Chaserious

Joined

• started 12 topics
• posted 790 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Chaserious

• 
  32

  Jehovah’s Witnesses — An Organization?

  by Marvin Shilmer in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jehovahs witnesses an organization?.

  today i added a new article to my blog addressing a particularly dirty trick played on jehovahs witnesses.

  it has to do with watchtowers legal maneuvering to place and keep its harsh religious shunning practice beyond reach of secular law enforcement.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  That's true, but whether someone has authority to show up at your door and ask questions about your sex life or whatever is purely based on church authority, not legal authority. I think it's important for readers to know that the elders have no legal authority to compel you to follow any church procedure, such as answering questions or attending judicial committees.

  A common misconception that I have seen on this forum is that baptism is a legally significant event. If it were really some sort of contract, it would be invalid in the case of minors, which we all know it isn't. Minors can't enter binding contracts in the U.S. and other common law countries (and most civil law countries as well). The fact that it took place would be admissible if someone were to file a lawsuit seeking damages, but so would just about anything else of relevance.
• 
  53

  Hello

  by newdawnfades in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i am a long time lurker who has finally decided to post.

  i am still in along with my wife, kids and extended family.

  i am in my 40s and was raised in the org.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  Welcome! To echo what others have said, think carefully about everything do you and say about your doubts. The organization is structured to crush dissent and ferret out dissenters.
• 
  32

  Jehovah’s Witnesses — An Organization?

  by Marvin Shilmer in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jehovahs witnesses an organization?.

  today i added a new article to my blog addressing a particularly dirty trick played on jehovahs witnesses.

  it has to do with watchtowers legal maneuvering to place and keep its harsh religious shunning practice beyond reach of secular law enforcement.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  The cases in the first letter only serve to make the point that secular courts are not going to question or get involved with the rulings of an ecclesiastical court. There has never been any case or statute in the U.S. that says that secular courts are going to enforce any duty to follow the internal laws of any religious organization.

  The only legally significant part of the 1996 letter is the part where they say their files about members are secret and they aren't turning them over, and that the FOIA doesn't apply to them. Not every word in a letter written by a lawyer has the force of law. Sometimes lawyers try to take the moral high ground, and that's what they are doing when they say you promised to listen to our rules when you got baptized. There is no law that says you have you keep all of your promises, but when a lawyer is dealing with a case of a broken promise, he or she will almost always put in a paragraph about that in addition to any legal basis.

  If you really became legally bound to Church governing procedure when you get baptized, they could go and get a court order to compel you to attend a judicial committee if you refused to go. As the maxim goes "for every right there is a remedy." If they have the right to hold people who join to a "legal burden," then what is the legal remedy against those who don't?
• 
  32

  Jehovah’s Witnesses — An Organization?

  by Marvin Shilmer in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jehovahs witnesses an organization?.

  today i added a new article to my blog addressing a particularly dirty trick played on jehovahs witnesses.

  it has to do with watchtowers legal maneuvering to place and keep its harsh religious shunning practice beyond reach of secular law enforcement.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  MS: "Under U.S. law at this moment the individual becomes legally bound to whatever internal governing is established by the Church."

  I don't think this is correct. What U.S. law?
• 
  32

  Jehovah’s Witnesses — An Organization?

  by Marvin Shilmer in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jehovahs witnesses an organization?.

  today i added a new article to my blog addressing a particularly dirty trick played on jehovahs witnesses.

  it has to do with watchtowers legal maneuvering to place and keep its harsh religious shunning practice beyond reach of secular law enforcement.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  Interesting clip from the Judge era. Yes, it's an example of double speak, like probably hundreds of other examples of Watchtower double speak. But I don't understand the connection to shunning or a legal burden. They can direct the shunning of whoever they want from a legal standpoint in the name of religion regardless of what they call themselves. If they want to shun born-ins who are never baptized and never joined they could do that. If they want to shun all Catholics they could do that too. I don't see any legal burden that anyone getting baptized places themselves under, unless you are talking about agreeing to the jurisdiction of Watchtower kangaroo courts.
• 
  19

