just passing this on.
it doesn't seem to have been posted here yet.. it's from the website of the daily express.
a 'mid-market' uk tabloid newspaper.
Everyone (in the U.K. anyway) has a right to an appropriate treatment. That treatment sometimes has to accommodate various religious beliefs. If, and it sounds as though they could have done in this case, the beliefs can be accommodated then they should take measures to treat that person safely within their wishes.
The judge thought so anyway after looking at the evidence.
this is obviously a question for the older generation.
i'm really curious what it was like to be a witness in the 60's and 70's?.
was the society as strict as it is today?.
Mine was more the 70s and 80s but no real complaints to be honest. Happy enough childhood despite meetings and ministry.
Glad I never put my kids through it but I didn't die.
i received a phone call, "is that (name)?".
i was working my way around a car park and answered.
"yeah hang on" at which the caller hung up.. this is a scam where they are wanting you to confirm who you are so they can move on identity theft.. the voice was male clear like a professional announcer.. i have reported this to the relevant authorities.. i have also frozen my bank account..
Perhaps a slight over reaction.
Your name is in public domain anyway. They've now tied a phone number to it. It will be sold as part of a verified marketing list.
There was some vague threats a while ago about them recording you saying 'yes' in order to sign you up for some services but that amounted to nothing really.
it's good to be paranoid when it comes to phone/email scans though.
this is obviously a question for the older generation.
i'm really curious what it was like to be a witness in the 60's and 70's?.
was the society as strict as it is today?.
Is it true you could disassociate yourself prior 1981 with no restrictions?
That rings a vague bell. I think the changes were to do with ray franz iirc.
can he be sued for violating clergy pertinent privilege by the person that confesses to him?.
Why would anyone feel impelled to support such behaviour so frequently and so often I cannot comprehend.
You mean why would someone dare have a different opinion to you?
Shocking isn't it!
i know this has been discussed many times, but i was watching a news story about female genital mutilation (not female circumcision) and segued mentally into why the hassle about male babies having to be circumcised, christians especially.
even the wts flipflops on this...... if adam, the first perfect man, not under the jewish law code, was given a foreskin by god as an aspect of his physical perfection, why then do so many "christian" people have their boy babies circumcised?.
if a health issue....why did god create the perfect man, adam, with a foreskin?.
If you're looking for oddities of the human body to disprove creation then the foreskin is way down the list!
local.
irs raids televangelist benny hinn's office in grapevine.
lauren zakalik, wfaa2 hours agofacebook.
I read the OP as IRS raids Benny Hill's office.
it's been brought to my attention that there are xjw that say they support the witnesses and don't think russia should ban them.
i would just like to remind all of you that jws are guilty of murder, causing higher rates of suicide, covering up child molestation, and keeping members in prisoned because if they leave they loose family, financial support, possible employment etc.. sure their not strapping bombs to their chests but they easily get members to kill themselves with their blood policies.
they are an extremist group!
Those that argue this, have no merit.
And those that don't have no brains.
freedom of religion is a precious precious thing. It's to be valued and held sacrosanct by any measure of civilised society. Any attack on that is A. Very. Bad. Thing.
uc berkeley orders cancellation of ann coulter speech.
officials at the university of california at berkeley on thursday reversed their decision to cancel a speech by conservative firebrand ann coulter.. the university had announced wednesday that it was canceling coulter’s appearance following several political protests in berkeley that turned violent.. but on thursday, the university said it had found a venue where it could hold the speech on may 2, instead of the original april 27 date.
however, a leader of the college republican group that originally invited coulter said the university was placing strict conditions on the event, and he said his group intended to reject the new terms.. before the reversal was announced, coulter had vowed to go ahead with an appearance anyway.. that probably would have put security officials on high alert and might have sparked another showdown in struggles over campus safety, student views and ideological openness.. “what are they going to do?
Was there anything wrong with posting this in the existing thread?
theresa may the british p.m. has called for an election.. the house of commons has to vote tomorrow and have a two-thirds majority to agree and the main opposition parties want it to happen too so it looks pretty certain to go ahead..
If we send another landslide from Scotland how dare she refuse us a vote.
You've already had one. Do you want to keep having one every year until you get the result you want?
