forum18, which - similar to amnesty and other groups - does a great job in directing the public's attention to acts of religious and other types of discrimination, persecution etc., and which frequently reports on persecution against jws in central asian counties such as turkmenistan etc., has the above three lines as its slogan.. it just makes me wonder ....... "the right to change one's belief or religion", "the right to join together and express one's belief".
well, one of the groups forum18 reports on as being persecuted, does not exactly tolerate free expression of thought, does not exactly tolerate "inofficial" gatherings, does not exactly give its members the right of changing their membership status or beliefs etc.
....... so let us make full use of the world's resources, but totally deny it the right of investigating ourselves .....
Aww, thanks Annie,
I am glad you have found my rants useful. I still have a considerable amount sitting on the HD.
Use it in any way you feel necessary. I have come to learn that the value of serious well documented information is able to work wonders, and the internet is really great. Once something is out there, it lives it's own life.
All the best,
Norm
forum18, which - similar to amnesty and other groups - does a great job in directing the public's attention to acts of religious and other types of discrimination, persecution etc., and which frequently reports on persecution against jws in central asian counties such as turkmenistan etc., has the above three lines as its slogan.. it just makes me wonder ....... "the right to change one's belief or religion", "the right to join together and express one's belief".
well, one of the groups forum18 reports on as being persecuted, does not exactly tolerate free expression of thought, does not exactly tolerate "inofficial" gatherings, does not exactly give its members the right of changing their membership status or beliefs etc.
....... so let us make full use of the world's resources, but totally deny it the right of investigating ourselves .....
Hi there Ross,
Hello again and thank you. Yes the journy home was quite tranquil, particularly considering the company (Kent). I understand that you had a very exiting journy home with Travis. Did he buy a kilt
btw? That would fit in nicely with his somewhat savage appearance don't you think? A little blue color in the face wouldn't feel unnatural either. Do you think they make any king size Sporran's for Texans?
Regards,
Norm
forgetful as i am, i just forgot the title of the new brochure issued at this summer's conventions, but it is something like "keep on the watch", and it deals with the imminent return of christ, the signs of our times, and the need for being on the watch, being prepared for the "any day now" return.. the signs of our times are mentioned, but not earthquakes, so they are "out" again, it seems.
but, the first pages make out the basis for the belief in our days being the last ones, the final ones, and 607 is mentioned, 539 and 537 - but not 1914, not the "seven times" or "2520 years".. do you remember 1995, when the "generation change" came?
in summer, the "knowledge" book was issued, and it also dealt with the signs etc., but for the first time, there was no mention of the then "present truth" that some alive in 1914 would still be alive and witness the return.
Hi OldH,
Sorry, I didn't know you have pitched your tent in Poland. Is the reason the usual one?
I mean, hrrmm, a female? You don't have to say anything.
Take care,
Norm
forgetful as i am, i just forgot the title of the new brochure issued at this summer's conventions, but it is something like "keep on the watch", and it deals with the imminent return of christ, the signs of our times, and the need for being on the watch, being prepared for the "any day now" return.. the signs of our times are mentioned, but not earthquakes, so they are "out" again, it seems.
but, the first pages make out the basis for the belief in our days being the last ones, the final ones, and 607 is mentioned, 539 and 537 - but not 1914, not the "seven times" or "2520 years".. do you remember 1995, when the "generation change" came?
in summer, the "knowledge" book was issued, and it also dealt with the signs etc., but for the first time, there was no mention of the then "present truth" that some alive in 1914 would still be alive and witness the return.
Hi Gary,
Good to see you too, long time eh? I really think you are on to something there Gary. The R&F dub don't seem to care much whatever they teach or do. So I think your observations are very much valid. I had not been thinking about it all from that angle.
Thanks again Gary.
Take care,
Norm
forum18, which - similar to amnesty and other groups - does a great job in directing the public's attention to acts of religious and other types of discrimination, persecution etc., and which frequently reports on persecution against jws in central asian counties such as turkmenistan etc., has the above three lines as its slogan.. it just makes me wonder ....... "the right to change one's belief or religion", "the right to join together and express one's belief".
well, one of the groups forum18 reports on as being persecuted, does not exactly tolerate free expression of thought, does not exactly tolerate "inofficial" gatherings, does not exactly give its members the right of changing their membership status or beliefs etc.
....... so let us make full use of the world's resources, but totally deny it the right of investigating ourselves .....
Hi Annie,
Thank you for the kind words. It has been a constant source of bewilderment to me that human rights organizations from Amnesty Internatinal and others seem to completely disregard that totalitarian religious organizations don't give a toss about the individual cult members human rights. They seem to care only if these sick cults can't operate freely in various countries in the world.
