LookingGlass - Thank you for the clarification. I knew the word 'obligation' was a poor choice when I typed it but didnt know what else to use. What I was trying to refer to was the Vicki Boer case in Canada ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/59515/1.ashx ) where although Vicki 'won', she was apparently ordered to pay a huge sum for WTBTS legal costs, based in part becuase of her earlier refusal of WT offers to settle. My understanding was that something similar to this could have happened here in the U.S. also with regards to these 16 cases.
Hoping4Change
JoinedPosts by Hoping4Change
-
23
The 16 sexual abuse cases settled this year
by WTNightmare00 ini am puzzled about two key factors.
one is the fact that the victims agreed to settle out of court, and two, they agreed to a gag order.
those two key factors there, tells me something as i am sure it will tell you something as well.
-
-
-
23
The 16 sexual abuse cases settled this year
by WTNightmare00 ini am puzzled about two key factors.
one is the fact that the victims agreed to settle out of court, and two, they agreed to a gag order.
those two key factors there, tells me something as i am sure it will tell you something as well.
-
-
Hoping4Change
Someone clarify where I may be wrong on this, but I thought back when the news of the settlements first broke, and there were some discussions as to "why' this may have happened, I thought it was brought up that in the U.S, if a settlement is offered by a defendent that is potentally more than what could/would be awarded in any jury trial, then the plantiff was under some kind of obligation to accept the settlement, or at least risked being countered sued themselves, if they refused the offer and went through with the jury trial; even if they eventually did win the jury trial. Can someone with more legal understanding than myself refresh my memory of what I am referring to?
-
11
Barbara's CD - Answering the Critics
by Hoping4Change init would be interesting to hear what people think will be the things (if any) that jw's wont be able to deny from barbara's work.
for example, over on the topix boards, many are crying out that the "dismissed with prejudice" documents prove nothing and that there is no "proof" any settlements were paid.
i havent hardly begun sifting through the mountain of material, and it may be too early to start a thread like this, but it would be good to hear some comment and opinions that "answer the critics" about this bundle of material..
-
-
Hoping4Change
It would be interesting to hear what people think will be the things (if any) that JW's wont be able to deny from Barbara's work. For example, over on the Topix boards, many are crying out that the "dismissed with prejudice" documents prove nothing and that there is no "proof" any settlements were paid.
I havent hardly begun sifting through the mountain of material, and it may be too early to start a thread like this, but it would be good to hear some comment and opinions that "answer the critics" about this bundle of material.
-
181
OKM 09/07 (english)- Just another brick in the wall...
by metaspy inok guys and gals, i (being the assistant to the magazine counter) have acquired the newest okm.. i have uploaded it to imagevenue.com: here.
hopefully that works!.
by the way drew, your translation was very close.
-
-
Hoping4Change
DJK - "OKM/KM" = "Our Kingdom Ministry" / "Kingdom Ministry"
-
181
OKM 09/07 (english)- Just another brick in the wall...
by metaspy inok guys and gals, i (being the assistant to the magazine counter) have acquired the newest okm.. i have uploaded it to imagevenue.com: here.
hopefully that works!.
by the way drew, your translation was very close.
-
-
Hoping4Change
If the F&DS "does not endorse any literature....not produced or organized under its oversight", where does this put literature such as Josephus and other 'non-JW" historical texts? Are all linguistic, scientific, and history texts now "not endorsed" (and to be avoided) becuase none of them are "produced or organized under oversight" by the society?
How do others think JW's will respond to this? Does this letter really imply that JW's are not to get together and have pre-WT meetings/readings/studies of their own or are they ok so long as people dont look any further than their WT and look at other WT literature? Does the society expect people to only study their WT material by themselves and at the meetings?
-
33
Use Catholic Abuse Settle to Attack JWs re:KN #37 & JW Abuse Cases
by Seeker4 ini was thinking earlier of how the recent mega-million dollar catholic settlement in la is an ideal opportunity, in letters to the editor in local newspapers, to highlight the hypocrisy of the witnesses in how they have handled similar abuse cases.
a couple of points that might be useful to make this applicable anywhere: .
1. in the kingdom news #37 tract distributed around the country last fall.
-
-
Hoping4Change
TC - You could purchase a copy of the AP story directly from AP by going to the following link and search for jehovah. The article is the one from May of this year.
-
43
Just Witnessed at my Door to an Elder and his Wife About Child Molestation
by flipper inhello all, just had an interesting conversation with a p.o.
elder and his wife who were leaving me a incognito invitation to the "follow the christ" convention.i declined the invitation, but told them i had an associated press article i'd like to leave with them about molestation settlements jw's made outside of court.
i asked if they were aware of this settlement.
-
-
Hoping4Change
I mentioned the NWT, asking if he knew who the translators were and why they weren’t mentioned. He, as usual, mentioned humility.
