i don't mean by the r&f dubs, but loved ones and friends?
and do you regret leaving the organization because of this?.
i am being shunned by twin daughters.
OzziePost said:
I don't get shunned by friends because i've realised I never had any!! To a dub a friend is merely an associate or acquaintance.
Same here. Unfortunately, that is my situation after spending the first 27 years of my life as a super-dedicated, by-the-book (i.e., no worldly friends, no outside interests/activities, no external network) JW.
imagine starting a topic and hardly anyone replies.
and you have to keep bumping yourself to the top because of either your ego or passion for the topic.. unc did a number on this a couple of days ago but it was too subtle.
(unlike him).. i have no passion for this topic.
LOL! I've already determined that I must be a member of the 'thread-killer' club too! What an ego-bruiser! E.g., my interest was caught up in DirtyFace's topic on the JW family-killer in Veracruz, Mexico - so much so that I looked up the Mexican newspaper reports on the story and gave a synopsis on the thread. KISS-OF-DEATH!
-V.
points for consideration:.
1. a. is the "organisation" (i.e., doctrines, teachings, practices, spirit) of 2006 the same organisation that you affiliated yourself with at your accession to unbaptised/baptised publisher status some 10 - 15 - 20 years ago?.
1. b. if the organisation is substantially changed, and you abandoned your congregation before [many of ] those definitive changes were instituted, can the current "organisation" accurately be said to have the authority to disfellowship you from an entity which essentially no longer exists?
Thank you all for your thoughtful contributions to the issues; they were meant to be thought-provoking, not sugggestions for challenging a DF or a DA.
Looking_Glass:
My confusion with respect to this thread is that it appears that people want to use the courts to pursue claims or actions against JWs for being df'd or da'd. That is impractical and would clog up the judicial system more then it already is clogged up. As for libel and slander, people have a tendency to throw those words around to freely. It is much harder to prove.
1. The issue that I raised in my initial comment had no reference to, and made no suggestion of, pursuing actions against JWs or the WTS for being DF'd or DA'd. I referenced only the wording of the excommunication announcement, and its suggestion of near-godlessness as a possible slur against the subject. If the DF'd or DA'd person continued to consider him-/her- self a worshipper of Jehovah, having respect for the Bible and its teachings, such a public announcement refuting one's dedication to Jehovah might be psychically traumatic and depression-inducing.
I think the average person have an unrealistic view of the judicial system and how it works in the US.
2. My geographical point-of-reference is not so restricted. I am not in the U.S.; the laws of that land are, therefore, not my focus. To some degree, restrictions against random, slanderous statements are common to the legal systems of many countries. If there is no strict legal restriction against such within certain legal systems, there certainly exists a cultural repudiation of such conduct.
-V.
points for consideration:.
1. a. is the "organisation" (i.e., doctrines, teachings, practices, spirit) of 2006 the same organisation that you affiliated yourself with at your accession to unbaptised/baptised publisher status some 10 - 15 - 20 years ago?.
1. b. if the organisation is substantially changed, and you abandoned your congregation before [many of ] those definitive changes were instituted, can the current "organisation" accurately be said to have the authority to disfellowship you from an entity which essentially no longer exists?
Note to readers: I apologise for situating this topic in the inappropriate forum! It should have been under "Beliefs, Doctrines and Practices."
Note to Administrator: Please relocate to the appropriate forum, as convenient. Thank you!
points for consideration:.
1. a. is the "organisation" (i.e., doctrines, teachings, practices, spirit) of 2006 the same organisation that you affiliated yourself with at your accession to unbaptised/baptised publisher status some 10 - 15 - 20 years ago?.
1. b. if the organisation is substantially changed, and you abandoned your congregation before [many of ] those definitive changes were instituted, can the current "organisation" accurately be said to have the authority to disfellowship you from an entity which essentially no longer exists?
Points for consideration:
1. a. Is the "organisation" (i.e., doctrines, teachings, practices, spirit) of 2006 the same organisation that you affiliated yourself with at your accession to unbaptised/baptised publisher status some 10 - 15 - 20 years ago?
1. b. If the organisation is substantially changed, and you abandoned your congregation before [many of ] those definitive changes were instituted, can the current "organisation" accurately be said to have the authority to disfellowship you from an entity which essentially no longer exists? [Whether the entity is an essentially different one can be concluded after an element-by-element comparison of the former and current teachings, and a determination as to whether the changes have substantially altered the conduct of affairs so as to make the current entity unrecognisable to, say, a publisher in 1960 or 19__ [your entry date here].]
Both semantically and practically considered, have you not rather disfellowshipped the impostor organisation?
2. a. Are you a registered officer of/shareholder in/beneficiary of the legally registered corporate bodies known as i) Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses; or ii) Religious Order of Jehovah's Witnesses? If you do not hold such legal status, does the local congregation have the right to announce that you are "no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses?" [See http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/85016/1399424/post.ashx#1399424 ]
2. b. If the congregational announcement serves to clarify anything other than your factual, publicly verifiable affiliation with a corporate body bearing the name "Jehovah's Witnesses" (and, to quote SickofLies: "Show me the contract!"), cannot the members of the Judicial Committee and/or the WTS (in case the DF Form S77 can be produced) potentially be charged with slander since the original concept of a witness for Jehovah is a Biblical and moral one - which can hardly be appropriated (justifiably) by a corporate entity? Thus said, how can a congregation or a corporation support such a declaration with proof that you are no longer a witness for Jehovah -- involving a pact between you and your God?
