came across this a few minutes ago.
http://www.wmcstations.com/global/story.asp?s=5973793
Hambeak,
Crap
I applaud your freedom under the Constitution to speak your mind. Sadly there are many places in the world where you and I could not express ourselves as freely as we do. It is that freedom I applaud...yours, mine and everyone else in the U.S. Freedom of speech, of worship, of assembly, of the press etc., is the very foundation on which this discussion board lawfully exists! Ed.
I sense she only had her self to blame
I sense she had a lot of help in her life's downward spiral, from her parents to the salacious news media there was no shortage of people who contributed to her sad life or made money from her. Lost souls should not be villified. Perhaps if we had walked a mile in her shoes we could understand a little better. Ed.
came across this a few minutes ago.
http://www.wmcstations.com/global/story.asp?s=5973793
HS,
Interpreting scripture is one thing, influencing others to follow an interpretation which abuses their civil rights, or leads them into harms way is not. Shunning for example, leads to emotional distress and has resulted in numerous suicides over the past forty years, yet the WTS consistently wins any case bought before the courts citing the First Amendment. Why is this?
The United States Constitution protects the rights of the minority as well as the majority. You bring up the shunning among JWs, something I am well familiar with. Did you as a JW ever shun? I did, and I must suppose many here also did. Why did we do it? Because we thought it was in scripture and God's will. It is that right of conscience that the U.S. Constitution protects, the right of religious conscience even that which is not in the mainstream.
Shunning is a filthy thing but it is a filthy thing which some religions preach and are free to exercise. It is better to warn others of this filth than to wish that a law be passed which prevents its exercise because when that happens a pandora's box of "lawful" control may descend upon us. Freedom of religion exists not to protect us from radical religion but from radical government!
People should choose their religion like they buy their cars: Buyer Beware! In a free society we are free to choose. I support that choice.
Ed.
this is a touchy topic for some because of strong beliefs about god's nature.
many believe that the nt bible is a law book, designed to give us exacting instructions and formula on what to do and not to do.
on prayer to the holy ghost (holy spirit), the new advent says:.
Amazing,
Although God the Father is mentioned in this prayer [Lor'd Prayer] as the one to whom we are to pray, it is not out of place to address our prayers to the other Divine persons. The special appeal to one does not exclude the others.
I left the Witnesses because I came to realize their Governing Body spoke out of their ass....excuse the colorful language. Popes, Priests, Bishops and Ministers are not above doing the same.
Please, friend, supply a scripture that supports the notion we can pray to the Holy Spirit. The quote above is not from a scriptural source.
With Christian love.
came across this a few minutes ago.
http://www.wmcstations.com/global/story.asp?s=5973793
HS,
Above is quoted the First Amendment. As you will read, it was written into the US Constitution as a noble gesture in order to protect the religious and political freedom of majority and minorities.
"to protect the religious and political freedom of majority and minorities", true.
The WTS, and numerous other bodies have used this statement as a shield behind which all manner of anti-social behavior, such as shunning, can take place with impunity.
No, this is actually a right of the minority, the right to interpret and apply their scriptures, their holy writings.
Despite such organizations misusing and fracturing the spirit of the First Amendment, courts and individual judges have shrunk from taking action against religions who use the Amendment as a legal loophole from which the artfully escape justice for their sins.
The amendment you quoted says in part: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"
Fracturing the spirit of the First Amendment? How do you interpret "prohibiting the free exercise thereof"? Please specify.
I believe that a way to deal with the situation without overturning the spirit of the First Amendment iwould be to grant Government Licences to all religious bodies. These licences would ensure, by annual checks, that the religious bodies in question were not harming, or infringing upon the rights of its adherents. If they are found wanting, they should be fined, have their licences revoked, and be granted a period to reform their ways, failing this they would have all their assetts seized. In short, they should be placed under the same governmental constraints that any corporation is required to live by, and with the same accountability attached to their actions.Why is that we can bring to book a used car salesman who suggests that the car you are buying is more than it is, and yet religions who promise you eternal life with all that this involves, get away scott free when they cannot come up with the goods? Both are confidence tricks.
I suggest you re-read the American Founding Fathers in particular Jefferson, Madison, Washington and Franklin. In their writings you will find the reasons for the necessity of the First Amendment and the applications thereof. The fact that you believe the First Amendment's application could in any way be applied as the laws pertaining to free commerce are applied is evidence of some ignorance on your part.
What you suggest would negate, "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion...".
Ed.
hello everyone.. i don't if this has been posted before.
if it has i apologize, but maybe my version will add to what is already known.. my brother is a district overseer.
the society sometimes places conferences calls to do's, co's and other overseers, especially when it is something that they do not want to put in writing.
Every used book store I've visited (and there have been many) has carried an old Watchtower publication. To believe that the Watchtower "conference calls" elders to warn them of old publications on the web is, to say the least, laughable.
Looking for stolen books?, lol. How would they know? My grandmother has every book published since Rutherford so do many JWs, nothing new here. The Watchtower, for all their faults, is not at every turn stupid, they know old publications are available on or off Ebay.
Ed.
does anyone know if it went anywhere other than an interesting essay?
has anyone used the strategy in court?
What big news are you referring to?
Ed.
came across this a few minutes ago.
http://www.wmcstations.com/global/story.asp?s=5973793
HS,
it is about the WTS hiding like snivelling bullies behind the First Amendment
Do you believe the First Amendment or its application is in some way faulty? If so, in what way do you believe improvement can or should be made?
Ed.
i'm still making my way through what is an excellent book by ron frye, former jw and c.o.
i found one of his comments interesting.
on page 68 he speaks affectionately of his wife mavis.... "i especially depended on her because she was observant and discerning.
Unfortunately, there is no one in the Watchtower who is anointed with God's spirit and therefore, according to scripture, they have no right/ability to judge their brother.
Confidentiality is a hit and miss thing among most religions including the JWs.
Love is the primary thing and without love there is nothing.
Ed.
anybody heard from him lately?
i havent seen a post from him in a long time.. tor.
Plus, he's also gotten to the point in his life where he's not as obsessed with JW things as he used to be. Personally, I'm not complaining!
This is good. More exJWs should follow his lead. Forget the watchtower and live your life!!!!!
Ed