I've been a little confused about how they expect this type of reply (the 'humilty' response) to actually hold any water. My response goes a little something like this: when we send our children to school, we expect the teachers who will be teaching our children to be verifiably and accurately trained. So if my child is to take a French or Spanish language class, I have every right to know and be able to call upon the credentials of those who would be teaching my children. I am sure most may not do so, but if we wanted to, we certainly could. It seems to me, the same should hold true for any Bible translator or teacher of the Bible. Humility can/should have nothing to do with telling who a given set of translators were; offering verifiable evidence of the training/credentials of the translators, and showing an interested one that the translators/teachers for a given work and subject area are indeed qualified to to be doing so. Who would send their child to school to learn French or Spanish from someone if the school was unwilling to offer up the evidence of a) who the teacher is (we cant know a teacher's name??) and b) what credentials that teacher has to be teaching the subject matter. When it comes to the Bible I use for study, I wrote a letter to to publishers and received a 2 page response with all the names of the members on the translating committee, a list of all the denominations of those members, and the underlying translation philosophy behind the work. Yes, I still have to put some trust in what I have being told, as I havent gone and looked up or called all the colleges and seminaries these people went to, but at least I know who they are and if I really wanted to, I am confident I could find out the training and what credentials each of those individuals hold. It's hard for me to accept that the WTBTS hides the members of its' translation committee and won't confirm who they are once they are found out (through other sources).
-
19
JW's celebrating the largest national birthday of all -- you heard me!
by Fatfreek inmy non-jw son just called from another state.
i asked him if he's attending any fireworks display tomorrow in observance of our nation's birthday.
he laughed, knowing that i was digging the lack of birthday celebrations amongst jw's.
-
-
Hoping4Change
At last night's meeting I overheard a number of people talking about where to go see fireworks. Is the rule for this particular holiday that 'so long as there are no flags or remembering of the history of America' involved, than everything else is ok?
-
40
Comments You Will Not Hear at the 7-1-07 WT Study (SUFFERING END SOON)
by blondie incomments you will not hear at the 7-1-07 wt study (may 15, 2007, pages 21-25)(suffering soon to end).
where is the love?.
17) "god is love.
-
-
Hoping4Change
Thanks Blondie. Maybe I was a little quick to reply, but I had just finished reading the article and then read Tim Keller's sermon (which I thought was good), went to Deuteronomy 29 and felt that the "How sad!" comment was basically saying, "9/11? Ha! We know why it happened, its becuase they rejected Jehovah" (like the Deuteronomy example), which really bothered me. I went back and read the article again and I guess maybe all that was perhaps meant by "How sad" was "9/11? Ha! We know why it happened and isnt it sad that no on else does." If that's all that was being implied in the article, than my bad. I still feel it was in poor taste (but not surpised) to lift Tim's comment out of context of his sermon and a poor choice of scripture to 'puff themselves up', given the close proximity to what was said in Deut.24:24-25.
-
40
Comments You Will Not Hear at the 7-1-07 WT Study (SUFFERING END SOON)
by blondie incomments you will not hear at the 7-1-07 wt study (may 15, 2007, pages 21-25)(suffering soon to end).
where is the love?.
17) "god is love.
-
-
Hoping4Change
When one pastor addressed an audience gathered to mark the anniversary of a devastating terrorist attack, he said: "We don't know the reason that God allows evil and suffering to continue." How sad! Are we not blessed to have insight into this subject? (Deuteronomy 29:29)
and now Deut.29:24-29 from the NWT
24 yes, all the nations will be bound to say, ‘Why did Jehovah do like this to this land? Why the heat of this great anger?’
25 Then they will have to say, ‘It was because they abandoned the covenant of Jehovah the God of their forefathers, which he concluded with them when he brought them out of the land of Egypt.
26 And they proceeded to go and serve other gods and to bow down to them, gods that they had not known and he had not apportioned to them.
27 Then Jehovah’s anger blazed against that land by bringing upon it the whole malediction written in this book.
28 Hence Jehovah uprooted them from off their soil in anger and rage and great indignation and threw them into another land as at this day.’
29 “The things concealed belong to Jehovah our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons to time indefinite, that we may carry out all the words of this law
Perhaps I am dense, but just exactly how does Deut.29:29 show that JW's are "blessed" on this subject? Is it me or doesnt using this example from Deuteronomy in relation to the 9/11 attacks to explain their "insight" into why God allows suffering suggest that (according to JWs) the terrroist attack occurred on the World Trade Center becuase everyone who was in there (and all their families) deserved to suffer becuase they werent or hadnt become JWs (i.e "they had abandoned the covenant with Jehovah")?
Am I off on this reasoning that they appear to be using? I sure hope so, becuase otherwise, it is a sly way of expressing some very repugnant beliefs.