As i have been knocking around on the net for about 10 years now i have encountered whatever the WT can throw at me so if there is anyhing you think i can assist you with feel free to make contact.
Take care,
Norm
forum18, which - similar to amnesty and other groups - does a great job in directing the public's attention to acts of religious and other types of discrimination, persecution etc., and which frequently reports on persecution against jws in central asian counties such as turkmenistan etc., has the above three lines as its slogan.. it just makes me wonder ....... "the right to change one's belief or religion", "the right to join together and express one's belief".
well, one of the groups forum18 reports on as being persecuted, does not exactly tolerate free expression of thought, does not exactly tolerate "inofficial" gatherings, does not exactly give its members the right of changing their membership status or beliefs etc.
....... so let us make full use of the world's resources, but totally deny it the right of investigating ourselves .....
Hi OldH,
Here is a mail I sent to Forum18, of course I never had a reply:
----------------------------------------------------------------- Read in your news about the Witnesses that was sacked for being JW's. It is very apalling.You should however know that internally
JW's have absolutely no respect for any of the Human Rights they so much want for their organization. Iinside the Watchtower all indivduals are denied those very same rights.
?True freedom??
The Watchtower Society regularly brag about the incredible ?freedom? all Jehovah's Witnesses are supposed to enjoy. This is of course in stark contrast to the downtrodden masses in the world, not to speak of the poor Catholics and Protestants, which are in bondage under their clergy.
? Millions now enjoy true freedom as Jehovah?s Witnesses? Watchtower March 15. 1992, page 15.
Because of their many strange rules Jehovah's Witnesses often gets into conflict with Society in general. One such conflict was reported from the
?The Meaning for Lovers of Freedom
All lovers of freedom certainly rejoice in this decision to uphold the right of free choice in the matter of religion and in the dictates of one?s conscience, while at the same time being subject to the relative authority of the state. (Romans 13:1, 2) In protecting the rights of individuals, the State does not open the way for anarchy but, rather, serves in the role mentioned by the apostle Paul at Romans 13:5, 6, where he states: ?There is . . . compelling reason for you people to be in subjection, . . . on account of your conscience. For that is why you are also paying taxes; for they are God?s public servants constantly serving this very purpose.? Jehovah?s Witnesses in the respect the jurisprudence of the justices of the Supreme Court and realize that final credit must be given to our Creator, Jehovah God.? Awake! January 8. 1994, page 23.
A case of a similar nature was reported from . This time it was about the right to preach. Here the Watchtower quote the Human Rights convention:
?Since is a member-state of the Council of Europe, it is obliged to conform to the Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 9 of the Convention reads: ?Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.? Watchtower September 1. 1993, page 30.
In both of these cases the rulings was in favour of the Witnesses. Something that without any doubt was right and just, and good examples that democracy and the legal system really works. It is however very sad, tragic and a paradox that absolutely none of these freedoms is extended to the Watchtower Society?s own members! Let us take a closer look at what conditions there is for those human rights and that freedom which the Watchtower cult yell and scream about, internally in the Watchtower organization. We will get a pretty good idea by reading the following ?Questions from readers? column in the Watchtower:
?? Why have Jehovah?s Witnesses disfellowshipped (excommunicated) for apostasy some who still profess belief in God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ?? Watchtower April 1. 1986, page 30.
In the answer to this question the Watchtower states among other things the following:
? Those who voice such an objection point out that many religious organizations claiming to be Christian allow dissident views. Even some clergymen disagree with basic teachings of their church, yet they remain in good standing. Watchtower April 1. 1986, page 30.
Well, what?s the situation in the Watchtower organization? Do its members enjoy the same freedom? Can a Jehovah's Witnesses disagree with any of the ?basic teachings? of the Watchtower Society and remain in ?good standing?? The Magazine says this about the practice in these churches:
?However, such examples provide no grounds for our doing the same.? Watchtower April 1. 1986, page 30.
Whatever do they mean by this? Let us find out:
?Teaching dissident or divergent views is not compatible with true Christianity? Watchtower April 1. 1986, page 31.
This comment should make it pretty clear that the GB doesn?t take kindly to ?divergent views?. But how should one view Jehovah's Witnesses who hold such views? The Magazine states:
?Approved association with Jehovah?s Witnesses requires accepting the entire range of the true teachings of the Bible, including those Scriptural beliefs that are unique to Jehovah?s Witnesses.? Watchtower April 1. 1986, page 31.
