Posts by abbagail

19

Need Help with INFO

by JT in

jw
friends

does anyone still have thier old "aid book"-.

i need a small quote: it is either under divorce or homosexuality-.

it is pre-1988 revision of the grounds for divorce.

The blue Aid To Bible Understanding encyclopedia, 1971 edition, is what I have. Page 460. The main subject is Divorce, but what you are looking for is under the subheading, "Only Ground for Divorce Among Christians," 3rd paragraph under that particular subheading...

3rd paragraph quoted in its entirety:

"Sexually immoral acts committed by a married person with someone of the same sex (homosexuality) are filthy and disgusting. Unrepentant persons of this type will not inherit God's kingdom. And, of course, bestiality is Scripturally condemned. (Lev. 18:22, 23; Rom. 1:24-27; 1 Cor. 6:9,10). However, though these acts are grossly filthy, they do not constitute adultery and are not named as Christian grounds for divorce. An individual cannot, for instance, Scripturally marry a person of the same sex and become 'one flesh' with that one in the way God ordained when uniting Adam and Eve in wedlock.--Gen. 2:24"

----------

Sounds to me like they were "trying too hard" to be so "exact" regarding the word "adultery" that they were not thinking straight: i.e., Since adultery means an immoral "connection" between man/woman, sex between woman-woman or man-man cannot possibly equal adultery since they are not "connecting" in the way that Adam/Eve did.

Even so, I don't know how they rule out bestiality as not being an adulterous ground for divorce since, technically, a man or woman 'could connect' with a beast -- (totally grosses me out, but if people didn't do it it probably wouldn't have been in Lev. to start with.). If I caught my husband with the family pet, he'd be out the door! Barf!

GRITS

10

I'm sad.

by SPAZnik in

my father called the other evening.. first time since i left over a year ago.. .

i know how this man operates.

i knew he'd call a year after my departure.

abbagail

Wow guys, this is really sad stuff. Sorry for those with such painful family experiences. None of mine were ever JWs, so no change for me in that regard.

That was a good idea to write your own "Disowning Letter." Evidently it had an impact. Pow!

I was intrigued by blondie's comment: "Elders may call on you once a year to see if you want to come back." Huh? I never had an elder call on me in 12 years, much less once a year. I guess the operative word in that sentence is "MAY call on you..." which, I am guessing, means they MAY IF THEY WANT TO...

Reminds me of the scripture about the leper:

"Lord if you JUST WANT TO, you can make me clean." And so, stretching out his hand, [Jesus] touched him saying, "I WANT TO. Be made clean." And immediately his leprosy was cleansed away." (Mat. 8:2,3).

Revised 20th Century Version: "Elder, if you JUST WANT TO, you can remove my DF'ing." And so, stretching out his bat, he bonged me on the head saying, "I DON'T WANT TO. You haven't sat in the back row for a year yet." And immediately I gave up on the idea. (Book of Grits, Chapter 12).

:-/

22

OUCH ! Wall Street Journal SPITS out the JWs!!

by deddaisy in

i saw this in the wall street journal, friday, june 21, 2002, page w15...it's a good article, unfortunately, i had to type it because i can't find the article on-line.....so forgive the typo's.... .

houses of worship / by jason l. riley .

door-to -door, disturbingly .

abbagail

Hubba Hubba. At first I thought surely the WSJ article by Jason L. Riley was written by someone from this forum!

Thanks for posting the "biting" article, and for the brief bio of xBro Riley. Even tho he exited the WT in his teens, sounds like the hairs on the back of his neck still stand straight up when he even THINKS about JWs and/or the WTS.

I like how he added the comment about there being no black brothers in the GB until recently. Nice touch, JLR!

Funny comment about all the good writers getting away... :)

And deddaisy, I like an article with pre-inserted emphasis! Good job!

All sad but true, sad but true...

