DesirousOfChange

Joined

• started 127 topics
• posted 12,656 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by DesirousOfChange

• 
  25

  Would there, or would there not be, lawsuits if they took away the blood transfusion ban?

  by VerdadTJ2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i have heard or read, many times by many exjw's, that the org does not remove the blood transfusion ban because it would be crippled by the resulting lawsuits the minute that "new light" was made official.i am not a lawyer, but i would like to know what legal opinion lawyers have on that.on what legal basis would there be a lawsuit?

  "i am suing the watchtower because my relative died because of a rule they had but no longer have"?am i missing something?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  When AIDS was new, I think many JWs were "smug" (if that's the right word) about how their "spirit directed" policy against blood transfusions had "protected" them from contracting this deadly disease by abstaining from blood.

  Today, I think most JWs are more aware of the deaths from refusal of blood transfusions than any "benefits". The evidence of this, IMO, is that nearly ALL of the JWs I assisted with their "blood card/documents" agreed to accept any of the "blood fractions" that WTS permitted per their "conscience".

  When WTS/GB saw the New Light on JWs accepting "blood fractions" (or EPO or any product previously prohibited) then SHAZAM! they ALL HAD A SUDDEN REVERSAL OF THEIR PERSONAL CONSCIENCE.

  Likewise, if WTS/GB saw New Light and determined that transfusions would be a "personal conscientious decision" that would NOT bring them negative consequences, the VAST MAJORITY would "change their contentious position" on accepting them in an emergency.
• 
  38

  unbaptized boy having priority over women

  by enoughisenough in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i was thinking about the male children ( even unbaptized ) being placed ahead of the sisters.

  ; and i thought the jw were raising a bunch of misogynist.

  would these kids not feel more important than their mothers let alone other women.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  I was thinking about the male children ( even unbaptized ) being placed ahead of the sisters. ~ OP

  Just check out the Announcements for July as posted by Atlantis.

  https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5166373920047104/2024-07-july-147-announcements

  Review the qualifications for young baptized males (early teens or younger). They are grooming them for future MS, etc.

  Apparently, WT HQ has determined that getting these young people (I mean boys) involved in Cong activities will keep them interested in future goals/positions.
• 
  46

  August WT: DF'ing renamed "Removed." AKA: GB re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic

  by WingCommander in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so: the mystery has been clarified as to more "new light" / clarifications of decades old doctrine and procedure.

  august watchtower has finally been leaked.

  disfellowshipping?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  And this is the case now. Instead of a genuine backing away from harsh and unkind rules, they are only lessening them in the minimum sense that they think can persuade governments that they have changed.

  Wednesday meeting of GB: What else do these effing politicians expect? It's not like apostates and persistent sinners and exJWs are being burned at the stake like the Church tradition centuries ago!
  
• 
  22

  August issue is now up on JW.com

  by ozziepost in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  just a heads up that the english version with the changed cover is now up on jw.com.. i haven’t yet read it but if any you have the time i’m looking forward to people’s insights.. in the meantime i must find a red 🍷.

  cheers,.

  ozzie (of the ‘is he still here?’ class ).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  I don't see how this is supposed to soften their position with governments that condemn them for this. All they did is soften their position on sinners

  Let's hope that it fails to change the opinions of said government officials.
  
  
• 
  19

  So a JW can date an unbelieving person...

  by silentbuddha in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  but the entire congregation is not to be informed or mark the person.

  the only repercussions are that the individual who is aware of it can decide to "mark" them and not go to the local club or bar with the individual, but they are still obligated to go door to door in the ministry with them, and even speak to them at the kn as if nothing is wrong and not feel obligated to tell anyone else?

  this is crazy.. so they are also basically saying that a person can carry on a romantic (but none sexual) relationship with an unbeliever and still go out in service and participate in meetings?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  D of C, where in the publications does it say a person could be disfellowshipped for "continuing a relationship with an unbeliever." I can't find that, and I could use it in a conversation with a relative.

  I recall that the situation fell under "loose conduct" in the past. A blatant disregard for God's standards to "marry only in the Lord". After reading Viviene's comment, I'll admit the guy may not have finalized his divorce -- just do not remember. He was an MS. The application was made by the WT Service Dept.

  To go for it now, it could likely be "brazen conduct" (since they changed the Bible).

  Of course, now there is no DF, so doesn't matter. A local case here the former elder has been online hooking up for over 3 months and filed for divorce and still no judicial action.

  Should be fun to see how all these changes (and Pretend Changes") work out in the real JW World.
  
  
• 
  46

  August WT: DF'ing renamed "Removed." AKA: GB re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic

  by WingCommander in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so: the mystery has been clarified as to more "new light" / clarifications of decades old doctrine and procedure.

  august watchtower has finally been leaked.

  disfellowshipping?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  By now I suspect everyone here has seen the video of the WT lawyer speaking to the Canadian Court regarding disfellowshipping, and how it ONLY changes "spiritual association" with family members while the relationships remain unchanged in all other ways.

  WHY DON'T THEY (WT) JUST DO THIS?

  Why all the cunning and lying about changes that are not real and thinking they're going to trick the Secular Authorities? JUST MAKE IT AN INDIVIDUAL CONSCIENCE MATTER. Most diehard JWs will follow tradition and shun dissenters and WT won't have to LIE about it all.
• 
  19

  So a JW can date an unbelieving person...

  by silentbuddha in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  but the entire congregation is not to be informed or mark the person.

  the only repercussions are that the individual who is aware of it can decide to "mark" them and not go to the local club or bar with the individual, but they are still obligated to go door to door in the ministry with them, and even speak to them at the kn as if nothing is wrong and not feel obligated to tell anyone else?

  this is crazy.. so they are also basically saying that a person can carry on a romantic (but none sexual) relationship with an unbeliever and still go out in service and participate in meetings?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  Except no marking talk.

  That is a big change.

  a person can carry on a romantic (but none sexual) relationship with an unbeliever and still go out in service and participate in meetings

  That is an even bigger change. In the past, a person could be DF for continuing a relationship with an unbeliever (required multiple warnings re: marry only in the Lord).
  
  
  
• 
  7

  Deep study

  by road to nowhere in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  wifes friend had to go home to deep study the sunday article.

  does that mean not skimming headings?

  the last deep thing i remember was babylon book and it was a perfect fit except none of it came true.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  that outlandish REV book we studied should have woken us up.

  Yes, it should have been enough to wake us up back then. It was total BS. Declarations at conventions that no one gives a shit about back then, or that no one even remembers now. JWs were just full of themselves thinking that what they did really mattered. Narcissism on steroids.

  So, why hasn't this BS gotten everyone to wake up by now? They are still delusional!

  
  
• 
  72

  Coming soon: Governing Body Update #4

  by ukpimo in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the upcoming governing body update, set to be released on friday this week, will feature a bearded samuel herd.. jwtalk website revealed the leak, so this thread will be used to speculate the content of the update and discuss the actual contents after its release..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  Someone is not taking their meds.......................

  
  
• 
  27

  Assembly Attendence

  by Riley in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i am in western canada.

  we use to have our assembly in saskatoon.

  our assembly has moved to medicine hat.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  Since Covid, for Regional Conventions in our area there has only been one larger venue at a small local sports arena where only had a couple congs were assigned from each of the several circuits in the region. All other congs attended numerous smaller conventions at the local Assm Hall, which seats less than 1600.

  Prior to Covid, there were always multiple weekend events at that arena -- at least three, and only foreign language conventions were held at the Assm Hall.

  WT is reaping the most they can by keeping the Assm Hall full every weekend and charging $$/publisher for those assigned to attend there.