Skeptic wrote:
Focus,First, I apologize for being so blunt in my first reply [..] Yes, you are right, the divorce was not finalized. They were in the beginning stages of a divorce, not the end. I erred in that [..] I can see the Watchtower being 100% the cause of a divorce [..] due to a lack of SOLID, VERIFIABLE evidence, I will withdraw my assertion that Kevin Hensley was an abusive husband.
Good. Since you have thereby withdrawn most of your argument - and have admitted that the rest of your "feelings" about the non-jW husband were simply your own prejudgment, guesswork (in the face of part of the evidence) or prejudice - why should I teach you further?
So, produce evidence that the Watchtower leader’s caused Nancy’s murder.
Again, can't you read, """""""Skeptic"""""""?
I answered this question ages before you asked it.
Right in the lead post above. Here it is again, maybe you have some issue with using your mouse, eyes, cat or something else.
***fy 160-1
GROUNDS FOR SEPARATION Are there situations that may justify separation or possibly divorce from a marriage mate even if that one has not committed fornication? Yes .. What are some extreme situations that may make a separation seem advisable? .. if a spouse constantly tries to force a marriage mate to break God's commands in some way, the threatened mate may also consider separation, especially if matters reach the point where spiritual life is endangered. The partner at risk may conclude that the only way to 'obey God as ruler rather than men' is to obtain a legal separation. -Acts 5:29.. mature friends and elders may offer support and Bible-based counsel .. if an extremely dangerous situation persists, no one should criticize her if she chooses to separate.. It is not true, as some assert, that Jehovah's Witnesses divide families.
And what do you think "tries to force a marriage mate to break God's commands" means, eh? It means "tries to force a marriage mate to break
THE WATCHTOWER'S COMMANDS"
Like, being in the company of and having fellowship (and fellowship means "spiritual fellowship"; there is no other sort) with someone who opposes the Watchtower. And someone who loves a mate and then sees him or her fall over the precipice of madness into the netherworld of the God-dishonoring, filthy, barbaric Cults is likely to fight that evil tooth and nail (or give in and join).
As the Watchtower leaders know this well.
The Watchtower therefore openly solicits the division of families. So, they are, in a large part, a CAUSE the murder.
Whether it can possibly be legally actionable is another matter altogether. I deal with that below.
If you cannot, then retract your statement or admit you are stupid and shut up.
In the light of the above, I think not.
Focus, you are a poster I normally respect. I should let this post end here. Yet you have succeeded in doing something that is rare on this board, pissing me off. Since that was your intent, I will continue.
LOL! Are you this easy to manipulate? Converting you must have been a cinch. Are you really going to stick with that posting handle, """"""""Skeptic""""""""?
Focus, have you ever been in an abusive relationship? I have [..] I smiled when I read this one. Everyone thought my first wife and I had “a perfect marriage”
Thank you for making it even more clear that you judged the non-jW husband on the basis of YOUR experience, rather than on the published evidence.This is the limit of the influence the Dubs had, if we go strictly by “evidence”, not using our brains and thinking
And where did
I suggest one ceased thinking??
Elsewhere, you have declared (now if I was trying to "piss you off", I would have employed "conceded"!) that a JW conversion is very destructive to a marriage.
So, I have no more quarrel with you, having demolished such points as you may have thought you had. I have left suitable advice for you in the "Anger Management" thread.
Also, women (like men) do TELL LIES in depositions during divorces, Mr "Skeptic"...
Very good point. So do men and children.
So, do explain:
which part of my words "(like men)" did you fail to understand? Not reading AGAIN?? See what a bad idea it is to write when you are so angry? Believe you me, I am being very gentle with you!
I boldly contend that the principles of Justice demand that the law be modified so that certain leaders (at the local and other levels) of the Jehovah's Witnesses Cult SHOULD BE CHARGED WITH MURDER, alongside Kevin Hensley.
Focus, please present evidence showing that the leader’s of Jehovah’s Witnesses should be charged with murder, alongside Kevin Hensley.
I do not have such "evidence". Can't you read?
AGAIN??????????? Read the text of mine that you have quoted immediately above, and pray inform me as to where in that have I claimed to have possession of such evidence?
Hint: look for the word "modified".
What I said was that I want THE LAW TO BE CHANGED so that Cult Manipulators are held accountable, both in tort and in criminal law, for the consequences to the world at large, of their duped, brainwashed followers adhering to cult teachings, at the same time weakening the available legal defenses of duty of care, foreseeability and of remoteness of damage in such cases. [/reiterate]
With the law as it stands, there is no case to answer, as there is no direct evidence.
Sadly, I do not think the law will be changed in this way. Lawmakers tend to underestimate the power of deceitful brainwashing and manipulation, and use the PERSONAL FREEDOM OF CHOICE argument AGAINST such an introduction - when in fact disgraceful Cults such as the Witnesses are the thieves of personal freedoms! Ironic, tragic...
So again, you chase me on a strawman - attacking me for what you THINK I wrote - which is not what I wrote (Or what I thought, for that matter). One must ask, what is the motive of such people?
Do you have a problem holding a negligent hypnotist accountable for the actions of the hypnotized person and damage resulting therefrom?
Meditate before answering.
Remember, if you can’t then by your own standard you are stupid.
Well, I am clearly OK then.
I can see the Watchtower being 100% the cause of a divorce, but not a murder.
It is not 100% the cause of the murder. Yet another strawman?
And legally - under the systems of "justice" that subsist in the US and most of the world - legally it is not at all the cause of the murder.
That was my point. Legal reform is needed.
Moral arguments WILL NEVER persuade the OLD WHORE. She understands but two persuasions - the $ and the lash.
Tell you what I’ll do: due to a lack of SOLID, VERIFIABLE evidence, I will withdraw my assertion that Kevin Hensley was an abusive husband. I still personally believe he was, but it is a belief based on circumstantial evidence and not solid proof.
Not that this is too relevant, but you misunderstand the meaning of
circumstantial evidence. The evidence is an unsubstantiated allegation by an interested party, presented without any supportive proof or evidence from an independent source. Circumstantial evidence is something else.
So, wipe the foam off your mouth
I need not so employ my paw. I am not hot with anger... please, be more of a skeptic, and do not always go by outward appearances. If you must, join the OBVES club, which sees the
Creeping Leopard shape country as being a fulfillment of unpleasant Biblical prophecies. At least, that is somewhat funny.
No be at peace, and not in pieces, and go about your business with joy in your heart. Do not squander your happiness, and continue to have a care for those millions whose lives have been ruined by the Disgusting Abomination of Brooklyn.
--
Focus
(Cold, Cold, Cold Anger Class)