At best, an accurate DF announcement would be framed to state that the DF'd "is no longer affiliated with such-and-such Congregation," or that the DF'd is no longer under the auspices of such-and-such corporation."
- Any refinements or clarifications from trained litigators would be appreciated....
it doesn't surprise me at all that the man in mexico that killed his family was a wacko jw.
april 13, 2006 man slaughters family - update
eloy leon kings was, apparently, a well liked and respected man in his local community.
An earlier report (from 17 March 2006; the report above dates from 21 March 2006) in “Notiver” states that the only earlier clinical assessment of Eloy’s mental health reveals that during his youth he suffered an automobile accident which caused a cranial injury that subjected him to periods of schizophrenia. Some family accounts confirm that he was on occasion jealous and suspicious of his wife, but that he was - in general - loving and dedicated to his family members.
http://www.notiver.com.mx/index.php?id=19491
[...
Sólo existe el antecedente clínico de que Eloy León sufrió en su juventud un accidente automovilístico que le provocó un traumatismo craneal y le dejó secuelas de esquizofrenia. Algunas versiones de su entorno familiar afirman que en ocasiones se mostraba celoso y desconfiado con su esposa, pero en lo general era amoroso y dedicado con los suyos.
…]
it doesn't surprise me at all that the man in mexico that killed his family was a wacko jw.
april 13, 2006 man slaughters family - update
eloy leon kings was, apparently, a well liked and respected man in his local community.
Following (last below) is an excerpt from a report on the event from "Notiver," a Veracruz, Mexico newspaper.
http://www.notiver.com.mx/index.php?id=19904
To summarize some points from the excerpt: Eloy Le ón’s sister-in-law (Gertrudis) believes that his mother was, to some extent, aware of his plans to murder his family and reported to the sister-in-law some days before the crime that she was worried that he would do something crazy/foolish. [Eloy may have suggested as much to his mother in advance.] The mother is currently being held for questioning.
Gertrudis stated that Eloy planed the crimes, evidenced by the fact that on the day before the murders, he took his family to the beach – along with his niece (Luz Marilín) – and, as they were facing the ocean, told his daughters to take a good look at everything and to enjoy those moments because it was for the last time, since it was all vanity/fantasy (Sp. “una fantasía”). The young niece later told her family members that, after her uncle uttered those strange words, her six year-old cousin Luz María (Eloy’s only surviving daughter) asked her what was the meaning of the word “fantasía.”
Gertrudis told the authorities that Eloy mistreated/abused his family, but that no one realized it; she further believes that he was fully aware of his actions (the massacre), because after committing the deeds he telephoned her and told her to come quickly to the house because something terrible had happened.
The report begins by relating (not reprinted below) that Eloy acknowledged suffering mental anguish and torment, and read the Bible for several hours prior to setting about implementing the murders at six o’clock on that Thursday morning.
[“…
Manifestó la señora Gertrudis que unos días antes del crimen la madre de Eloy fue a buscarla a su casa para comentarle que estaba muy preocupada porque presentía que el hombre iba a cometer una tontería, y que esto lo dijo seguramente porque Eloy ya había comentado sus planes.
Gertrudis dijo que a pesar de vivir muy cerca de su hermana Lucía y sus sobrinitas desconocía lo que Eloy las hacía pasar, porque nunca se les separaba. La que sabía todo, es la madre del ahora detenido.
Declaró Gertrudis que Eloy planeó los crímenes porque un día antes las llevó a la playa Chachalacas, también fue con ellos su sobrina Luz Marilín Carmona Varela quien les dijo que estando frente al mar, el hombre les dijo a sus hijas que miraran bien todo y disfrutaran esos momentos porque era la última vez, ya que todo era una fantasía.
La pequeña Luz Marilín dijo a sus familiares que después de que su tío dijo las extrañas palabras su prima Luz María, la de seis años que sobrevivió a la tragedia, le preguntó a ella que qué significaba “fantasía”.
Gertrudis dijo a las autoridades que Eloy León maltraba a sus familiares pero nadie se daba cuenta, por lo que cree que estaba conciente de lo que hacía, pues luego de cometida su acción le llamó por teléfono y le dijo que fuera rápido a su casa porque había ocurrido una desgracia.
...”]
florida, and know an elder(?
) by the name of phil wilson (and his family)?
i believe that they are originally from the midwest section of the country.. thanks!.
bttt...
"keep on asking, and ______________"
My price: (U.S. equivalency) $6.40/gallon
florida, and know an elder(?
) by the name of phil wilson (and his family)?
i believe that they are originally from the midwest section of the country.. thanks!.
Florida, and know an elder(?) by the name of Phil Wilson (and his family)? I believe that they are originally from the Midwest section of the country.
Thanks!
-V.
