when i first saw the jw psa i fired an email off to cbs.
this was my second email to them.
i haven't been up early enough lately to see if they ignored this one too but i'll check it out next week.
Dave...good idea. I think it's very ironic that CBS is running a JW/Watch out for child molester spot while NBC/Dateline, and others, have done stories on the Dub/Molest issue. Brenda...no I forgot to mention Silent Lambs. If anyone else sees that thing again please post where you saw it...what network, time, etc. So far CBS is the only one I've seen it on.
kwintestal...I think it was.... [email protected]
-BONEZZ
when i first saw the jw psa i fired an email off to cbs.
this was my second email to them.
i haven't been up early enough lately to see if they ignored this one too but i'll check it out next week.
Thanks. It only took a couple of minutes to locate their email address and send it off. I was getting pretty chapped seeing the damn thing every morning. Now I just have to get my sorry ass up early again and see if they're continuing to run it. If they are....hmm...I can locate others in power over there and burn their damn earlobes off.
-BONEZZ
when i first saw the jw psa i fired an email off to cbs.
this was my second email to them.
i haven't been up early enough lately to see if they ignored this one too but i'll check it out next week.
When I first saw the JW PSA I fired an email off to CBS. They ignored me. This was my second email to them. I haven't been up early enough lately to see if they ignored this one too but I'll check it out next week. They were airing it around the 5-6am timeslot on the west coast. A few more emails from others might help if they continue with it.
"Normally I don't get confrontational but in this case...WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE? I emailed you about a week ago telling you of my displeasure with your broadcast of the Jehovah's Witness PSA's. You did not even respond, let alone take them off the air. Do you not find it hypocritical that this group is vilifying the internet and "warning" the unsuspecting public of the dangers of possible pedophiles on the web...while THEY ARE INVOLVED IN MORE CHILD MOLESTATION CASES THAN ANY OTHER RELIGION WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE CATHOLICS who out number them at least 100 to one? At least the Catholics have the decency not to produce a PSA of that nature right now.
What do I have to do to get the attention of someone in charge there? Do we have to get a couple of hundred child abuse victims to picket CBS headquarters? That would look good on the NBC Nightly News. Come on, have some compassion for the victims and please pull that drivel from the air. Thank you," (and yes I gave them my name)
-BONEZZ
ed bell will be arguing for barbara anderson in the tennessee court of appeals on april 14th.
this case may go to the supreme court.
it is very important for a lot of us.the wtbs hides behind the first amendment whenever they can (usually in money related cases) and then disposes of the rights of individuals who wish to leave, coerces families and causes families to break apart.
My apologies. One posted the site where the Washington case can be reviewed. It is an older case , not "recent" like I said. I got my dates mixed up with another case...a California case where (I believe in 1998, Bertolucci v Aananda Church of God-Realization) a woman successfully sued a church for emotional distress and fraud, and won. There was also a court case against the Unification Church in which I believe the plaintiffs won.
A good source of info about lawsuits against churches comes from the insurance carriers underwriting them. As one insurance attorney put it, "The 1st Amendment embraces two concepts - freedom to believe and freedom to act. The first is absolute but, in the nature of things, the second cannot be. Conduct remains subject to regulation for the protection of society. Therefore, the courts may entertain claims against clergy for intentional misconduct."
The WTBS is certainly well versed in constitutional law and will pull Paul v Watchtower out of the hat, ironically a Washington case, that they prevailed in. I've never said it wouldn't be a rough road but if enough people have varifiable horror stories about over-enthusiastic elders giving bad counsel and families in turmoil, it could be enough. I know they will never lose their "right" to shun but I hope their days of labeling people they don't like come to an end soon. Any entity that supports the destruction of the family relationship, no matter what their reasoning, should be in the least investigated, and certainly not protected by a misinterpretation of the 1st Amendment...imo. In the meantime let's pull for Barbara Anderson.
-BONEZZ
ed bell will be arguing for barbara anderson in the tennessee court of appeals on april 14th.
this case may go to the supreme court.
it is very important for a lot of us.the wtbs hides behind the first amendment whenever they can (usually in money related cases) and then disposes of the rights of individuals who wish to leave, coerces families and causes families to break apart.
jst2laws....You are correct in stating there are differences between the Anderson case and others. They all have various differences and nuances. I do believe if the Anderson case is decided favorably though, it will open the door for others who have been wrongfully pursued.
1 It makes a great deal of difference if a religious organization does this compared to a non-religious organization such as the boy scouts
This is true but there have been court cases in which religious organizations have been on the losing end of the arguement such as...a recent case where a Washington religious sect encouraged people to leave their non-believing spouses. A husband of a believer sued for alienation of affection. The religion responded with a 1st Amendment defense. The court rejected it stating, "One does not, under the guise of exercising religious beliefs, acquire a license to wrongfully interfere with familial relationships...Ill will, intimidation, threats, or reckless recommendations of family seperation directed toward alienating the spouses, where found to exist, nullify the privledge and project liability."
