I have a very-recently ex Filipina wife who may be able to help Iam. Depends on financial and citizenship staus.
Sorry, that was bitchy but feeling a bit raw at the moment (so would Iam, but in a different way).
Smutty talk mode/ off.
i remember a gorgeous sister was making fun of her elder husband's big belly.
i do not know why she mentioned it to me about it in private outside of the kingdom hall.
any ideas why she mentioned about it to me?
I have a very-recently ex Filipina wife who may be able to help Iam. Depends on financial and citizenship staus.
Sorry, that was bitchy but feeling a bit raw at the moment (so would Iam, but in a different way).
Smutty talk mode/ off.
i remember a gorgeous sister was making fun of her elder husband's big belly.
i do not know why she mentioned it to me about it in private outside of the kingdom hall.
any ideas why she mentioned about it to me?
There seems to be a bit of a common thread running through your postings.
Have you considered a holiday in Thailand? (Recommendations available).
i'm a bit unusual here, never was a jw, don't suffer from the ex- or leaving jw stuff, but i surely can sympathise with those who do.. .
tomorrow ( 2 august) my divorce decree absolute is issued, disolving the marriage with my filipina princess.
i'm not sad about that, per se, it will be good to get the whole sorry episode over and done with.
Well, more developments today, as in a letter from her lawyer via mine.
Disregarding the tears and the 'little girl voice' there is no doubt that underneath it all is a shrewd and calculating mind focussed on staying in the UK and possibly financial gain on the way. And no, I'm not being too harsh here. She is quite prepared and ready to use all weapons in her arsenal.
Just goes to show the vulnerabities of us humans, I suppose. I'm great at seeing through religious and other crap but show me a 4'10" woman in tears and I'm as vulnerable and credulous as anyone else. I think I'll send her a DA letter and ask her to shun me! (No offence intended, and no wish to make light of the very real issue of shunning).
This is hurting a bit, right now.
some of you will have noticed that i've been paying a lot of attention to the governing body recently.
this is because most jehovah's witnesses venerate them collectively (even if they can't name them individually), and i feel this makes it important to understand this group of men properly and expose their mindset as individuals.
as the saying goes, i feel it's important to "know your enemy".. i realize it's very convenient to think of the governing body as being "evil" when we consider that they are ultimately responsible for all the damaging jw teachings and beliefs.
'Wilful', 'deliberate' or 'knowing' ignorance is my best guess, brought about by ego and the thirst for veneration and power.
And that, in my opinion, in view of the potential and actual harm they cause, is evil. They are not dissimilar to many other secular and religious leaders.
i'm a bit unusual here, never was a jw, don't suffer from the ex- or leaving jw stuff, but i surely can sympathise with those who do.. .
tomorrow ( 2 august) my divorce decree absolute is issued, disolving the marriage with my filipina princess.
i'm not sad about that, per se, it will be good to get the whole sorry episode over and done with.
Glander: Congratulations and well done!
i'm a bit unusual here, never was a jw, don't suffer from the ex- or leaving jw stuff, but i surely can sympathise with those who do.. .
tomorrow ( 2 august) my divorce decree absolute is issued, disolving the marriage with my filipina princess.
i'm not sad about that, per se, it will be good to get the whole sorry episode over and done with.
Blondie: Excellent point, and I suppose that there's always a tendency to 'edit' our memories. So on one side I probably remember more of the good times. On the other, those few people close to me in whom I confided during the bad times will remember those.
i'm a bit unusual here, never was a jw, don't suffer from the ex- or leaving jw stuff, but i surely can sympathise with those who do.. .
tomorrow ( 2 august) my divorce decree absolute is issued, disolving the marriage with my filipina princess.
i'm not sad about that, per se, it will be good to get the whole sorry episode over and done with.
It's probably bad form to resurrect your own thread, but ..
Today I met up with the Filipina Princess for the first time in a long time. I didn't plan it, but I didn't go out of my way to avoid it, if you know what I mean. We had drinks/coffee.
