Posts by Chaserious

12

Copyright of Food at the Proper Time?

1) i wonder why (or how) the wts can claim copyright over the food it dispenses, given that it says the food is spirit directed and from jehovah?

surely the copyright should reside with jehovah himself?

can you copyright god's word(s)?.

Chaserious

Chaserious, Jehovah's words have been twisted but they are there in the bible for all to read and judge for themselves. The point is he never copyrighted them

Well, it's not like Jehovah could copyright what he wrote. Maybe he would if he could. But it seems that legal systems discriminate against omniscient, omnipotent beings. Since copyright periods are tied to the death of the author, maybe they are worried letting Jehovah get a copyright would be abuse of the system since he never dies. Or it could be they just figure he could strike with lightning whomever he would otherwise sue.

Either way, as has been discussed in other threads here, you don't have to "copyright" anything to have a copyright (although in the past you had to). The fact that something is an original work automatically makes it copyrighted.

The bible is available to all, the Mosaic Law, the words of Jesus, the letters of Paul and the other apostles. All in the open. Why do the elder's book and letters to the BOE have to be kept secret?

They don't claim that letters to the BOE and the elders' book are on the same level with the Bible. Whether they view them with the same amount of authoritativeness is open to debate, but any JW would tell you that they have never claimed that the letters to the BOE are "inspired by God and beneficial for teaching...," etc. Everyone needs the Bible to know how they should serve God; the same cannot be said about the BOE letters.

33

RELIGULOUS...Please watch it.

by Fed-up in

i know it's been commented on before here.

if you haven't seen it (i'm sure it's on netflix) please take a look.

it's the other side of the coin, presented in a funny way that really makes you think about religion and worship.

Chaserious

Watched it a while back. I thought it was very funny and pointed out some of inconsistencies of religion, both mainstream and fringe. My wife didn't like it and thought it was disrespectful and mean spirited, even though neither of us has been religious since leaving. I can see that side also. I did think he was hard not only on the man who owned the store, but also on the truck stop chapel guys. I know he was trying to make the point that it doesn't matter if you have good intentions, but they seemed very kind and sincere. My favorite parts were the scenes with the gay counselor and the creation amusement park (although that would have been entertaining by itself, really).

75

DFing....Human Rights Violation and DEFAMATION of character?

by Terry in

>>>>>>>>>no one can allow human rights to be violated--not even inside the insular confinement of relgious policy>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

what are "rights" and where do the stem from?.

human equality.

Chaserious

There may well be hundreds if not thousands of legal cases the Watchtower Society lost on the local level (Elders in Kingdom Halls) which carried

a settlement which included a gag order with the damages in settlement.

Eh, these would have had to all settle prior to a lawsuit ever being filed, because once a complaint is fiied there is a record of it - something that I'm sure some of the WTS watchdogs would have picked up on. I am doubtful that anyone is ponying up to pay such claims just on the threat of a lawsuit being filed. The WTS doesn't even typically defend the local elders, so it's even less likely that local elders and congregations are rushing to settle claims before lawsuits are even filed and demanding gag orders.

75

DFing....Human Rights Violation and DEFAMATION of character?

by Terry in

>>>>>>>>>no one can allow human rights to be violated--not even inside the insular confinement of relgious policy>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

what are "rights" and where do the stem from?.

human equality.

Chaserious

I will take up your invitation to respond, Terry. I will first say that to the extent that you characterize the WTS as an abusive organization, I wholeheartedly agree. However, if you are arguing that putting someone in fear of dying at Armageddon is unlawful, just as it would be to put someone in fear of being executed by an imminent stoning, I will disagree.

The Model Penal Code (which most states either adopt or very closely base their criminal law on) defines assault (in part) as:

(1) Simple assault: a person is guilty of simple assault if he:

(a) attempts to cause or purposely, knowingly or recklessly causes bodily injury to another; or

(b) negligently causes bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon; or

(c) attempts by physical menace to put another in fear of imminent serious bodily injury.

(Bold mine)

Lining someone up for a mock stoning is assault because they are in fear of imminent serious bodily injury. Telling someone they are going to die at Armageddon is not. Imminent does not mean "we are in the last days". It must be almost immediately about to occur. Also there is no physical menace on the part of a judicial committee or other WTS officials. So that's where the illustration breaks down. Like jgnat, I am glad that the government doesn't tell religions what they can and cannot teach about what God is going to do, etc, etc.

75

DFing....Human Rights Violation and DEFAMATION of character?

by Terry in

>>>>>>>>>no one can allow human rights to be violated--not even inside the insular confinement of relgious policy>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

what are "rights" and where do the stem from?.

human equality.

Chaserious

Defamation has to involve a false statement.

"______ is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses" is not false. It's very much the truth. This certainly had much to do with the changes in announcing procedures over the years. It's also likely the reason that they don't need HQ to sign off on a DF'ing, unlike the appointment of elders or (formerly) pioneers.

