it's likely that the grand jury verdict on the michael brown incident will be released in the coming days or weeks.. i've no doubt many people are going to feel strongly about things whatever the verdict is.. whatever the outcome though, here's what's not going to happen:.
we're not going to put up with inflamatory language and comments designed to rile others up.
be respectful.. we will not allow accusations of racism simply because some have a view of the verdict that contradicts others.. there will not be invented evidence or claims being repeated - if it's been falsely reported or debunked then it's off limits.. it's not going to be an opportunity for people to air past gripes over past discussions.. if you feel that you cannot discuss the subject in a rational way then it may be better to simply avoid any topics on the matter.. please try to be objective and respectful if you do decide to comment and not keen to take offense.
'Boy' is both legally incorrect and deliberately designed to mislead by attempting to portray a younger more innocent child than apparently was the case
I think 'thug' is over-used but its hard to describe his behavior as anything other than thuggish
In any other context calling an African-American man "boy" will probably put you on the receiving end of some thuggish behavior. And if you're that boorish and stupid you probably deserve it.
it's likely that the grand jury verdict on the michael brown incident will be released in the coming days or weeks.. i've no doubt many people are going to feel strongly about things whatever the verdict is.. whatever the outcome though, here's what's not going to happen:.
we're not going to put up with inflamatory language and comments designed to rile others up.
be respectful.. we will not allow accusations of racism simply because some have a view of the verdict that contradicts others.. there will not be invented evidence or claims being repeated - if it's been falsely reported or debunked then it's off limits.. it's not going to be an opportunity for people to air past gripes over past discussions.. if you feel that you cannot discuss the subject in a rational way then it may be better to simply avoid any topics on the matter.. please try to be objective and respectful if you do decide to comment and not keen to take offense.
Simon, how about adding this to your list:
If anybody here thinks they know more than whatever evidence is presented they should contact the attornies involved so they can testify in open court and submit themselves to cross examination.
The truth is to the best of my knowledge no one on this board was there and has some superior knowledge of what happened, recognize that what your saying is opinion not fact - no matter what side your on.
i can't remember the topic with the discussion about the talk where they suggested that sisters should only consider ministerial servants as potential marriage partners but think about the implications more.. are they trying to use the potential affections of sisters to enourage brothers to do more and work harder?.
isn't this a form of 'pimping out' the sisters by limiting their attention to the people contributing to them?.
it seems to cross a line to me but i guess it's not vastly different to "only marry another jw".. what do you think?.
This would sound good when you're in a meeting with an elder who wants to suggest your name for MS.
"Brother T I've been very impressed with your spiritual growth and how hard you're reaching out. It's great to see a young man willing to do more."
"Oh I don't care about that, I'm just trying to get laid."
o.k just worked out how to start a new post/thread, just came across this and wanted to share with anyone that may be interested.. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/20/idaho-citys-ordinance-tells-pastors-to-marry-gays-/.
coeur dalene, idaho, city officials have laid down the law to christian pastors within their community, telling them bluntly via an ordinance that if they refuse to marry homosexuals, they will face jail time and fines.. read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/20/idaho-citys-ordinance-tells-pastors-to-marry-gays-/#ixzz3ibe4kyvq follow us: @washtimes on twitter.
.
You know, discussion on this board would be a lot easier to conduct if people bothered to find out what they're talking about (or what Rush Limbaugh or Rachael Maddow or whoever they're quoting was actually talking about).
The Hitching Post is not a church, it is a business.
The Knapps aren't pastors, they're business owners. They may be ordained, that has nothing to do with their business.
In the Texas case, the city didn't decide to just pry some information from the Pastors. It is requesting documents as part of discovery in a lawsuit filed by the people they want the documents from. If the churches don't want to produce documents required by the court, they can drop the lawsuit.
o.k just worked out how to start a new post/thread, just came across this and wanted to share with anyone that may be interested.. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/20/idaho-citys-ordinance-tells-pastors-to-marry-gays-/.
coeur dalene, idaho, city officials have laid down the law to christian pastors within their community, telling them bluntly via an ordinance that if they refuse to marry homosexuals, they will face jail time and fines.. read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/20/idaho-citys-ordinance-tells-pastors-to-marry-gays-/#ixzz3ibe4kyvq follow us: @washtimes on twitter.
