bennyk

Joined

• started 6 topics
• posted 763 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by bennyk

• 
  52

  What were you disfellowshipped for?

  by Kristofer in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i recently had a discussion with a witness friend (i'm a secret) and she claimed that witnesses only get disfellowshipped for being unrepentant for immoral acts.

  i am curious to know from those who have been disfellowshipped, what was it for?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bennyk

  Well, if they get around to announcing it -- apostasy.

  Even though the announcement has NOT yet been made, the shunning has commenced...
• 
  36

  Did you ever have a crush on a married Brother or Sister?

  by JH in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  .

  .

  did you ever have a crush on a married brother or sister, and they probably knew about it, just by your actions?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bennyk

  Absolutely! But she's my wife, so it's okay...
• 
  20

  Making progress

  by schne_belly in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  so here is an update from a previous thread i posted about my parents, especially my mother.

  last night, my husband and i were eating dinner at my parents house and all of sudden my mom whips out her bible and tells us to sit down because she wants to share some scriptures shes been researching.

  come to find out about a month ago some elders stopped over at their house to talk to them about us, and how to deal with a disfellowshiped person.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bennyk

  Schnee-

  Would this weekend be a good time to invite your parents over to have dinner with us?
• 
  20

  Why can't I get over it already?

  by schne_belly in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ive had several people whom ive considered friends (jws) basically drop off the face of this earth.

  not once have i really discussed with them my reasons for leaving... actually come to think of it, only one of them has even asked.

  i just responded to her that i still love god, & kept it short and simple.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bennyk

  It wasn't a small part of your life; it is understandable that you grieve your loss.

  Remember that it may well be that they don't really wish to act this way -- it's the indoctrination. You may wish to attempt to remain in some contact with them; maybe you'll be there for them when it's their turn to leave. In any event: don't invest too much heart -- you're only going to get hurt.

  Hugs from my wife and myself.
• 
  28

  Help --Pre-JW Faithful and Discreet Slave??

  by lynnmelo in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hi, folks.

  for those who may not remember my previous posts, i'm someone who has been studying with the jw's for about two years but didn't commit (i.e., get baptized) because, as i thought then, i was just too selfish and cowardly to join up with the jw's.

  that's before i found this site and watched the dateline video on the child molestation problem.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bennyk

  Let's not forget our friends the 16th-century Anabaptists. I once asked an Elder why, according to JW doctrine, they've already been resurrected and are to reign with Christ in Heaven, DESPITE the fact that they believed in the Trinity, the doctrine of an immortal soul, and eternal Hellfire. (Of course, I didn't get a convincing answer: only 'they were true Christians, but still in darkness....')
• 
  12

  Just thinking out loud.....

  by schne_belly in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was born and raised a jw.

  however over the last year my husband and i gradually have faded away.

  several times weve had discussions with my parents, whom are both in, regarding our disgust for the org and the reason for our decision to leave.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bennyk

  Schnee,

  Your Mum unquestionably does love you and your husband. Your close relationship with her was real and will be real again. However, she is thoroughly confused by this strange turn of events. Try to imagine how you would have felt only eighteen months ago, if your mother had suddenly (remember: it seems quite sudden to HER) announced to you that she was renouncing Christianity (which is what SHE thinks you've done) and become a Hindu (just an example). Your mother is a decent person, she does still listen, all is NOT lost. Plant seeds, don't transplant trees. (Too much, too soon.) She'll come around. (And when she does, your father will come along with her: he's always been the sort to go along to get along.)

  Besides, you could always hold the (future) grandchild(ren) hostage. . (I'm not really advocating this.)

  When the "Sisters" spread too much gossip/slander about you, your Mum will be faced with a decision to "fish or cut bait". When she sees the "lovin' brotherhood-spiritual-paradise" for what it is, she'll choose YOU.
• 
  92

  Brand New Blood Card

  by PoppyR in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  hubby has just come back from the service meeting where they have been handed out brand new style blood cards, now called 'advance decision to refuse specified medical treatment' .

  it's quite a bit different.

  and has the line on it about giving permission to the hospital liason committee to see your notes and medical records.. very scary stuff i think, and i certainly wont be filling one in.. i'm really short of time tonight, but will scan it in, along with the notes that go with it and try and post it some time over the next day or so if someone else doesn't beat me to it!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bennyk

  Bah. This is just an attempt to lull the unwitting Witlesses to sleep. Next year no one will question the new item on the bloodcard/DPA:

  6a) I consent to grant unrestricted access to my checking and savings accounts to: [Ted Jarasz recommended] and/or other members of the Governing Body.
• 
  38

  What's the worst response a person ever said to you in the field service?

  by JH in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i remember knocking on a door in the field service, and the girl who answered the door, looked at me and said in french, "allez vous faire crosser" .

  although i didn't laugh, i found it very funny.

  the brother with me also had a smile on his face, but didn't say a word, as we walked back to the car.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bennyk

  Kindly Householder: "You have five minutes to get out of here before I loose the dogs!!!"

