Posts by digderidoo

82

VOTE TO REVOKE UK CHARITY STATUS OF JW CHARITIES! URGENT!

by Blablaman in

jw
friends

not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.

vote now!.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .

digderidoo

Cedars, you continue to misquote me.

I have not said that the advancement of religion automatically is considered to be in the public benefit. I have also not said the 'public benefit' requirement does not exist, but rather that it does not exist under the Charities Act 2006.

I don't know what's not to understand, I have stated that the public benefit is no longer in existence under the Charities Act 2006 as stated in the petition question, you then proceed to quote me from the Charities Act 2011 to show that it is. By quoting from the Charities Act 2011 can you not see that this replaces those words in the Charities Act 2006? You then provide a link to 'prove' the public benefit exists in the Charities Act 2006 by providing a link to the 2011 Act. Which is the very thing i said in the first place, that the Charities Act 2006 should not be used.

If you wish to research this further as I have no inclination to seeing that I am continually being misquoted, then you may also wish to consider Charities Act 2011 s3(m)(i) and rather than make a presumption of whether a religion is in the public benefit, check 'under the old law' Thornton v Howe (1862) that publications of a religion (in this case that she was impregnated by the Holy Ghost) are construed to be in the public benefit by mere fact that they are available to the public and ask whether this is applicable to the WTBTS of Britain.

As I am being misquoted I have no interest to further this discussion and wish you well in this endeavour.

82

VOTE TO REVOKE UK CHARITY STATUS OF JW CHARITIES! URGENT!

by Blablaman in

jw
friends

not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.

vote now!.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .

digderidoo

"public benefit is no longer in existence"

Care to clarify the above statement?

Public benefit is no longer in existence under the Charities Act 2006.

That's a very narrow interpretation of what public benefit means. Care to back it up with, er... I dunno - references? I doubt you will be able to.

Charities Act 2011 s2(1)(a) and s3(1)(c)

Again, can you provide evidence or confirm actual experience in the parliamentary process to confirm that petitions are regularly thrown out if the wording doesn't precisely specify the legal entities against which the petition has been made, i.e. (in this case) entities representative of Jehovah's Witnesses? It seems I would credit MPs with more intelligence in determining the subtance of the petition and acting upon it than you would.

Taken from HM Government e- petition Terms and Conditions ...

"If an e petition does not include a clear statement explaining what action you want the government to take, it will be rejected."

If you care to look at the e petitions rejected there have been 15,772 for one reason or another, though how many for not including a clear statement I haven't the time to go through.

82

VOTE TO REVOKE UK CHARITY STATUS OF JW CHARITIES! URGENT!

by Blablaman in

jw
friends

not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.

vote now!.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .

digderidoo

I didn't say public benefit is no longer a consideration, I said it is no longer in existence under the Charites Act 2006. Please read my words you have cut and paste and not put them in your own words. The Charities Act 2011 now applies which also has a public benefit requirement (hence why it's on the website). To confirm this read the piece of legislation itself.

In this instance however, we are talking about the public benefit of advancing religion which English Law sees as a good thing, better than no religion is it's view.

The assumption that MP's would be 'getting the gist' is wrong. They will not debate a different issue (however minor in your view) as to what's been petitioned. Parliamentary time is tight and they will not alter incorrectly worded petitions, you cannot have on the one hand 100,000 people petition one set of facts, but on the other MP's debate something different, that is not how Parliament works.

As for me 'nitpicking', being 'vehemently opposed' or 'trying to undermine the petition for some unknown reason', an ad hominem does tend to shift the focus from the mistakes that have been made here.

82

VOTE TO REVOKE UK CHARITY STATUS OF JW CHARITIES! URGENT!

by Blablaman in

jw
friends

not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.

vote now!.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .

digderidoo

My words don't need summarising at all and putting into your words, then telling me that's my opinion.

The fact that the public benefit under the Charity Act 2006 is no longer in existence is not my opinion, that Jehovahs Witnesses do not have charitable status isn't my opinion and the public benefit requirement is qualified by 'advancement of religion' is neither my opinion. They can all be checked out as legal fact.

