original reddit post (removed).
Just something to add something into the mix,
If Lloyd is going to try to claim money for damages from anyone in a separate civil suit, then he would would have to prove that monetary loss - ie. make his accounts available to the defence.
Given his lack of legal knowledge, he probably hasn't realised that one.
original reddit post (removed).
Dude I am thinking about studying law. That was all. I was curious. : /
Go for it. I studied for my law degree post the borg. Never looked back. Beats cleaning windows.
original reddit post (removed).
Extradition requires 'dual criminality' in most jurisdictions - ie the crime has to be a crime in both countries.
This one is laughable. I truly believe that the lawyers are just taking his money (or his Patron's money) and offering him advice that he wants to hear.
original reddit post (removed).
An interesting article here on the scope of the criminal law on 'insult' and 'defamation' in Croatia in the context of digital platforms. Irrespective of all the jurisdictional issues in Lloyd's claimed case, the courts are mindful that there is a constitutional principle of freedom of expression and so prioritises the public interest of anything said.
original reddit post (removed).
I recall when he first came on the scene.
He and others placed ex and fading JWs into a Facebook group (at a time when Facebook allowed you to do that) as a way of building up his base (obviously now client base). At that time, Facebook settings allowed all the friends of those placed into the group to see that they belonged to his exjw group (can't recall what it was called). It resulted in many faders being 'outed' and some disfellowshipped.
He never took ownership of the consequences of what he did back then, continually deflected and became extremely defensive of anyone who dared to criticism him. I recall his squirming and conditional apologies on here.
This was before his Youtube channel. He has continued with the same modus operandi ever since. The guy can never take responsibility and always attacks others. This latest one is no surprise.
back in the day, tons of witnesses were brought in the “back room “ to be counseled by elders because of their dress and grooming.
some elders frowned on mustaches or hair that went past a certain point on a male.
women were regularly harassed because their skirt was too long or too short or had a slit on the side.
Five of us camped on a campsite for a Convention, all around 19-21 years old. It was one of those campsites the JWs takeover at Convention time, so there was alot there. We had a laugh one evening and into the night - nothing major happened, we just had fun, laughed alot and we were in bed around 10.30pm.
Over the following week we were hauled individually into the back library room for counselling, for bringing reproach on Jehovah's name. We ate humble pie, apologised and promised that we wouldn't have fun again at Convention time.
hi all, been a long time posting.. i have heard today that jws cannot take the vaccine due to blood within it.
is this correct?.
dig .
Thanks. So there is no truth in any of the vaccines being refused? My JW elderly father, with serious health problems, is saying he may not be allowed it due to blood - some directive from the Governing Body. I assume he has got something confused? Possibly local JW gossip.
hi all, been a long time posting.. i have heard today that jws cannot take the vaccine due to blood within it.
is this correct?.
dig .
Hi all, been a long time posting.
I have heard today that JWs cannot take the vaccine due to blood within it. Is this correct?
Dig
has anyone turned it down or know of someone who did turn down being an elder or ms?.
yes, it should be one of the biggest privileges a brother can get !!
(how do i put the barfy icon in?
My father started to privately doubt God's existence when he was offered an MS position. He accepted it.
i'm sure most here who've questioned or left behind their belief in god have encountered this question - without god, what basis can there be for morality?
my exwife, when i admitted that i was an atheist, once asked me "if you don't believe in god, what's to stop you from going out and raping and murdering?
" previously, whenever i got this objection, i would tend to turn it around on the other person with a response along the lines of "if fear of god is the only thing that stops you from murdering, that makes me rather nervous to be around you.
This is an ancient dilemma.
Socrates asked Euthyphro, "Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?" Socrates was asking if morality must come from the gods to be good, or is it good anyway and therefore loved by the gods.
Many theists argue that morality is separate from God, that God only loves morality because it is good - Thomas Aquinas for instance, holds that humans through reason (from God) can seek out what is moral to what is immoral. It is 'reason' that is a gift of God, not that morality itself stems from God.
Morality only stems from God in a theistic argument if they believe in a Divine Command Theory of morals, ie what is moral is only moral because it comes from God - this is, however, a minority opinion among theists - and incidentally, not necessarily the view of JW's. Not least, because this means there is no measure on morality, other than God's will. Many others argue that God commands what is moral, because it is moral - ie God and morality are separate.
Romans 2:14,15 even tells us that the Gentiles have the law written on their hearts, that it is through their conscience that they do what is right.
If God and morality are indeed separate, then we can be moral without any belief in God or god.