2 Most often the only comments made officially by a JW congregation is that an individual is no longer a JW (by dfing or disassociation). They do little to discourage the destructive rumor mill and sometimes encourage it, however, it would be difficult to make a case of this.
You are correct in stating that not much is said from the platform anymore, other than ..."remember that disassociated ones are to be treated the same as disfellowshipped ones." I have heard that on more than one occassion. And if you want "official" policy of the WTBS, you have the "official" Pay Attention to Yourselves and to All the Flock elder guidebook, (1991), p. 103, under the heading of Proper View of Disfellowshipped and Disassociated Persons where they state, "Disfellowshipped and disassociated ones are shunned by those who wish to have a good relationship with Jehovah." There are tons more references from their official publications about avoiding family members, not eating with them, etc. If quotes from their publications are not "official" I don't know what is.
But, until then I wonder if he really wants to hear from every one of us who has been treated unfairly?
I never said that. I said he may wish to hear from those who have been aggressively pursued. That eliminates a lot of us. AND...I would never post a name, number and/or email address without permission from the people involved.
-BONEZZ
ed bell will be arguing for barbara anderson in the tennessee court of appeals on april 14th.
this case may go to the supreme court.
it is very important for a lot of us.the wtbs hides behind the first amendment whenever they can (usually in money related cases) and then disposes of the rights of individuals who wish to leave, coerces families and causes families to break apart.
Ed Bell will be arguing for Barbara Anderson in the Tennessee Court of Appeals on April 14th. This case may go to the Supreme Court. It is very important for a lot of us.The WTBS hides behind the First Amendment whenever they can (usually in money related cases) and then disposes of the rights of individuals who wish to leave, coerces families and causes families to break apart. For some of us there may be no case but for many this case is very important.
Those who played by WTBS rules and/or got DF'd may not have a case. Many though, have chosen to walk/fade away without being left alone (I'm not sure how DAing will play into this). Those who have been aggressively pursued by elders and not left alone may have a legitimate claim.
I have always maintained (& still do) that the WTBS is guilty of slander and liable because of what they do to the DA'd and sometimes fade-aways. That is, they sometimes announce from the platform and write in their own publications, to treat the person as a "fornicator or drunkard", as well as other things. This type of treatment cannot be defended or protected by the 1st Amendment.
It is malicious defamation! It would be the same as if your son quit the Boy Scouts and the Troop Leader announced to everyone that they should treat the former member as "a sissy or drug abuser." There's no way that Troop Leader would get away with that kind of character assassination...and the WTBS should not be able to either! If you have been aggressively pursued by elders and such I urge you to contact Mr. Bell?s office at 843-546-2408. Things like elders telling people they shouldn?t associate with their own family members for whatever reason. You might also try an email to his assistant, Rachel Ridgeway at [email protected] . Let's think good thoughts for Barbara. I?m going to lunch now.
-BONEZZ
PS. IT Support - Go for it and good luck.
i was thinking of sending this letter as my da letter to the society and to the kingdom hall i welcome feedback on it.
to the watchtower society,.
i am writing this letter to make a formal statement of disassociation.
Sorry for your situation. Expect a knock on the door and maybe some last minute love-bombing.
-BONEZZ
the wts is always saying that it is "spirit directed".. what exactly does that mean?
does any of the literature ever actually define "spirit directed"?.
in the past the literature said that angels came down and told russel and ruthorford what "truth" was... then when their "truth" started to fail, the wts started using the phrase "spirit directed".. is this just a way of saying "god controls us, but we are not accountable for any errors made"?.
Get outa here! Big Joe Rutherford was definetly "Spirits" directed. Bourbon I believe.
-BONEZZ
in genesis it mentions the "tree of life" that adam & eve were never to partake of... they ate off the "tree of knowledge" and then god forbid them from everlasting life.
he stationed angels and a flaming sword there to protect the tree.. what happened to that tree, the flaming sword, and the angels?
do you think the story was literal or like other misunderstood things, symbolic?
FYI - The "Flaming Sword" is now a gay bar in San Francisco...
The "Tree of Life" is a day spa in Palm Springs...
...and of course all of the Angels are now involved in high school football in the midwest.
-BONEZZ
http://www.dec.org/pdf_docs/pnacs222.pdf
stumbled across this site.
i skimmed over it (going to lunch right now) and saw the wtbs mentioned a few times amongst ngo's and other scarlet colored orgs.
Didn't mean anything personal SP.
-BONEZZ