Grits

6

Why the Watchtower Has Embraced Cowardice

by metatron in

jw
friends

there have been some acts of personal bravery in this organization.

martin poetzinger.

endured a death camp.

abbagail

Well said, Metatron, and good reading! I, too, used to get really fired up (thrilling) to read about the forefathers of the org and all they stood up to, and stood up for ("JWs and the Divine Purpose" - old dark-green book, was one of my favorite Thrillers, along with the Yearbooks). "Why, If THEY could do it, so could I!" I always thought. But all this wishy-washy, mamsy-pamsy stuff going on.... it truly is disheartening, and would make one feel "weak at the knees" (Heb.12:12) due to lack of vision and leadership. One day I got out all the WT's from the past decade with "new light" which I had missed... and the first thought/emotion I had was the scripture at Ephesians 6:4:

"And you, fathers, do NOT be irritating your children..."

Sidenote: The NWT Reference Bible says regarding the word "irritating": Literally: "not be you PROVOKING TO WRATH." -- How about THEM apples, eh? But that's the first thing I felt in my gut, was, "Hey! You are not being CONSISTENT with the children, irritating us to pieces by always changing everything around... Cut it out, will ya?!!!" (Didn't the Society always say, in explanation of that scripture, that parents should be CONSISTENT in their teaching/training of their children, so as not to irritate them?)

I agree with you who said the lawyers have taken over... the zig-zag of the explanations and wording of things... wasn't it legal-beagles who invented circular-reasoning? ;) When I began trying to play 'catch up' with the WT-world (after having not paid attention for about 9 years), my OTHER first gut reaction was, "The Lawyers Have Taken Over..." (maybe due to my having worked for attorneys for over a decade during the same years I was a JW)... It just "felt" like everything the WT was saying was like they are trying purposely to NOT say anything, just to "cover their tail;" and who else would advise them to speak such legalese except the Mouthpieces? Whether they WANT this kind of "legal" guidance or not, it almost sometimes seems like they have been "overtaken"... like, who really IS running the show? The spiritual men or the legal-heads?

And why would they be "chickening out" now, after all this time, and sucking up to governments, brown-nosing the UN, etc.? Sounds like motives far from spiritual ones... more like, "Let's make sure our own butts are safe, come what may..." Who knows better how to cover their own tails than attorneys? Have you ever noticed how that Marino guy or the other one, I forget his name, how they have been quoted in magazine articles, using words like "screwed up", and stuff like that? Aren't these attorneys also JWs? They come across as harsh and heartless... definitely not spiritual sounding to me. I would be embarrassed for my former (attorney) boss to have to know all these things, as he really respected my position as a JW (when I WAS a JW, that is...)

Is it that the leadership got too old to write articles, and therefore, so many DIFFERENT ones are writing articles/opinions they are all putting their own thoughts in the literature? This one thinks this... That one thinks that... Maybe they are playing "Musical Chairs" up there in HQ, i.e., whoever has the pen-in-hand this week WINS and gets to write the latest new light...?

Sorry for the rambling.... I got carried away in the spirit of irritation... ;)

Regards/GRITS

13

Fire Walls and Sueing the Society

by voltaire in

jw
friends

a few thoughts about the society's efforts to protect itself from litigation.. i attended the elder's seminar a few years back where we were instructed to write in our elder's manual a few extra instructions pertaining to filling out the society's disfellowshipping forms and other aspects related to judicial cases.

that was nothing terribly unusual.

we often wrote in clarifications and updates during meetings with the co. this time was a little different because we filled an entire page with seven(i think) specific instructions.

abbagail

I appreciate this thread. It is intriguing to me to be able to hear what "wise" men who were/are elders have to say on these weighty matters. This is very heavy stuff. And I remember just very slight references to this "separation of org & congs" way back, but it was not something widely discussed among the R&F, so I never really grasped the significance of what was REALLY going on.

