i'm feeling very angry tonight as i watched my mother in law end her relationship with my husband, her son, tonight.
we were happily inactive, enjoying a distant but decent relationship with my in laws until they saw some christmas decorations and everything changed.
i spent two hours getting drilled on whether my husband and i celebrate holidays, to be told that my laws won't socialize with us anymore.
According to Spinks and O`Brien @ the ARC its your fault they are shunning you or rather by your action of having a tree in your house you are shunning them because you knew the consequences of your action..?
How does one reason with such stupidity !
We feel for you and your hubby visitor1984 , its their loss not yours.In time you will probably see it as a blessing in disguise.
Take care
many years ago i had only seen the third movie and had never seen the first two for some reason ,so i saw them on stan this past week and enjoyed every second of it.. their were even occasions i could see the gb being depicted in it s portrayal of the rc church... its 45th anniversary is coming up this week since it was first shown in cinemas.
what is your view of this trilogy ?
what were your fav .moments , comments made in the movies?.
Many years ago i had only seen the third movie and had never seen the first two for some reason ,so I saw them on Stan this past week and enjoyed every second of it.
Their were even occasions I could see the GB being depicted in it s portrayal of the RC Church..
Its 45th anniversary is coming up this week since it was first shown in cinemas
What is your view of this trilogy ? What were your fav .moments , comments made in the movies?
One of mine went something like this , Michael :"Every time I try to get out they drag me back in "
does forcing people to shun other people violate free will?
They mislead, coerce, misinform, misrepresent, and downright lie, but nope, they do not force people to do anything. The one thing that they make sure is not violating people's free will, and using the tactics that they use, they don't need to.
Well said Scratchme1010
someone suggested i would address a letter not only to mr. angus stewart, but also to the royal commission as well.
it merges the two subjects on the same letter (inactive status and shunning; two witness rule), and adds some things more that what i said to mr. stewart.
it's a bit long, please bear with me.. --------------------------------------- .
Thanks for posting this letter here EdenOne It was very impressive.extremely well written I think.
It was also heartening to hear from Angus Stewart that they had recieved over 1000 letters from all over the world critical of the JW`s handling of child sex abuse cases.
From Spain ,Canada,UK ,South America ,USA,Europe ,just to name a few from memory.
when the arc made their recommendations to the society last year i genuinely thought we'd see some real changes.
oh sure, i expected a lot of feet dragging, double talk, and general nonsense - but at the end of the day i was certain the society would do what they legally had to and then run around claiming:.
) these new policies and procedures aren't really new we've always done them.
It became painfully evident that the WT ORg.will only make much needed changes when forced to by the powers that be ( of Satans ststem of things ) and not because of the goodness of their hearts or because of christian principles or most importantly for the safegaurd of their children .
They just dont get it......They will fight tooth and nail against making any changes that will benefit children and to cling to their failed interpretation of the 2 witness rule., and their cruel policy of shunning.
so, on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is absolutely pro-jw, 5 is neutral and 10 is youtubing nutjob apostate, where do you stand?.
i'm probably around a 6. i have the view that jws are a nothing marginal religion.
if i hadn't been brought up as one i doubt they would have ever entered my consciousness.. the reasons it's a 6 and not a 5 is that i have some concerns over their child baptism and safeguarding procedures, but i think it's down to them being a bit dim rather than any pro child abusing ethos.
I dont consider myself a youtubing nut job apostate in anyway shape or form ,just an atheist who sees the emperor with no clothes (emperor=GB ) and I thank JW`s for getting me where I am .
we have heard: “don’t share food with apostate.” what about sharing the air we all breathe in?
whether apostate or believer, both breathe in the same air (which is more important than food)!.
today i put this question to the couple who came to invite me for the memorial.
Welcome venus look forward to more of your posts.
with all the legalese being tossed around, and the expert manipulation on the part of the wtbts, who can explain why the "two witness" is being perverted by the wtbts?
i don't care if you're a bible believer and want to approach this from a biblical standpoint, or if you simply use logic and reason.
how would you explain this subject to a j-dub, or even a non-dub?.
The two witness rule is used by the JWs only as part of their own internal judicial system, to establish sin for disciplinary action of the one committing the sin but has a number of negative consequences.
Of course child sexual abuse is a crime and not a sin , so Elders who are informed of an allegation of sexual abuse against one of the children in the congregation regardless of whether it was committed by a fellow member or a non member , it should have been reported to the appropiate authorities when it came to their notice. regardless of whether a mandatory rule of law applied or not.
It was a moral responsability on their part which they failed to do.
guys,.
i need your help in trying to wrap my head around this strange experience i had today talking with a jw lady sitting at a literature table in a busy outdoor shopping center.. i'm a very shy person, but i always wanted to ask these jws at their literature stands questions to start them thinking about the validity of watchtower teaching.
i finally mustered my strength today to talk to this jw lady.
By the way welcome to the board nevermind .
apologies if this has been posted already.... http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-10/uniting-church-in-australia-apologises-to-victims/8344496.
As an atheist determining who was more christian in their answers To the ARC the Uniting Church won hands down.
The UC were contrite in their answers and apologised and answered questions without trying to defend their failings.
In contrast the JW`s continually tried to defend the indefensible taking the ARC to task for not understanding their scriptual interpretations and continually defecting to legalisms much to the frustation of SC Angus Stewart