As for the church of Scientology ... it cannot be argued they advance religion as under UK law they are not a religion. So why do you say that it can?

The Charity Commission in 1999 decided on two points of attempt that the Church of Scientology cannot have charitable status.

1) The fact that they do not advance religion as they are not classified as one. In the Court of Appeal in 1970 (R v Registrar General ex part Segerdal), Scientology was classified as a philosophy of existence and not a religion.

2) They failed under the 'public benefit' requirement of advancing moral or spiritual welfare or improvement of the community.

Had they had established one of these points they would be on the Charity Register. Whilst the petitions argument is that under point 2) they should be deleted, under point 1) the WTBTS would stay on in advancing religion ... as Jehovahs Witnesses are a religion ... which is my point.

If you disagree Jehovah's Witnesses are a religion then that should be your line of attack to the Charities Commission, not a petition that would get thrown out of any Parliamentary debate in the first instance, for the very reason that it is flawed.

82

VOTE TO REVOKE UK CHARITY STATUS OF JW CHARITIES! URGENT!

by Blablaman in

jw
friends

not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.

vote now!.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .

digderidoo

Cedars ... I actually have more than a passing interest in Trusts Law of which Charitable Trusts are part. There is one thing stopping me from posting my own petition as it would have to be worded something along the lines of ...

"We hereby petition for the charitable status of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society to be revoked. We believe the work of the Society does not serve the purpose of 'the advancement of religion' (of course we all know it does) under the Charities Act 2011."

As the WTBTS of Britain does advance religion (according to the law) starting my own petition would be futile and a waste of everyones time.

So yes let's all follow Phizzy's advice and vote for ...

"We hereby petition the charitable status of Jehovahs Witnesses (even though it doesn't have one). We believe the work of Jehovahs Witnesses does not serve the public benefit (even though advancing a religion does according to legislation), and is entirely self serving. We also ask the Charity Commission should take greater care in ensuring that all charitable organisations serve in the public benefit, according to the Charities Act 2006 (even though the Charities Act 2006 no longer applies to the public benefit criteria)."

If you're going to propose this sort of motion to Parliament at least get the facts correct.

64

I am currently reading " The GOD delusion" by Richard Dawkins and would appreciate comments from those who have read it,pro &con.

by smiddy in

i`m only halfway through chapter 4 and enjoying what i have read so far .so why am i asking for peoples comments now ?

the reason i have is this : i wish i had done something like this when i first was approached by the witnesses ,i beleive i would have been more informed to make some enlightened decisisions that would eventually shape my future .. whereas not doing so i spent the next 33 years a slave of the watchtower , and not just me but my wife and children , not that i`m suggesting i would be a slave of richard dawkins , but i can weigh up the pros and cons as i progress through his book ,then hopefully i can draw the right conclusions , if their are any.. smiddy.

.

digderidoo

I have it and been reading it from time to time for the last couple of years, but not read all the way through.

In my opinion he is very condescending, uses the ad hominem attack quite a lot and doesn't do the atheist argument any favours. He does have some valid points but his approach is far from an objective one. I will continue to read it at some point, but for me it's not a page turner.

82

VOTE TO REVOKE UK CHARITY STATUS OF JW CHARITIES! URGENT!

by Blablaman in

jw
friends

not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.

vote now!.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .

digderidoo

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.

82

VOTE TO REVOKE UK CHARITY STATUS OF JW CHARITIES! URGENT!

by Blablaman in

jw
friends

not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.

vote now!.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .

digderidoo

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.

82

VOTE TO REVOKE UK CHARITY STATUS OF JW CHARITIES! URGENT!

by Blablaman in

jw
friends

not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.

vote now!.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .

digderidoo

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'.

82

VOTE TO REVOKE UK CHARITY STATUS OF JW CHARITIES! URGENT!

by Blablaman in

jw
friends

not long left... closes 20/02/2013 @ 08:01am.

vote now!.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29949 .

digderidoo

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.