Millie210
I see what you mean - guess it wouldnt be huge enough to work.
I agree with Simon. It needs sustained action not just a one-off unless that one-off is absolutely huge.
in the early 1990s, i was in a meeting.
we were making some major changes to the main it system of the company i worked for.
during the meeting i said, 'what would happen if one of our major customers went belly up and shouldn't we build something into the system to cope with this?'.
Millie210
I see what you mean - guess it wouldnt be huge enough to work.
I agree with Simon. It needs sustained action not just a one-off unless that one-off is absolutely huge.
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/06/11/19/06/parents-under-fire-for-failing-to-allow-lifesaving-blood-transfusion-to-terminally-ill-son.
there is a video that can be seen at the above link that is worth watching.. the andersons.
7:10pm june 11, 2015 parents under fire for failing to allow lifesaving blood transfusion to terminally ill son.
Azor
She refused blood as any good JW would and died within a month. Leaving behind a teenage son scheduled for open heart surgery this year.
The emboldening and underlining is mine.
What is good about dying needlessly and leaving a sick teenage son without a mother?
This is sending out the wrong message to society.
Words fail me.
in the early 1990s, i was in a meeting.
we were making some major changes to the main it system of the company i worked for.
during the meeting i said, 'what would happen if one of our major customers went belly up and shouldn't we build something into the system to cope with this?'.
Millie210
What about a really juicy scandal with a Governing Body member at the epicenter?
Nah, that won't work. All that will happen is that new members will be appointed to gb who are of the same ilk as the existing ones and life will continue as normal.
Nah, what one needs to do, IMHO, is to highlight those cases where jovie parents are prepared to let their children die rather than have blood transfusions and to emphasise to all and sundry that jovie world is a high mind control cult.
in the early 1990s, i was in a meeting.
we were making some major changes to the main it system of the company i worked for.
during the meeting i said, 'what would happen if one of our major customers went belly up and shouldn't we build something into the system to cope with this?'.
Taxation has been mentioned - making jovie land pay tax would mean that they'd simply put yet more pressure on members to cough up more bucks.
A coup has been mentioned - however, some members would go with the current regime and the rest would go with the new. We would simply have two jovie worlds to deal with instead of one.
Paedophilia has been mentioned but it doesn't seem to adversely affect jovie world nor the katlicker church too much.
The only way this evil cult can be killed off as far as I can see is if far more people leave the organisation than joins it. It's that simple. You don't even have to get everyone to leave. Just enough such that the funds coming are insufficient to sustain the organisation. Once that happens, assets have to be liquidated and it's then downhill all the way. Eventually, although the organisation still may have a reasonably substantial membership, it will be untenable as an organisation because of the funding gap between what it needs to survive on a daily basis and the amount coming in. Of course they have assets that they can liquidate in the short term but although they are large, they aren't infinite. Besides, once the top management can't afford their large cars, houses and solid gold watches, they'll desert the sinking ship and the whole lot will quickly implode.
How do you get more people to leave than join?
Bad press. This causes existing members to leave and potential new ones not to join.
Essentially, this is what DoC & Simon were getting at.
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/06/11/19/06/parents-under-fire-for-failing-to-allow-lifesaving-blood-transfusion-to-terminally-ill-son.
there is a video that can be seen at the above link that is worth watching.. the andersons.
7:10pm june 11, 2015 parents under fire for failing to allow lifesaving blood transfusion to terminally ill son.
Cofty
Outlaw - I think that portraying JW parents as uncaring is unhelpful.....cofty
The parents can claim they care as much as they want but, if they get their way, their son dies. Caring isn't about saying you care, words are cheap. It's about showing it. If a parent is prepared to let a child die rather than defy a religion, then the religion is sick and so are the parents. Claiming that the parents care is just plain dumb. If the parents cared, the child would be allowed a blood transfusion. Situations like this need highlighting and brought to society's attention and the parents held up as being irresponsible and uncaring so as to deter other jovie parents from doing likewise. The parents need to understand that a caring society doesn't tolerate such behaviour. The courts shouldn't need to get involved. In some cases, time may not even allow the courts to get involved and a child might die.