The magazine continues to show that anyone who can?t accept all of those ?unique? teachings will be disfellowshipped. It is therefore a fact that freedom of thought, freedom of expression and what we simply call religious freedom is non-existent within the Watchtower organization! Freedom loving people within the Watchtower Society has absolutely no reason to rejoice over enjoying ?true freedom? as the Watchtower magazine above boasted. Jehovah's Witnesses have been completely stripped of all the freedoms of article 9 in the Convention on Human Rights. As we have just documented, they have to accept the teachings of the Watchtower or be disfellowshipped. Jehovah's Witnesses doesn?t enjoy the: ?freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief,? Jehovah's Witnesses only ?right ? in this regard is to ?accept? whatever the Watchtower currently teaches. They have no right to disagree with their leaders. This becomes crystal clear when you investigate their literature:
?Beware of those who try to put forward their own contrary opinions? Watchtower March 15. 1986, page 17.
?Avoid Independent Thinking? Watchtower January 15. 1983, page 22. ?Fight Against Independent Thinking? Watchtower January 15. 1983, page 27.
It is of course extremely difficult to exercise anything even remotely resembling human rights in an organization where you have to ?Beware of those who try to put forward their own contrary opinions?. Where you must ?fight against? and ?avoid? independent thinking! But at this point some Jehovah's Witness genius will no doubt point out that it is ?independent thinking? is warning against, not ?thinking? as such. Well, please point out the difference between independent thinking and thinking in general. But to deal with this once and for all let us firmly establish how the Watchtower Society define independent thinking. We find it here:
?Yet there are some who point out that the organization has had to make adjustments before, and so they argue: ?This shows that we have to make up our own mind on what to believe.? This is independent thinking. Why is it so dangerous?? Watchtower January 15. 1983, page 27.
If you want to MAKE UP YOUR OWN MIND this is ?INDEPENDENT THINKING?. Yes, read it again. Making up your OWN mind about something must per definition be avoided, yes even fought against! Incredible isn?t it? Although one can actually observe the tremendous success many loyal Jehovah's Witnesses have had in this regard. It is crystal clear that the Watchtower seriously tell every Witness that Watchtower Society are the only ones that is capable of making up every single Jehovah's Witnesses mind for them. But seriously, don?t forget what you just read and take a look at this quote from the Awake?:
?Freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.? Awake? January 8. 1994, page 23.
Yes, what wonderful principles, what freedom. One wonders how a Watchtower writer can quote this with a straight face, knowing full well that no Jehovah's Witness have the ?Freedom to differ? with the GB. It?s a pity that the Watchtower Society only has the death penalty for anyone who dares exercise such rights within their organization. The hypocrisy is staggering. Imagine the nerve of the Watchtower Society, paying lip service and giving praise to lofty principles that is totally banned within their own organization. How does the Watchtower Society stand up to the test when it comes to ?The test of substance? when it comes to the ?right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.?? How does an organization where it is death penalty for ?putting forward a contrary opinion?, respect ?freedom to differ? But the Awake had more:
?The idea that one may be compelled to salute the flag, sing the national anthem, and recite the patriotic pledge, during a flag ceremony on pain of being dismissed from one?s job or of being expelled from school, is alien to the conscience of the present generation of Filipinos who cut their teeth on the Bill of Rights which guarantees their rights to free speech and the free exercise of religious profession and worship.? Awake? January 8. 1994, page 22.
The sad fact of the matter that the Jehovah's Witness children didn?t enjoy this much hyped freedom at all. They were in fact forced NOT to salute the flag. If any of these children had even tried to exercise their democratic rights and actually saluted the flag, they would have been subjected to disfellowshipping, regarded as dead and shunned by all Jehovah's Witnesses.
According the Awake! The Supreme Court in the understood that ?In protecting the rights of individuals, the State does not open the way for anarchy?. This is something that the GB in doesn?t understand at all. If everybody doesn?t think and believe exactly like they do, anarchy is a fact in their world.
The Supreme Court naturally found it illegal to force anyone to salute the flag. But at the same time they were totally ignorant of the fact that the Watchtower Cult systematically denies its own members these rights by forcing them to NOT saluting it, by holding the ?gun? of DF?ing and shunning to their head. The Watchtower willingly gives lip service to these democratic ideals and writes such things as this:
? The Meaning for Lovers of Freedom
All lovers of freedom certainly rejoice in this decision to uphold the right of free choice in the matter of religion and in the dictates of one?s conscience,? Awake! January 8. 1994, page 23.
While doing this they trample on anything even reminding of such principles within their own organization. The Watchtower Society has absolutely no intention whatsoever to let any Jehovah's Witness ?rejoice? over such freedom. On the contrary, the leaders of the Watchtower Cult is understanding such court rulings as an opportunity to strip their own members of all these rights which they outwardly praise oh so highly.
When confronted with this obvious lack of respect for everything that reminds of freedom in their organization, the following comment is the usual: ?Of course we have freedom! Those who disagree with us can just leave!? If the Supreme Court in the should use the same reasoning the ruling of that court would have been the following:
?Of course we won?t force you to salute the flag, just do as you please! But you must leave the immediately, all citizens will be forbidden to help you and have any contact with you!?
