GLTirebiter

Joined

• started 12 topics
• posted 2,631 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by GLTirebiter

• 
  10

  There is NOT "Spiritual Confidentiality" privilege for sexual abuse claims!

  by 3Mozzies in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  .

  i just love this section from the case:.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GLTirebiter

  Justitia, use the IE compatiblity mode (or a different browser)
• 
  10

  There is NOT "Spiritual Confidentiality" privilege for sexual abuse claims!

  by 3Mozzies in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  .

  i just love this section from the case:.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GLTirebiter

  It does not apply when the victim accuses someone else.

  Also, it does not apply unless there is an expectation of privacy. In a judicial committee, there are witnesses who know there is an investigation. There are multiple elders, instead being a one-on-one private confession. If the committee makes a finding, there will be a "... is no long one of Jehovah's Witnesses" announcement from the stage, or a "marking" local-needs talk.There is no reasonable expectation that what transpires in a judicial committee hearing will be kept private. (The same logic applies in the Los Angeles case 3mozzies referred to: if it was documented, then it was not a private matter between the penitent and confessor, and not protected by clerical privilege).
• 
  97

  Greetings from Candace Conti

  by AndersonsInfo in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  candace asked me to tell you thank you for all your kind expressions of support.

  this really means a lot to her.

  she wants you to know that she is coping well with all the stress and excitement, even though she's had years of anger and frustration because of being abused for so long, first by the molester, and then by the wt.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GLTirebiter

  Thank you, Candace, for your strength and perseverance. You have made a difference!
• 
  42

  Excellent news article re Candace Conti's abuse, not for the sensitive or tender-hearted

  by yesidid in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/06/15/bauq1p2ph2.dtl.

  sadly there are details which may make you heave or want to commit violence..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GLTirebiter

  "This is the first case I know of where a church has been hit with liability involving a rank-and-file member,"

  This glosses over the point that written policies from WTBTS headquarters tell the BOE report to the lawyers at Bethel first, rather than to the legal authorities, and to do as little as possible to comply with the "mandatory reporting" laws (use a pay phone, don't give a name, etc.) rather than cooperating fully with the investigators. The direct consequence of that written policy was that Kendrick was able to continue his crimes, leading to further harm to plaintiff and other victims. That WTBS policy of negligence is what the case is about, and the jury agreed with the claim.

  Besides, don't they say that all baptized publishers are "ordained ministers", and that they don't have any special "clergy class?"
• 
  16

  ny jw principle causes problem banning patriotic song...on foxnews now

  by oompa in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  god bless the usa song by lee greenwood...is making little kids sing a bieber love song instead lmao...baby baby baby....and it is a very long segment with lee himself making good points about the idiot jw as did the mom of a kid the jw lady principle bitch slapped for singing the song...that is not literal all you pc sensitive types out there.....oompa.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GLTirebiter

  Do the parents know how close Bethel is to their neighborhood, in case they wanted to have a protest and get it on national TV? Just sayin'...
• 
  42

  Nephew Readying for Harvard

  by snowbird in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  since he disregarded the elders' "encouragement" to turn down the fellowship offer from harvard, he's being deleted as a ministerial servant.. he leaves in august.. i'm so happy for and proud of him!.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GLTirebiter

  Sylvia, this is awesome! Congratulations to your nephew, and be proud of that young man!
• 
  22

  Did Jesus ever use the name Jehovah?

  by biometrics in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  while growing up as a jw this was a question i often wondered about: did jesus ever call his heavenly father by the name jehovah?

  and if he did, why wasn't it recorded.. i know there's plenty of references such as john 17:6, 26 where it says "i have made your name manifest to the men ...".

  however is there anywhere in the bible where jesus used the actual word jehovah?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GLTirebiter

  Jesus would not have said "Jehovah", because that mis-translation originated many centuries later. A Spanish monk mixed up consonants for the divine name (written form) with vowels for the Hebrew word "Adonai" (Lord, the spoken replacement word), thus producing the hybrid "Jehovah".
• 
  13

  Is Sparlock a violation of this companies copyright?

  by UnConfused in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.sparlock.com/.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GLTirebiter

  You got it, Syl!

  The pattern is most of a large circle, with a smaller circle attached to it. You can imagine a second small circle under the table where you can't see it. Put it together, and you have one of the best-known logos in the entertainment business.

  M-I-C ----K-E-Y...
• 
  13

  Is Sparlock a violation of this companies copyright?

  by UnConfused in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.sparlock.com/.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GLTirebiter

  I'm not saying yet, so as not to influence anybody else's opinion. I'm curious if others see the same thing there that I do, or if it's just my over-active imagination. I'll check in tomorrow night, and will explain then.
• 
  13

  Is Sparlock a violation of this companies copyright?

  by UnConfused in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.sparlock.com/.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  GLTirebiter

  Forget the brick company--look at the pattern on the rug in the video. Does anybody else see what I saw? It looks to me like the animators used a well-known, well-defended trademark (the table hides part of it, but there's enough showing to be recognized as that famous logo).