How about the video (on Dateline) of Bill Bowen recording the Service Dept. telling him to "leave it alone" (or similar wording). Can evidence like that not be used? (or was he recording the conversation w/o their knowledge at the time...?)

To change the "tone" a little.... I had to smile at some of the comments:

BluesBrother wrote:

I wish I still had the Shepherding Book in which I wrote it, but of course they took it back off me.

That comment reminded me of Police & FBI TV dramas where the offending officer is asked to turn in his badge and gun... :-)

And, Sam Beli wrote:

"...the brain drain" is likely to continue and as the "teachers" in the congregations become increasingly dull and dim witted the brighter "publishers" may become increasingly irritated and impatient with the leadership... Where these irritated publishers, usually women, go is uncertain..."

Crack me up, Sam. This "brain drain" you speak of was readily evident to me over 20+ years ago when I moved back to the South after first learning the truth out West, where the "IQ and finesse" of that cong seemed so much more elevated. I couldn't believe the "backward & small-minded" atmosphere at the new KH where I relocated. Ugh! It was terrible. Talk about dull and dim-witted! After my first few meetings there, I swore there was no way I could cope with this, and would just have to relocate AGAIN to a more "educated" atmosphere where the speakers could actually speak, and knew how to read utilizing the punctuation and grammar as printed in the literature. The reading of the WT and the book studies by these brothers was pure torture to sit through. Talk about being irritated and impatient with the leadership! That described me for sure. But alas, I determined it was ME who was at fault, overly critical, and needed to learn patience, kindness, understanding, etc. and I did learn that not everybody got to go to Catholic School when they were kids and learn their phonics!... ;)

That cong was sooooo "in a slump", though, for quite a long time, that there was "talk" that the "holy spirit had left the cong," etc. Eventually, a "NY family" moved in, and, thankfully, that brother knew his ABC's and how to give a public talk, and later they moved a pioneer couple in from a nearby cong, the brother having been at Bethel, etc., and they were both great people who also knew their ABC's, punctuation, and he was a good teacher and speaker....Whew! so things eventually picked up and became a little more lively, and much more "bearable" for "irritated publishers, usually women..." (as Sam wrote, crack me up, btw, since I was exactly such an "irritated woman (ex) publisher...") ;)

Pardon the walk down "memory lane" but the similarities of what you guys/girls write is amazing...

Kind regards/GRITS

PS: Isn't the name Sam Beli similar to some famous attorney? Who is it I am thinking of??? Melvin, Marvin???? Talk about brain-drain...

36

This is SO SICK and WRONG!

by SYN in

omg.

this is just wrong on so many levels.

thongs for young girls!

abbagail

It's true what LadyLee says about men being visual, they're hard-wired that way. Ever watched one go into that stupor-daze, without even realizing it, when they catch sight of somebody that looks really good, etc.? You gotta sock 'em in the arm to snap them out of it.
Agree, also, that attire is not the faulting factor for rape, etc.
Thongs? Never tried 'em... you gotta have great buns to wear thongs I would think.
(They remind me of the "belts" we were given to use... well, you know... the ladies might remember those.... how horribly uncomfortable those were! Total yuk!)
And kids? Guess times have changed, but I was horrified when my mother said it was time for me to get a bra!

Read it just in the past few days, a post, not sure where... one of the forums I'm sure... about the xbrother who was on a JC about the young lady called in re: fornication or whatever, and she was grilled to the enth-degree as to whether she had worn thongs or regular panties.... remember that one? It was the saddest thing I ever read.... and this xbro was soooooo apologetic. The reasoning of the elders was (and I don't know if this is across-the-board instructions that all elders get, or if it was just the elders in that one JC), but if a woman wore a thong and was on a date or whatever, they determined that meant she went with the desire to "get laid;" whereas if she had worn regular undies, her intentions would NOT have been to get laid (or is that layed?).... Yes, seems they were policing (police-ing) down to the underwear level...

And if that is the logic going on at the KH, better not let the elders know if you let your young daughters wear thongs...