There was a great deal of very straight talking and tears on her part. I fully admit that I am far from perfect and have faults but the divorce was based on her behaviour. I itemised and challenged the behaviour that led to our estrangement and divorce. Most of it, I can see, was because of her insecurity and I can't blame her for that. Not marital insecurity, there was never any reason for that, but being a Filipina in a strange country.
She has done very well in her job (carer in a nursing home). She works long hours for crap pay but is held in very high esteem by the patients and colleagues. She loves her job (it's not one I could do).
I fell in love with her when I first met her and had high hopes for our marriage. I remain somewhat cynical, of course, but after our talk I was/am tempted to try again. I know that she would come back tomorrow.
Many things to think about, not least the effect her jealousy and behaviour had on my family. This was discussed as well and she promised me, through her tears, that she had learned a hard lesson and could change. Whether my family could accept her back is another matter.
I want to believe her but there is always at the back of my mind the misery she put me through - and, of course, the possibility that all of this could be a ploy for her to stay in the UK. She is, at heart, a good woman. I believe that.
So maybe I should change my thread title to 'Can We Go Back?'.
i should point out that i'm not a lawyer and i'm not qualified to give legal advice.. there has been much discussion about judicial committees lately and how to handle and possibly record them.. naturally, the question of the legality of recording judicial committees is a concern.
my understanding of the law in the u.s. is that it is legal to record private conversations in most states provided at least one party consents to the recording.
in the other states, it is required to get the consent of all parties to record a private conversation.. however, it would be reasonable to ask whether or not a judicial committee is a private conversation and whether the elders have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
In reply to the question in OP (again based on the position in England & Wales) but it is, AFAIK, a fairly general concept.
'Privilege' - i.e. the absolute confidentiality of certain material and the fact that there can be no enforced disclosure in legal proceedings, applies to specified material, commonly 'legal privilege' (discussion between lawyer and client), medical records, and the confession of a penitent to clergy (note previous discussions on the latter - if the clergy report the confession it loses its confidentiality).
One point sometimes missed is that in all 'privilege' cases the 'privilege' belongs to the individual, not to the other party.
So, if the individual willingly discloses the content of the legal discussions, or his medical records, or his confession, etc., the other party has no claim whatsoever to enforce confidentiality - the privilege is not his to claim.
This, it seems to me, would apply to JCs. If the 'subject' (or 'poor shmuck', in the vernacular) who is the only one who could legally claim the privilege of confidentiality chooses to waive that, no-one else can insist on it.
Just my thoughts.
i should point out that i'm not a lawyer and i'm not qualified to give legal advice.. there has been much discussion about judicial committees lately and how to handle and possibly record them.. naturally, the question of the legality of recording judicial committees is a concern.
my understanding of the law in the u.s. is that it is legal to record private conversations in most states provided at least one party consents to the recording.
in the other states, it is required to get the consent of all parties to record a private conversation.. however, it would be reasonable to ask whether or not a judicial committee is a private conversation and whether the elders have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
This is an interesting discussion. (My comments are based on the law in England & Wales).
For quite some time now, liability has been firmly placed on individual managers/persons of responsibility in civil proceedings - whether for discrimination/health & safety/employment etc. issues as well as the organisation. The organisation/employer/whatever will have one objective - to minimise its liability, often by attempting to show that it trained its managers properly and that if they did wrong they operated outside instructions or guidelines. The manager or responsible person may often be left in the middle and be 'hung out to dry'.
This seems to me to be what the WT corporations are doing, and as cases such as Candace's (hopefully) become more frequent I foresee more and more elders becoming personally liable as the WT tries to distance itself further and further.
.
the wtbts, at least here in the uk, makes loans to congregations of jws for mortgages to build kh's at a 'reasonable rate of interest'.. does the wtbts pay tax on the interest it is making, since this is clearly not a charitable earning or donation?
"I doubt it. They are, after all a non-prophet organization."
I noticed this commment above. It may be a typo or a concise and ironic comment.
It works either way!