not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.
vote now!.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .
The £2.50 is not a mistake, taking into account your gross earning would be £12.50. Therefore £2.50 (tax already paid) represents 20% and £10 (net) represents 80%.
I have had a further look into this and s3(1)(c) Charities Act 2011 defines a charitable purpose as 'the advancement of religion'. Therefore the 'public benefit' requirement can be avoided if a charity advances religion, again rendering this petition obselete.
not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.
vote now!.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .
My apologies, I thought it was your petition.
I agree that they act as a single body, but in approaching Parliament on this issue it has to be approached in a legal way, whereas in my opinion for reasons stated, this petition would get thrown out without any Parliamentary debate as it isn't worded correctly.
not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.
vote now!.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .
Further the 'public benefit' reqiuirement is given a very wide definition. Though a charity may act in a negative way as is being argued here, in my view, this in itself would not be enough to negate the 'public benefit' positives that they state they provide.
Even if you didn't agree with the Charity Commissions decision a judicial review would be unlikely, as judicial reviews can only be argued on whether the Commission acted inside or outside of the law. In this case Parliament gives the Charity Commission decision to adjudicate, that in itself is inside the law as per the Charities Act 2011.
As for examing the process of the decision itself, so long as it was made inside the law, the Court in a judicial review would stay out of the actual decision making process, unless the decision itself was totally unreasonable under the rules of 'Wednesbury unreasonableness'.
not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.
vote now!.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .
Blablaman ...
As you make clear 1400 or so congregations have charitable status and so does the Watchtower Society of Britain. If you're asking via your petition question to have all of these to be removed from the Charities register that isn't made clear on your petition question. If on the other hand you're asking to have the Watchtower Society of Britain removed, again that isn't made clear on your petition question.
Parliament in debating this issue, should it receive 100,000 signatures needs to know to whom the question is refering ... all of the 1400 congregations or the Watchtower Society of Britain? As the religion of Jehovahs Witnesses is not a charitable institution in its own regard. As stated in the Watchtower Society of Britains objectives, their aim is to further the Jehovahs Witnesses who are a Christian religion.
Sifting through the legal jargon and putting into laymans terms ... the Jehovahs Witness religion (to which your petition question refers) is not a charity but a religion, whereas the 1400 congregations and Watchtower Society of Britain are charities on the register (to which your petition question does not refer). Hence Parliament cannot revoke the charitable status of the Jehovahs Witnesses, as they have never had one in the first place.
not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.
vote now!.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .
Is this what you're looking for?
www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends61/0001077961_AC_20100831_E_C.PDF
not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.
vote now!.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .
Further, who exactly do you want charity status revoking?
The fact of the matter is 'Jehovahs Witnesses' do not have charitable status as per the petition question. I'm assuming you're refering to the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Britain, who according to the Charity Commission, its aims and objectives are to advance the Jehovahs Witness religion. They print, publish and organise the religion itself, so it would be difficult to prove the public benefit (or lack of) argument, due to the fact that they can distance themselves.
Further, every single congregation in the UK is a separate charity registered in the Charity Commissions register. So when refering to the term Jehovahs Witnesses to have their charitable status removed, you have to make clear who exactly you're talking about with this petition question.
The whole petition question is flawed, from the wrong legislation applied, to the wrong wording of who you want removing, as 'Jehovahs Witnesses' do not have charitable status in the UK. It would be thrown out in a Parliamentary debate on this basis alone, before any real discussion took place.
not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.
vote now!.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .
The public benefit requirement under the Charities Act 2006 has been amended by the Charities Act 2011 and came into force in March 2012.
Though it covers same requirement ground your petition question is flawed.
Should this reach 100,000 signatures it would be thrown out in the first instance as the 2006 Act doesn't apply. Even though it would be clear a mistake has been made and the wrong legislation refered to in the petition question, Parliament like any other legislature processes on correct wording for questions like these and wouldn't make the necessary changes themselves to the wording of the petition question to take into account the mistake of wrong legislation being used.
Further, I would have thought an appeal to the Charities Commission under s46, Charities Act 2011 would be more applicable, as under s15(1) Parliament has given the Charity Comission the power to decide who qualifies under the 'public benefit' function. Therefore even a successful petition question using the correct Act of 2011 would mean that Parliament on debating the issue would delegate the repsonsibility to the Charities Commission as they already have done.
Just my two pennys worth.
he's asking if i've read the first page of the new watchtower.. says page 8 admits and exposes the society's mistaken expectations.. says that both mags have been adjusted to reflect the understanding of generation.
asking if it is my position that witnesses have made claims to be inspired prophets.... and saying if it is, maybe *we* can consider together some examples in the bible of others who have had wrong expectations and have gone ahead of god's timetable and see how god handled that..
I have suffered for many years because of the religion. I'm not prepared to post my story on this thread as it would derail it, but a small look through my posts will show.
Yet because I have suffered, like others, does not mean that I'm not going to acknowledge where I see the society acting in a correct manner. For many years they have evaded the issue of admitting their mistakes with regards to dates and for many years I have had issues with the whole generation affair. This statement I welcome as part of my healing process... sorry if that offends.
he's asking if i've read the first page of the new watchtower.. says page 8 admits and exposes the society's mistaken expectations.. says that both mags have been adjusted to reflect the understanding of generation.
asking if it is my position that witnesses have made claims to be inspired prophets.... and saying if it is, maybe *we* can consider together some examples in the bible of others who have had wrong expectations and have gone ahead of god's timetable and see how god handled that..
Is what all it takes?
What does the fact that I respect a statement whereby they admit they were wrong in the past mean to you?
he's asking if i've read the first page of the new watchtower.. says page 8 admits and exposes the society's mistaken expectations.. says that both mags have been adjusted to reflect the understanding of generation.
asking if it is my position that witnesses have made claims to be inspired prophets.... and saying if it is, maybe *we* can consider together some examples in the bible of others who have had wrong expectations and have gone ahead of god's timetable and see how god handled that..
Just read it. I actually respect the fact they have written that.