Not trying to be funny either.

GRITS

22

German TV Magazine Covers JW Child Abus

by GermanXJW in

about 45min ago - on short notice -, german tv magazine kontraste ( http://www.kontraste.de) broadcasted a very well researched report on child abuse within the jw community.

the report was only 10min long, but it was german prime time - the very first topic after the most watched daily news magazine.

kontraste (contrasts) is very reputable tv magazine.. two victims were interviewed and a jw spokesman.

abbagail

Hi GermanJW: Yes, thank you VERY much for providing not only the article and link, but for doing the translation for us "Anglos" over here.... You did a great job with the translation!

I am wondering if the victims who spoke up in this article.... did their stories just "come to light" recently, along the same time as the USA scandals coming to light? Or, has there been such cases all along in your country? I am happy these victims had the courage to speak out to the media. They are very brave!

Thanks again/GRITS

37

Scanned Copy of Newsweek Article on JW Child Abuse

by hawkaw in

please note the article is on "right side" with a "tan coloured background".

this is page 81 of the june 24, 2002 edition (on sale now - as of june 17, 2002).

it's a small article but .....!!!!!

abbagail

Thanks Nanoprobe, for sharing another side of the coin (about JR).

Do ya think the Society has the paper-shredding machines running full blast in order to destroy those 23,000+ names of molesters they have at HQ? I just saw a post at SL that the Mass. Attorney General has convened a grand jury to see about kicking the butts of those Cardinals involved in the cover up in the C.Church. Makes me think of the scripture in Daniel about "the handwriting on the wall..."

---------
Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly has convened a grand jury to decide whether there is enough evidence to charge Boston Cardinal Bernard Law and other high-ranking archdiocese officials for their handling of priests accused of sexually abusing children, The Boston Globe and The Boston Herald http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml;jsessionid=XC4D5RZLAW1F0CRBAE0CFEYKEEATGIWD?type=topnews&StoryID=1108312
-------

Also, there's some really dirty deeds which occurred to this really nice guy who posts at the Channel C forum... easier to read than for me to try to explain....
MESSAGE = http://www.channelc.org/cgi-bin/eboard30/index.cgi?board=Main&message=2211
MESSAGE = http://www.channelc.org/cgi-bin/eboard30/index.cgi?board=Main&message=2215

Kind regards/GRITS

23

Does the FBI have a file on you?

by patio34 in

jw
friends

does the fbi have a file on you?

be prepared for a real surprise at this site... .

an attorney i know gave me this site, i thought you might find it interesting.

abbagail

Die laughing!!! I got all excited when I put in the name of an ex-boyfriend and sure enough it came back with a match... thought I was gonna get to read some real juicy-scoop about him. Dangit! No dirt to be found -- only a pic of him on a day he forgot to shave...

I've GOT to spread this one around!

Too funny!
GRITS

8

Supreme Court Ruling--JW Atty Response

by patio34 in

this was in the news today and the wts attorney's response (highlighted) is really arrogant, don't you think?

it's not what the case was about--"protecting their public ministry"--it was about liberties under the law.. #################################.

court slams door on village's bid to curb solicitation .

abbagail

Hi Pat, In the New York Times' version of the Supreme Court ruling, they quoted a comment by the only dissenting judge, Rehnquist, and I thought what he said was kinda funny...

Solicitors Do Not Need Prior Permission, Court Rules
By DAVID STOUT -- WASHINGTON, June 17

(snipped)

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the sole dissenter, ... added, "Great as is the value of exposing citizens to novel views, home is one place where a man ought to be able to shut himself up in his own ideas if he desires."

---and this was kinda funny, too ---

Notwithstanding its constitutional importance, the Stratton case has been marked by rich human drama and, occasionally, comedy. ... Mr. Abdalla ... recalled Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's asking, "Do I have to get a permit to borrow a cup of sugar from my neighbor?"

--------------------
:) GRITS