.
I've been to at least two weddings at The Hitching Post. I have in-laws in Coeur d'Alene and I'm very familiar with the place.
The Hitching Post is a for profit business. The only things you need to get married there are a valid marriage license and the fee. They do not ask any questions about your religious beliefs. You do not have to be a member of any church. There is no membership at The Hitching Post, any more than you have to a member of something to get married by an Elvis impersonator in Las Vegas. I believe they claim to have married 35,000 couples there. I had no idea the owners of the place had any religious affliation until this story broke. If they want to be pastors, they should start a church. If they want to act as officers of the state by signing marriage licenses (a legal document) they have to follow the law.
it seems like the society has been desperately seeking ways to cut costs and boost reviniew (jw.org, kingdom hall programs, etc) over the past four or five years.
is this because donations are actually down?
or have they been preparing themselves for these lawsuits?
Band, your legal opinion is wanted here. I keep saying that I don't think they can hide assets by buying property, or investing in mutual funds or whatever. As long as the WTBS controls the asset, somebody could potentially get it, even in a bankruptcy. Am I correct? They might hide it for awhile, but if there's enough money at stake, spending some on forensic accountants to find it becomes profitable.
Obviously, they could put it in offshore accounts, but too much of that will mean they can't operated here any more.
science observes, studies and analyses the basic nature of all the components constituting the part of any experiment, follows the principle of cause and effect, and come out with equipments that would contribute to our comfort and save us lots of time and energyall of which are ultimately aimed at making life on this earth happier, longer and healthier, thus making this world a better place to live.. yet man day-by-day becomes more and more unhappy and discontented, and world is becoming bitter and bitter!
it means: though science is right in its details, it has gone wrong in its direction.
it failed to rightly judge and assess the true nature of its prime object (man) for whom it works.
Science sees man as purely material
Nonsense. Science doesn't see anything in any particular way. Science is a method of discovery by which we learn more about the world around us.
this night i installed christmas lights in the trees in the front garden of our house.. we all like it, the children like it, so this is the first year we have this lightning.
.
hope the elders will like it too ;-).
The first year we celebrated Christmas (1988) I put up a few lights. We only made the decision to celebrate about a week after Thanksgiving, so we didn't have a lot of prep time. The second year I had something like 2500 lights on the house.
i found this, and did not see it posted previously.. thought i'd post it, in case it's of use to anyone.. http://irs990.charityblossom.org/990t/200908/111753577.pdf.
according to this all assets in 2008 were valued at $400,000,000.
.
This isn't an income tax form. Well it is, but it is not THE income tax form. This is the IRS description of this form:
"Because tax-exempt organizations generally operate for charitable or other beneficial purposes, most income that they receive is exempt from tax under the Internal Revenue Code. Tax-exempt organizations are permitted to engage in income-producing activities that are considered to be unrelated to their exempt purposes. However, income from these activities may be taxable. This study measures income, deductions, and tax imposed on tax-exempt corporate and trust entities' unrelated business income. Data are compiled from Form 990-T, Exempt Organization Business Income Tax Return."
In this case its for some kind of Limited Partnership of which the WTBS has an interest. I can't find out much about "Provictor Property Fund" I think it is probably a Real Estate Investment Trust. The 400 million dollars is probably the total value of the trust, of which the WTBS owns some percentage. I suspect that there are lots of these forms floating around somewhere. The Watchtower is smart enough to be doing something with its money.
How would you know what lawyers are trained to look for?
Probably watching TV lawyers. I gave up watching "How to Get Away with Murder" because I could not suspend enough disbelief long enough to get through an episode. Apparently the writers have never heard of discovery, and the ethical violations would get everybody involved disbarred.
Band, I agree with your prescription for the WTBS. If the instructions to the elders were "if you hear about abuse, turn it over to the police immediately," and they did background checks on anybody that was going to be around some one else's kids, their legal problems would largely or entirely go away.