  PO refuses to give me a "shepherding" visit ... wtf ???

  by Calebs Airplane in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  so 2 weeks ago i received an email from the po... he wants to give my wife and i a shepherding call very soon... but get this... he mentioned that they had already made shepherding calls to the entire congo and we were the only ones left... i don't know whether i'm i supposed to feel loved or despised (by that completely irrelevant comment).

  he's probably doing this to impress the co who is probably visiting soon.... my response to his email was basically: no problem... please feel free to stop by anytime... however, no need to come with a second person.

  i would prefer a 1 on 1 meeting (not 2 on 1).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  I have seen elders make visits alone. I think you unnecessarily tipped him off that you aren't drinking the organizational kool aid any longer with the comment about your wife. They are probably interested in checking you out for apostacy. If & when you meet with them, have your answer ready for the F&DS question.
• 
  5

  UN Officials Drunk?

  by metatron in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/05/budget-committee-united-nations-drunk-_n_2809970.html.

  what a sweet gig.

  land a big salary, go to the best restaurants, stayed hammered at work.. metatron.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  Well, doesn't the harlot serve blood of God's people cocktails at most of these UN meetings?

  
• 
  9

  Great exjw tattoo!

  by lisaBObeesa in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i saw this on facebook, posted (to the public) by an exjw named mathew tallman and i had to share it.

  i freakin' love it!

  mr. tallman, the owner of the tattoo said, "i used to draw a little gun in his hand during the meetings when i was a kid.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  Awesome... the dinosaur from the map inside of the old bible!
• 
  25

  Does the WT have any legal grounds to go after "apostates" for defamation, slander, libel?

  by never a jw in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  question to all those well versed in legal issues.

  all jw's, when confronted with criticism, claim that apostates lie about the wt.

  i always have wondered, given the litigious environment in which we live in western democracies, why the wts doesn't go after all those websites that publish so many "lies" about "the truth".. can this lack of action on the part of the wts be used as evidence of the truthfulness of the message in "apostate" sites such as jwfacts,.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  Normally it wouldn't really prove anything that they don't go after apostates, since it's not always worth the time and expense for institutions to go after people on the internet. But since the WTS normally likes to go after any perceived violation of their rights, it does stand out.

  There is also the issue of opinion. Opinions are usually protected, even if they might be able to fairly be characterized as a "lie". For example, let's say that I write that the GB is more interested in protecting pedophiles than protecting children. Even assuming for argument's sake that it's false, there wouldn't be legal grounds since there's no way to prove what they really are interested in.

  It's an interesting point. I don't know how active JWs would react to this. I suspect it would have to be someone who already has doubts. Otherwise, I doubt most JWs understand this concept and will just assume there is a good reason the WTS doesn't pursue these people. When it comes to legal matters, they like to sound the trumpets whenever they get a victory but when they lose they say it's because we're in Satan's world and everything is under his control.
• 
  19

  All of Bethel Know About The Child Molestation Law Suits: And The Governing Body Is Looking Very Bad In Most Bethlites Eyes I'm Willing To Bet

  by frankiespeakin in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  ok we had the silent lambs march years ago right there at head quarter over this issue, don't you think that caused a lot of gossip, and expose on a big abc network called 20/20, and many in europe, canada, all about how bad the governing body's policies are on children.. now we have out of court settlements with victims with a gag order, conti big case, and many more.

  so i would think everyone at bethel knows about the governing body's mishandleling of these matters.. i'm sure this, a long with the big new light about the governing body alone make of the faithful slave are causing many a lot of irritation and so are seeing these guys now in a different light..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Chaserious

  Now we have out of court settlements with victims with a gag order

  Even if Bethelites know something about the Conti case, you can bet that if they get gag-order settlements, knowledge of those at Bethel is strictly kept on a need-to-know basis.