suicide and has lost some blood but will be ok. but i should get to the hospital as he's asking for me.
Sorry to read this. Sorry also for the additional stress on you. While many have expressed support to you, if appropriate, please express our support to your brother from all of us here. Maybe that might help to lift his spirits.
I would suggest, if there is a group of JWs there again when you arrive, ask your brother if he wants them there. If he says 'No' or is hesitant to respond, then you could ask them to leave for his benefit. If they refuse, ask the nurse to call security.
You can also tell your brother that he has a right to rest and if there are visitors he doesn't want, he can call the nurse himself if you're not there.
Edit to add: It is natural love and affection to group together as a family when one of your own is injured. You informing your mom and sisters is the natural thing to do under the circumstances. Unfortunately, WT washes natural love and affection from most JW brains.
here's a hypothetical: you find your elderly jw father - a lifelong witness, unconscious in his home - you are alone with him.
you ring an ambulance.
at the hospital the doc says they need to give him a blood transfusion straight away or he'll die.
If the situation was reversed, as a capable adult, would you expect your parent or partner to uphold a decision you made for yourself which they were fully aware of your position on?
A No Blood decision typically requires written instruction by the patient, which is the purpose for a signed and witnessed medical directive. The obligation is with the JW to always carry their medical directive with them at all times as that document is intended to 'speak' for them if they can't speak for themselves.
Regardless of whether or not you agree with a decision your parent may have made, if he/she continues to have mental capacity to make decisions for himself, then you should respect his/her decision.
https://wghow.ca/81/partners-associates.htm.
this law firm seems to exit for the sole purpose of defending the jw organisation.
am i correct?.
The physical address indicated for the 'How' law firm as per their web site, is the same address for WT Canada bethel.
first post here and looking for advice and help.
sorry in advance for it being so long :(.
i'm a happily married woman (no kids) who is a non-jw, presbyterian to be precise.
Another big Welcome Spacegirl,
Marriage is supposed to be an equal partnership. It appears you may need to force him to sit down to discuss your expectations and requirements for the marriage including how various celebrations are to be celebrated. Hopefully, a compromise can be reached by both of you.
JWs are trained they are the only true religion acceptable to God. There is little tolerance for other religions and beliefs, regardless if they are Christian or not.
JW men are lead to believe they are the head over the woman, so what he decides is how it is to be. This is now 2017 and those sexest views are ancient history to almost anyone except JWs.
He probably expected you would give-in to his every desire, including you becoming a JW. One problem is, you have already compromised your wishes in regards to other holidays you celebrated. He now expects you to give-in to everything he says.
i've seen a lot of posts around and about warwick and the goings on there but was curious as to people's theories on why the move to warwick?
granted there's the obvious point about all of the money from the sale of properties in brooklyn but for as massive as warwick is, the purchase of an apartment complex there, multiple sites and buildings i would be surprised if they had much left from all of the profits.
so beyond a financial incentive why move?
All any of us can do is speculate since WT is not transparent when it comes to its finances or reasons for doing things.
The Warwick land was a vacant contaminated property which they were likely able to buy cheap. Cleanup is normally costly but there are many JWs willing to volunteer labor so the costs may not be all that high compared to hiring a specialized contractor. Perhaps there are government grants available to offset some of the cleanup costs.
Although the new buildings cover a large area, again, they were built primarily with 'slave' labor. Building costs at least in this area, often equate to 50% labor, 50% materials.
New buildings are typically more energy efficient so it is likely WT's ongoing energy costs will be substantially reduced.
With regard to 9/11, WT may have received some bad press for locking their doors and not assisting evacuees on Sept 11.
I understand Brooklyn property owners were increasingly complaining over WT owning so much tax exempt property. Other property owners are then forced to pay more than their fair share of property taxes to offset those not paid by WT. I think the most complaints were not regarding places of worship, but more due to non-worship properties such as those used for printing, warehousing, equipment maintenance, parking facilities and residences for WT 'staff'.
Since I assume many of these complaints were made to the city, perhaps the city exerted some pressure or provided some incentive for WT to relocate. If the city didn't place pressure on them, perhaps it had become an expectation.
With WT cutting back on printing and in reducing staff, the buildings in Brooklyn would likely have required extensive alterations. They also would no longer require easy access for receiving paper or for shipping physical literature since the shift to electronic publications can be sent over a digital pipeline from virtually anywhere in the world.