Highlighting situations like this just might cause some people to leave jovie land and others not to join in the first place.
We stopped offing humans as sacrifices to the gods hundreds of years ago, at least I thought so.
Jovies are a cult. They should be treated as such and minors of cult members given automatic protection without the need for court intervention.
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/06/11/19/06/parents-under-fire-for-failing-to-allow-lifesaving-blood-transfusion-to-terminally-ill-son.
there is a video that can be seen at the above link that is worth watching.. the andersons.
7:10pm june 11, 2015 parents under fire for failing to allow lifesaving blood transfusion to terminally ill son.
Cofty
Outlaw - I think that portraying JW parents as uncaring is unhelpful.....cofty
Cofty, I have read a lot of your posts. I agree with most, if not all, apart from this one. You are a bright guy. You are looking like a real pratt on this occasion. Someone needs to point it out to you.
The parents care more about their religion than they do about their son's life. When religion interfere's with life, it's time to take religion and the parents out of the equation.
http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/06/11/19/06/parents-under-fire-for-failing-to-allow-lifesaving-blood-transfusion-to-terminally-ill-son.
there is a video that can be seen at the above link that is worth watching.. the andersons.
7:10pm june 11, 2015 parents under fire for failing to allow lifesaving blood transfusion to terminally ill son.
this topic was inspired by one of fhn's comments on the 'warzone' thread, so i'll just restate my post there .
.. "i've been wondering for a while now if ridicule really is an unacceptable feature in debate - it certainly isn't a valid form of argumentation.
the thing is, some individuals really do come out with the most laughable nonsense and parade it as a serious proposition that merits attention.
Millie210
As I have stated before, I am not an atheist but I am curious and wish I could discuss it but even when a thread is started by an atheist I feel is "approachable" it isnt long before the ones who employ jeering and mocking and preaching (yes I said it - preachers arent just religious - its a talking style also) and I leave the thread.
I don't want you to think I'm preaching because I'm not. I could point out web sites where if you even hint that you believe in god they will rip you to shreds and spit out the bones. The language is vile. In fact, I can't believe they can get away with it, but they do. When you join, the first question they ask is 'do you do anal?'. I kid you not. They will treat you unmercilessly. The problem is that there's some serious intellectual heavyweights on the site too. They know BS when they hear it and treat it with complete and utter contempt. Those guys don't whistle Dixie. They are full on. There's a moderator who's very active on the site. He makes sure that the level of abuse is turned up to maximum. He considers freedom of speech to be above all things.
Also be aware that x-tians have done some terrible things since they formed. Some people tolerate and even forgive. There are also those that don't and won't. Be also aware that x-tians suppressed and abused people for thousands of years. Now that the shackles are off and x-tians no longer have the upper hand, it's pay-back time. Maybe x-tians are getting their just deserts at long last.
I, by nature, am a very intolerant person, especially of religion and especially of x-tians. I'm trying a different way to see if it pans out. I have to admit, it's difficult. I can't say for sure whether or not I'll remain a born-again atheist or go back to my intolerant ways. However, be aware, x-tians and religious people in general have not covered themselves in glory and people do have a right to make this clear.
Believe me, this is a tolerant forum in comparison and one that people need to be proud of and appreciate.
in the early 1990s, i was in a meeting.
we were making some major changes to the main it system of the company i worked for.
during the meeting i said, 'what would happen if one of our major customers went belly up and shouldn't we build something into the system to cope with this?'.
Simon
- just look at Scientology.
I'd rather not. JW has made me sick to the stomach as it is.
so yesterday was a lovely day where i live and so instead of going to the meeting we went, as a family, out for the late pm/early evening to have a bbq.
we were far more relaxed than if we had gone to the meeting.
we spent far more time talking that if we had gone to the meeting.
The Searcher
Many of us here - and all around the world - are on the same path, Doltologist.
Good luck to you all.