  Me, about 15 years old: "Oh, no problem. I can explain why I've come in less than two minutes..."

  And there was the time a guy threatened me with a stiletto: "I don't want none of that jive -- unless you want this!!!"

  Me, abou 8 years old: "Ummm. No."
• 
  328

  Journal of Church and State: WT NO-BLOOD EXPOSE'

  by AndersonsInfo in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  (baylor university, waco, tx) an essay entitled, "jehovah's witnesses, blood transfusions, and the tort of misrepresentation," found in the autumn issue of baylor universitys prestigious journal of church and state, published december 13, 2005, exposes the vulnerability of jehovahs witnesses religious organization to massive claims for compensation because of the religions misrepresentation of the medical risks of blood transfusions.

  this milestone essay critically examines one of the religions main publications for teaching their children and new recruits about their blood beliefs, how can blood save your life?

  the peer-reviewed essay details many misrepresentations of medical facts, which the religion partly relies on to support its blood prohibition, thus denying its members from making fully informed medical decisions.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bennyk

  It is true that under the provisions of Yoder, the WTS would attempt to force the state to "prove" that there be "compelling state interests". And I agree that the deaths of thousands of children because of decisions based (at least) in part on intentionally misleading statements of the WTS would likely be considered a "compelling state interest". However, I was attempting to illustrate that the Sherbert test -- especially as broadly defined in Yoder -- would not likely even be considered relevant or material in light of Smith.

  Even if this were to prove untenable in the courts, the WTS may sustain significant damage simply because it would be very negative publicity: publicity regarding an emotional issue. (Here we may safely ignore the glowing WTS prose regarding the Witness message 'blanketing the earth' -- fact is, the public knows precious little about Watchtower teachings, with the exception of the dogma regarding blood transfusions.)

  It is my considered opinion that the Society has something about which to worry.
• 
  328

  Journal of Church and State: WT NO-BLOOD EXPOSE'

  by AndersonsInfo in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  (baylor university, waco, tx) an essay entitled, "jehovah's witnesses, blood transfusions, and the tort of misrepresentation," found in the autumn issue of baylor universitys prestigious journal of church and state, published december 13, 2005, exposes the vulnerability of jehovahs witnesses religious organization to massive claims for compensation because of the religions misrepresentation of the medical risks of blood transfusions.

  this milestone essay critically examines one of the religions main publications for teaching their children and new recruits about their blood beliefs, how can blood save your life?

  the peer-reviewed essay details many misrepresentations of medical facts, which the religion partly relies on to support its blood prohibition, thus denying its members from making fully informed medical decisions.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bennyk

  Disclaimer: I am not a practicing attorney, nor do I play one on TV.

  It is my understanding that the following are true:

  The Supreme Court has never held that religious liberty granted under the First Amendment be absolute: e.g. Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1878) "[L]aws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may interfere with practice." Id. at 166.

  While the WTS would seek relief under provision of the Sherbert test (Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 [1963]) i.e. "compelling state interest", the protections afforded under it (even as more widely defined under Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 [1972]), have been severely eroded since 1982. In United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252 (1982), the Supreme Court noted the Yoder decision, but created a significant limitation on that decision.

  In Goldman v. Weinberger, 475 U.S. 503 (1986), the Court did not even apply the Yoder test; Goldman's religious claim was denied.

  In Bowen v. Roy, 476 U.S. 693 (1986), very limited use was made of Yoder. Yoder 's very broad ruling in favour of religious freedom was closely qualified; note also the statement: "[T]he government is entitled to wide latitude" (Roy at 707).

  Another significant departure from Yoder is illustrated by Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Ass'n., 485 U.S. 439 (1988). This decision indicated that the state need not prove a "compelling state interest" (Sherbert) to justify its actions.

  The decision in Employment Div., Dep't of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) likewise refused to apply the Sherbert test.

  In Minnesota v. Hershberger, 110 U.S. 1918 (1990)(mem), the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the Minnesota Supreme Court judgement in State v. Hershberger, 444 N.W.2d 282 (1989), and remanded the case for further consideration in light of Smith.

  Note that when the Minnesota Supreme Court supported the contention of the Schwartzentruber Amish Church in the post-Smith decision in State v. Hershberger (Hershberger II), 462 N.W.2d 393 (Minn. 1990), they simply avoided the limitations imposed by Smith by having recourse to the broad provision "liberty of conscience" found in the Minnesota Constitution.