so, on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is absolutely pro-jw, 5 is neutral and 10 is youtubing nutjob apostate, where do you stand?.
i'm probably around a 6. i have the view that jws are a nothing marginal religion.
if i hadn't been brought up as one i doubt they would have ever entered my consciousness.. the reasons it's a 6 and not a 5 is that i have some concerns over their child baptism and safeguarding procedures, but i think it's down to them being a bit dim rather than any pro child abusing ethos.
...innocent children....You've used the term for effect to bolster your argument. It's unnecessary.
Really? You're finding fault because I said that children who are sexually abused within the Organization of JWs, then not believed because of the JW misapplication of the 2-witness rule, are innocent?
so, on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is absolutely pro-jw, 5 is neutral and 10 is youtubing nutjob apostate, where do you stand?.
i'm probably around a 6. i have the view that jws are a nothing marginal religion.
if i hadn't been brought up as one i doubt they would have ever entered my consciousness.. the reasons it's a 6 and not a 5 is that i have some concerns over their child baptism and safeguarding procedures, but i think it's down to them being a bit dim rather than any pro child abusing ethos.
I will stay away from you at parties though. ;)
Thank you.
so, on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is absolutely pro-jw, 5 is neutral and 10 is youtubing nutjob apostate, where do you stand?.
i'm probably around a 6. i have the view that jws are a nothing marginal religion.
if i hadn't been brought up as one i doubt they would have ever entered my consciousness.. the reasons it's a 6 and not a 5 is that i have some concerns over their child baptism and safeguarding procedures, but i think it's down to them being a bit dim rather than any pro child abusing ethos.
...I think it's down to them being a bit dim rather than any pro child abusing ethos.
The choice you offer is too limited, either they are 'dim,' or they are 'pro child abuse.'
And it depends on what you mean by "them," Jehovah's Witnesses as individuals or the Organization that controls them.
Individual Witnesses might be a bit dim, but mainly they are heavily controlled. The truly evil thing is the Organization itself.
As to the 'pro child abuse' choice, neither JWs nor the Organization are pro child abuse per se. Most individual Witnesses are unaware of what goes on because they are told not to pay attention to any negative news items relating to JWs because it's 'Satan's persecution against God's innocent people.'
Their horrible lack of a workable child protection policy comes from the fact that the Organization needs to protect it's own public image. If innocent children are abused and fall by the wayside, the Organization's attitude is 'So be it, God's Organization comes first.' The child abuse is a result of the 'We are God's chosen people' attitude of JWs and their Organization.
"...1 is absolutely pro-JW, 5 is neutral and 10 is youtubing nutjob apostate..."
Why does 10 have to be related to a "nutjob apostate?" Why can't 10 be ex-JWs who are telling the truth about the Organization? There are plenty of those on Youtube and they are well worth watching.
i am not wanting to start a fight.
i just want to hear what people think.
honestly and realistically, what do you think the australian government will do, with watchtower, when they receive the full arc report?.
Richard Oliver: I am not wanting to start a fight.
Yes you are.
Richard Oliver: I just want to hear what people think.
No you don't.
Richard Oliver: I am looking for realistic expressions...
No you're not.
Richard Oliver: ...this is when you consider section 51 and 116 of the Commonwealth's Constitution.
Nice try, but as Steve2 so rightly pointed out, this is where your "pin-pricking" will begin.
Richard Oliver: I am just looking for answers to that question.
No, you're pretending to.
Richard Oliver: I have no intention to respond to any statements that give an answer to that question.
Yes you do.
Richard Oliver, for the 3rd time: I just want to get an answer.
Oh dear.
(i wanted to put this in the child abuse section of the forum!).
we have seen that during the march 2017 broadcast, m stephen lett has openly praised children who get baptised as young as 10!.
so lets summarize why it is wrong to push child baptism (not far off "infant baptism" that jws condemn other churches for).
Sometimes kids are baptized even younger than 10. I've heard of 6 year olds being baptized and there was such an experience published in the Watchtower Magazine.
By publishing young baptisms Watchtower is encouraging other young children to be baptized too.
But when these baptized children misbehave they are tried and judged as any adult would be in the congregation.
what is the exact live streaming site for the arc today in sydney?
i hope someone or more here will be watching and giving info/quips throughout the case.
also, will someone here or elsewhere be able to 'save' a video of this (all or part).
Yes, I have the video going but it's only playing audio.
As a test I activated the Audio player at the same time. Got the same audio but slightly out of sync with the audio I am getting from the video player.
Oh well, the audio is the important part.
Maybe I'll refresh the tab and see if the video starts.
what is the exact live streaming site for the arc today in sydney?
i hope someone or more here will be watching and giving info/quips throughout the case.
also, will someone here or elsewhere be able to 'save' a video of this (all or part).
Several minutes in and I'm getting great Audio, but no Video. Anyone else getting this?
what is the exact live streaming site for the arc today in sydney?
i hope someone or more here will be watching and giving info/quips throughout the case.
also, will someone here or elsewhere be able to 'save' a video of this (all or part).
...'considerable regret' that no member of the GB has made themselves available for this hearing.
Shame on Watchtower for that!
school-bus-driver-accused-of-telling-boy-hed-go-to-hell-because-of-his-mom/.
Here is a screen shot of the tract from the video.
school-bus-driver-accused-of-telling-boy-hed-go-to-hell-because-of-his-mom/.
Remember the Bible quote that Watchtower uses to help cover up it's child molestation issues? "...there is a time to keep quiet..." (Ecclesiastes 3:7)
In their convoluted way of thinking JWs will keep quiet about criminal behavior within their own ranks, then ignore the times that it's really appropriate to keep quiet, as in this case. If it's none of your business just let it go. It's entirely wrong to judgmentally impose your lifestyle choices onto other people, especially onto a small child.
(As a side note, if it hadn't been for the Jehovah's Witness card I might have thought the reference to hell would mean it was a non-Witness who did this, but the card is there. Now I think it's probably a bit of miscommunication between the bus driver, the child (who understood he was going to hell), and the mother, but still very out of place on the part of the JW bus driver even if she didn't explicitly say 'you're going to hell.')
This is a screen shot of the card from the video.