If any ?worldly? court should have used such utterly ridiculous and uncivilized methods and reasoning as the Watchtower Society we wouldn?t see the end of furious yelling and screaming complaints about lack of respect for human rights and religious freedom in the Watchtower literature. What a display of hypocrisy!
Norman Hovland
-----------------------
Thats was that.
Norm
forgetful as i am, i just forgot the title of the new brochure issued at this summer's conventions, but it is something like "keep on the watch", and it deals with the imminent return of christ, the signs of our times, and the need for being on the watch, being prepared for the "any day now" return.. the signs of our times are mentioned, but not earthquakes, so they are "out" again, it seems.
but, the first pages make out the basis for the belief in our days being the last ones, the final ones, and 607 is mentioned, 539 and 537 - but not 1914, not the "seven times" or "2520 years".. do you remember 1995, when the "generation change" came?
in summer, the "knowledge" book was issued, and it also dealt with the signs etc., but for the first time, there was no mention of the then "present truth" that some alive in 1914 would still be alive and witness the return.
Hey there OldHippie,
This is your old friend Norm. Interesting points you bring up, well observed. Notwithstanding the 1914 generation, there is one remaining great difficulty with the date 1914 from the WTS point of view. Ever since "Booze" Rutherford tried to salvage the remains of Russell's hopeless "chronology" and made 1914 the "peg" that he hanged his "new" chronology upon. You must Remember that according to that "truth" Jesus "parousia" started that year (1914), and after some years of "inspection" Jesus choose the WTS as his sole agent to take care of his "affairs" on earth. According to all this insane drivel, Jesus was appointed King in 1918/1919. I know that most dubs today don't know jack shit about any of this but 1914 is still the foundation of WTS "theology" as it was all inherited from the grand master of religious claptrap, drivel and insantity Rutherford.
Norm
PS. Isn't it about time we had a beer and compared notes?
the late wt president, fredrick franz, the most prolific writer the wts had since rutherford was probably also the author of the article about young girls being like cow''s.
in that article he revealed to the world his almost limitless ignorance about human sexuality.
ignorance and lack of knowledge has of course never stopped any wt writer, most of the time it has even been a necessity for them not to have a clue about what they write about.
The late WT President, Fredrick Franz, the most prolific writer the WTS had since Rutherford was probably also the author of the article about young girls being like cow''s. In that article he revealed to the world his almost limitless ignorance about human sexuality.
Ignorance and lack of knowledge has of course never stopped any WT writer, most of the time it has even been a necessity for them not to have a clue about what they write about.
I do not know for certain who has penned the following quote, but it could well have been old Freddy, anyway, enjoy this "wisdom" straight from Jehovah:
"*** yy chap. 3 pp. 22-23 Growing into Manhood ***
PURPOSE OF SEX
13 Our Creator provided sex as a means for a man to express deep love for a woman and to father their children. But God laid down rules regarding sex, explaining that sex relations are to be had only by a man and a woman who are married to each other. This is because God purposed that every baby brought into the world should have both a father and a mother who would take all the responsibility of rearing that child. It is, therefore, wrong in God?s sight for persons who are not married to engage in sexual relations.
14 On the other hand, for married persons sexual relations are a wonderful way for them to express love for each other. The husband lies close to his wife so that his male organ fits naturally into her birth canal. This can give great pleasure to each of them. In the process, the husband?s sperm cells go out of his body through his male organ right into his wife?s birth canal. These sex cells move through the canal, and if a mature egg cell is there in the wife, one of her husband?s sperm cells may join with it, and the fertilized cell will begin to grow into a baby. So you see, God made the sex organs for a sacred purpose, that of passing on life. That is why it is proper that they be used according to God?s rules."
Of course we all know that God keeps your genitals under close surveillance at all times, this no doubt explains why he doesn't have the time and interest to take care of all the starving and sick people in the world. Your genitals always have first priority.
The author makes this very interesting observation: "This can give great pleasure to each of them."
This indicate that the writer had at least some knowledge of the female side of the proceedings as they don't have much chance to find out about any pleasure during those 15 seconds the whole thing takes from start to finish. But then again, one should be careful about using "sacred organs" too much. Remember this folks when you shower, always clean the "sacred" parts with the correct motive.
Norm
americans call 'em chips.
we call them crisps.. .
now..these are fish and chips.
Serious? Of course, this is good food, much better then cereals, pancakes and such sissy eunuch diet. How can you ever think you will win the "war" on anything the way you eat?
Norm
americans call 'em chips.
we call them crisps.. .
now..these are fish and chips.
Hmm, there are as you can see balls of more then one Ram there...
They have only two each :-)
Norm
