MeanMrMustard

Joined

• started 67 topics
• posted 3,911 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by MeanMrMustard

• 
  55

  Don't miss the health care sign up deadline.

  by FlyingHighNow in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  sign up deadline is the 31st, in a couple of days.

  if you have problems with the website and youve been there before, try cleaning out your cookies and cache, then restart your computer.

  that worked for me.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  @FlyingHighNow:

  "MeanMM, I don't think you asked me that for the reason of not knowing the answer."

  Most likely true. But, I don't see anything inherently wrong with being "big". How one becomes "big", on the other hand, does matter. I am not sure if you are picking on being "big" in general. Not all companies get "big" through government favors. If you get there through the free market, then I don't see anything wrong with it.

  I suggest reading this book:

  Critical Condition: How Health Care in America Became Big Business--and Bad Medicine

  http://www.amazon.com/Critical-Condition-America-Business-Medicine-ebook/dp/B000FC2IQM

  Here is part of the Prologue:

  

  Agreed - the system is rigged, but the problem is not with the market. The type of shenanigans described in this open paragraph isn't produced by a true market. The very fact that the author claims patients 'do not have a choice' should clue you in that something is wrong - after all, the very definition of a market is competition among a multitude of vendors. Now if that is what you mean by "big business", then I can stand with you. What you really mean, then, is business that has a competitive edge through lobbying, legislation, and state intervention into the market. ACA is more the same.

  MMM
• 
  55

  Don't miss the health care sign up deadline.

  by FlyingHighNow in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  sign up deadline is the 31st, in a couple of days.

  if you have problems with the website and youve been there before, try cleaning out your cookies and cache, then restart your computer.

  that worked for me.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  FlyingHightNow: Since I am an american that just doesn't "get it", can you define "big business"?

  MMM
• 
  55

  Don't miss the health care sign up deadline.

  by FlyingHighNow in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  sign up deadline is the 31st, in a couple of days.

  if you have problems with the website and youve been there before, try cleaning out your cookies and cache, then restart your computer.

  that worked for me.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Too many people ask "How do we pay for health care?", but the real question should be "Why is it so expensive in the first place?"

  MMM
• 
  26

  What if I am a disfellowshipped public school teacher?

  by bsand20 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  could a parent put in a complaint to the school district and request that their child be transferred out of my classroom because i am exjw?

  if they give me the jw school brochure (do they still do that?

  sorry its been 16years since i've been out) can i just tell them i'm familiar with their teachings or should i just pretend i'm new to their teachings?....i'm a freshman in college so i have still a long ways before this situation is presented, however i"m trying to get prepared for it.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  That doesn't sound like your problem. If a parent has a problem, let the problem stay right there. Sometimes parents might request that students be excused for holiday or birthday celebrations, etc. You would have to honor these requests like any other teacher, but that's about it. If a parent wants their student out of your class, let them make the request. Let the administration handle it, don't worry. Really not your problem.

  MMM
• 
  55

  Research on legal implications of group shunning

  by BreathoftheIndianNose in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hey everyone!

  i haven't posted here in a while, over a year i think.

  just goes to show where i'm at in the recovery stage.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Why should the WT have the power to bully people into having or not having association with anybody?

  Because the current members have agreed to be bound by the tenants of the religion. Any one of them is well within their rights to leave.

  The WT acts as if they owned its members and that is a Human Rights violation.

  What human right are you referring to here? Can you articulate it?

  They wouldn't be where they are today without the help of America's government. In America the rights of Corporations are above the rights of citizens. That leaves the individual at the mercy of these organizations pretty much in the same way that people was at the mercy of the government in communist countries.

  I would be among the first to argue that the goverment should NOT be in bed with corporations. I would be all for getting the goverment out of the market. But, the 1st amendment is not part of the government being in bed with corporations. Quite the opposite.

  The WT has 7 million drones in every country of the world for whatever purpose they want to use them.

  This is true.

  It is not a coincidence that America is the first exporter of sects to the world.

  This, perhaps, could be true too... not sure.

  The announcement so and so is no longer one of JW is figuratively a public execution and achieves the same thing: social control.

  Let's go further with this. Do you think that everyone should be free of all sorts of "social control"? That is, no entity should ever be able to legally control another "socially"?

  MMM
• 
  55

  Research on legal implications of group shunning

  by BreathoftheIndianNose in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hey everyone!

  i haven't posted here in a while, over a year i think.

  just goes to show where i'm at in the recovery stage.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  @DOC:

  The difference is that when a member leaves the Congregation to move to another Congreagation, there is no announcement made that "Bro Has Moved" is no longer a member of the "Yada yada yada Congregation".

  Clearly the announcement that one is ". . . . no longer one of JWs" is NOT a membership issue. It is a covert message to say that everyone here must now take punitive action against this person to punish them.