21

Should the Watch Tower Corporation Be held Legal Responsible if it Sends A Known Pedophile Knock on Unsuspecting People Doors Preaching Their Propaganda?

by frankiespeakin in

comment please..

Chaserious

Should they? I think so, if the pedophile were to actually molest or harm somebody. Are there any known instances of this - of a pedo assaulting someone he met through D2D? Just curious. I suspect they are way more careful with the public than with their own flock. They probably tell the pedo he is never to go D2D without another approved brother present. I'm sure they are much more fearful of being sued by the public than by their own. They can't control them and try to suppress it, plus it looks worse from a PR standpoint since they can't spin it as a disgruntled former member. It's perverse really that they care more about outsiders than their own kids.

12

Copyright of Food at the Proper Time?

by The Song Remains The Same in

1) i wonder why (or how) the wts can claim copyright over the food it dispenses, given that it says the food is spirit directed and from jehovah?

surely the copyright should reside with jehovah himself?

can you copyright god's word(s)?.

Chaserious

1) To prevent apostates and other enemies from twisting their words. Even Jehovah's own inspired words are sometimes twisted (saying good is bad and bad is good, etc)

2) Even people that are correct will sometimes be attacked by lies and falsehood and need to defend themselves. Sometimes innocent people get charged with crimes and need to hire a lawyer. It doesn't mean you are guilty just because you have one.

30

Noah's Ark and I'm a dumbass

by new22day in

walking down memory lane today and recalled a convo with my ex about noah's ark.

(i made all the rookie mistakes when talking to my ex about jw stuff -sigh.

) i think i said something like 'if you believe in noah's ark take the cat and a mouse from the backyard for a drive around the block and let me know how it goes.

Chaserious

Asking questions and introducing new information while ignoring answers is Perry's M.O. on this site. That's why I won't try to engage him any more.

47

Should Employers be WARNED about Jehovahs Witnesses

by BlindersOff1 in

any gov agency or private company that has private personal info of customers/clients should be aware.

its common knowledge to long time witnesses that jws will violate customer privacy laws and rules when they see something a customer does or buys that they think jw congregation elders should know about .

thats right they will spy for the elders.. .

Chaserious

Also, the federal law against discrimination in employment only applies to employers of 15 people or more, for precisely the reasons we have been discussing. Almost every JW business I knew of fell into that category. Some states have their own laws where you might be able to do something if the discrimination is blatant, even for a small employer. So if it was a business of 15 or more, asking how active someone is, even of the referring person, would probably be enough to make a case, if the referring person is willing to cooperate, of course.

47

Should Employers be WARNED about Jehovahs Witnesses

by BlindersOff1 in

any gov agency or private company that has private personal info of customers/clients should be aware.

its common knowledge to long time witnesses that jws will violate customer privacy laws and rules when they see something a customer does or buys that they think jw congregation elders should know about .

thats right they will spy for the elders.. .

Chaserious

the Watchtower requires Jehovah's Witnesses in terms of violating confidentiality to the elders of the religion.

I don't think this is correct. Isn't it a "conscience matter"?

The effect is the same. That's the important thing

Given that this technique is used by certain religions as a loophole to get around laws that other Americans are forced to follow, it should be illegal

I don't agree. Small businesses have a lot of leeway as to who they hire, and I think there are compelling arguments why it should be that way. First of all, it's not used by the religions themselves as a loophole; it's used by members of the religions. As far as I know, there is no WT direction that if a JW owns a business, they should only hire other JWs. Some just choose to do that, and I have known of JWs who employed non-JWs.

Let's say John Doe wants to follow the American Dream and start a business. Maybe a restuaurant. To start off with, he hires his wife, his sons, his sister, and his cousins. It's a family business. Being from the same family, they are all Catholic. Imagine that the business does well, and John decides to hire a couple of his son's friends from school as waiters. Since the sons went to Catholic high school, the friends happen to be Catholic also. He may not want to place a newspaper or internet ad but hire his family and family friends that he thinks he can trust. Are you telling me that you would force a business owner like this to hire someone that he doesn't know just so he has a religiously diversified staff? I am sure this kind of thing happens all over the US in small businesses. People like to hire their friends and family, and religious people often have most of their friends and family in the same religions as them.

It's a dangerous road you want to go down. The effect being the same is not a good reason. That is not what laws are based on. Lots of jobs in small businesses are off limits to lots of people. Go to any family owned dry cleaners or gas station or barber shop or law firm or convenience store and see if you can get a job there. Now if someone got fired because they got DF'd, like someone else mentioned, that would be a problem and they should make a stink about it. Asking how active somebody is in the ministry in a job interview is probably over the line too and could be a problem if the person wanted to pursue it.