  WTS would say that the announcement simply states that one is not longer a "member of the World Wide Congregation", however they only make announcements of new LOCAL members when a person gets baptized -- NOT of the World Wide membership Newbies. Thus, if they announce that a member leaves (via DF/DA) they should announce when a local member leaves via re-location. Or, they should announce when ANY MEMBER WORLDWIDE leaves and NOT just the LOCAL member. If the announcement differs in content, then one is punitive and punishment.

  This is eventually going to come up and bite them in the ass. The courts (society) is already holding religions responsible for the emotional pain resulting from sexual abuse, it is only a matter of time that they are held responsible for the emotional pain resulting from the emotional abuse of shunning. It is a hate crime based on religious intolerance.

  Doc

  This is all good and fine. But the announcment itself is not punative - whether it is a "covert" message or not. For those leaving the WTB&TS, I don't think a single one has ever thought the announcment itself is the punishment. It is what comes after. Perhaps it is because it is 2 AM, but I don't see why they would have to announce every membership action from the platform in order to claim that this one type of announcement ("so-and-so is no longer one of JWs") is a membership announcement only. After all, members seeking to leave are free to do so, and it is within their right to announce that decision to the congregation. This is not punative. The shunning is, however.

  What would you have the courts do? What sort of path does that lead to? We all know that the WTB&TS wants to "push" individuals into "choosing" to stay within the organization through shunning. But the fact remains that this is a long policy, it is applied generally (they don't recommend shunning for some DFed/DAed and not others), and it is based upon their intpretation of scripture. The 1st amendment protects individuals and organizations from government involvment, not individuals from a private company. The courts simply can't get involved purely on the basis of shunning, insisting the WT re-interpret scripture.

  Now if it goes futher than that, it could be an issue of harassment. However, that doesn't seem like a 1st amendment issue, just an issue with harassment. When you said this: " The courts (society) is already holding religions responsible for the emotional pain resulting from sexual abuse...", I think this is a different issue. Sexual abuse is a crime. Choosing not to associate with someone is not. Also, what is meant by "emotional pain" in the case of shunning? If someone can choose not to associate with you, and it causes you "emotional pain", should the goverment compel that individual to associate with you simply on the basis that it makes you feel bad? That seems like a slippery slope.

  MMM
• 
  55

  Research on legal implications of group shunning

  by BreathoftheIndianNose in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hey everyone!

  i haven't posted here in a while, over a year i think.

  just goes to show where i'm at in the recovery stage.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  @lisaBObeesa,

  I re-read the previous posts you cited. But I am still confused. The shunning, accourding to the WTB&TS, is the disipline - not the announcment. You said, "The shunning IS the discipline that the elders are applying.". So, I don't see how announcing membership (or lack of membership) can be viewed as the discipline. Just because it "informs" the members as to the status of the DFed or DAed individual doesn't mean that it is the discipline itself. Again, most churches maintain a members list - even on their websites. So would you feel OK with the congregational members list being posted on the annoucnment board instead?

  But if you want to say that the shunning is the discipline, then that changes the topic back to what Band On The Run was addressing: the legality of shunning in general. Concerning the 1st amendment: it seems to me that the 1st amendment is more binding on the government ("CONGRESS shall make no law...") than on any religious institution. In other words, JWs shun based upon their intpretation of the biblical text. It seems like a very great infringment upon the 1st amendment rights of the JWs if the courts attempt to tell JWs how to reinterpret that text.

  Good luck on your midterms.

  MMM
• 
  55

  Research on legal implications of group shunning

  by BreathoftheIndianNose in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hey everyone!

  i haven't posted here in a while, over a year i think.

  just goes to show where i'm at in the recovery stage.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  lisaBObessa,

  When you say "the announcement=discipline" - how do you figure? If the annoucement is "So-and-so is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses", how does that amount to discipline? It would seem to me that the announcment itself can be viewed, from a legal perspective, as a membership maintenence issue. How would this be any different than there being a "membership list" hung on the announcment board for anyone to see?

  I took a look at the link you posted: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/184645/1/Lawyer-Letter-copy-to-Judicial-Committee#.UyYlTYU26M0

  When the letter from the attorney said, "Any efforts to make a pronouncement or take action regarding Mr. Minette's status as a Christian, his moral character or any other statements which may possibly affect his relationship with others will be viewed as a violation of Mr. Minette's constitutional rights, in fact, violation of his First Amendment rights." How would this violate his first ammendment rights? The first ammendement to applies to congress, and federal, state or local government officials... so I am not sure what this means here.

  MMM
• 
  2

  There's No Place Like Home

  by cha ching in

  1. social
  2. humour

  .

  1. 
  2. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  There's no place like 127.0.0.1
• 
  14

  Space/Time and speed of light to explain how quick God created the Earth

  by EndofMysteries in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  just a random thinking outside the box thought i had today.

  it began with doing a little more reading about space/time.

  scientifically, it's known that as one approaches the speed of light, time slows down for them.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  "..... same principle would apply to God."

  You may be playing into the atheist's hand here - as you are asserting that God is time-bound (something is greater than God).

  MMM