hey there everybody,.
gota text froman elder in my cong a little while ago informing me of the "annual meeting meeting" to beheld at out hall on oct 5th....what live via satilite?
ps.
Thank goodness that in the UK only those really special ones are invited to the events at assembly halls/bethel. At least the rest of us mere mortals don't have to sit through 3.5 hours of tripe whilst repeatedly telling ourselves how privilaged we are to be considered spiritual enough to be able to feed at the table of the GB.
Even as a MS with 20+ years I wasn't worthy of an invite. Now as a pretty much inactive publisher I am lucky to be allowed in through the door of the hall...
a bit of background: she is a sweet sister who has hard a really hard life: mum killed in an accident when she was young while once-an-elder dad was off having an affair after having been released from jail after serving time as a pedophile; she spent months in hospital after the accident which killed her mother; brothers jailed as pedos, ex husband left her cold with their 6 month old son- she's had a tough life and is a really sweet lady.
she's intelligent, caring, forgiving and articulate.
far too good for jws.. she 'brought me into the truth' as they say, and as such we've always had a pretty good bond.. now, after the gossip/slander fiasco of another so-called friend running around telling everyone i'm an apostate and not to talk to me, i unfriended my jw friends from facebook with an explanation.
Hi Julia,
In answer to your question "what do I say to her" then I would say little more unless you are desperate for the elders to pursue you. The route you are going will escalate from a quiet fade to being forced into a corner where the elders will hound you to either formally DA yourself or they will DF you for apostacy.
If you want to have the ability to have a modicum of contact then fade. But fade quietly. If this does not matter to you then why not cut to chase and DA yourself?
Just my view - I could be wrong! Just don't let the bar stewards drag you down!
jane doe v. watchtower bible and tract society of new york, inc.. .
jury trial - june 14, 2012 - day 10. .
mr. schnack: ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the judge has instructed you that it is your choice to award or not to award punitive damages.
So what does this actually mean? Is this case any closer to getting formally settled or is it just being dragged on and on and on by WT lawyers?
about me, i am being raised in a jw family.
all of my family expect for one aunt, who had left but not disfellowedshiped thankly, are in jw.
my father is an elder and so is my grandfather.
This is a sad story as it highlights the double standards of many people in the organisation. I can accept that the organisation has a view on the morality of homosexuality which they believe is backed up by the Bible. Whether you choose to agree with the moral judgement is another thing of course.
What really irks me and has done for many years, even as a fully "in" dub, is the blatent homophobia. So many use their interpretation of the morality of the situation to simply go around verbally gay bashing. The vitriol and hate I have heard spat from Witnesses mouths over the years has been shocking. So much for hating the "sin" and not the "sinner".
I have worked with many gay people over the years and been embarassed by the experiences they have had meeting Witnesses on the door and in their lives. Whatever you think of the morality of homosexuality there is simply no excuse for the hate speech that regularly comes from the mouths of many in the organisation.
It's no wonder that anyone who identfies themselves as gay and, remarkably, still wants to live their life as an active and approved Witness must feel absolutely petrified at coming out. The judgemental and prejudicial attitudes they would have to face is appaling and certainly not Christian.
well i've just had a quick read through the november awake on jw.org.
usual twaddle but they must have run out of 'scientists' for their monthly feature, we have a pianist this month.. sexting, morals and the menopause all there to keep you facinated for ten minutes.. george.
.
I downloaded and read this mag during the quiz on Thursday night. I also looked up the pianist on Wikipedia. This guy continues to play around the world. The doublespeak in these articles is astonishing. The society are using men and women with established, successful careers to imply that just because the person was an atheist, is not a window cleaner and now beleives in creation then we can all sleep soundly in the full and safe knowledge that we are in good company and there is no case to answer regarding evolutionary science.
The fact that were any young witness to follow those career paths then they would attract lots of negative attention, perhaps even be marked is obviously never mentioned.
There was a good discussion about this when the articles first appeared... http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/242947/1/New-Pattern-regarding-Science-in-the-Awake
If they have run out of scientists then how long will it be before Hank Marvin appears?
playing devil's advocate here...
researching online, i found that approximately 1% of the world's population is 90 years of age or older.
this means that, come 2015, there will still be around 70 million people who fit the bill of "now living" in 1925 and still living.
It does not matter how you slice and dice it - the whole generations thing is utter booooosheeeeeeee.
i was thinking what a crushing blow it would be to the organization if the warwick project was stalled or held up in court.
many times a project will run into legal challenges over environmental issues or a lack of planning on the social-traffic- air quality - noise impacts.
political pressure on the council also can create headaches for the project proponents.. i saw a community once that had an indian casino planned.
@besty - spot on.
i will be doing some maintenance on the forum today so don't be surprised if some pages take a while to load now and again, you get an error or the site doesn't respond at all.. if this happens, please just wait a minute and retry.. many thanks!.
PM notifications? ;-)
"shepherd the flock" book - page 38 - chapter 3 par.20 ........ (talking about disqualifying servants and elders) 20. if the sin occurred before he was appointed as an elder or a ministerial servant, the elders will need to take into consideration the fact that he should have mentioned this possible impediment to his being qualified when elders interviewed him just prior to announcing his appointment.
moreover, the nature of the sin may reflect greatly on his qualifications to serve.
for example, the sin may involve past child abuse, and this would likely disqualify him for many years.-w97 1/1 pp.
mp - i am not talkng about 15 year old elders, I am talking about a scenario where someone is older but was convicted when younger.
allelsefails - you are right, I'd forgotten that the WTS already discriminates. The fact that the discimination also extends to whoever the legal dept considers a risk does not seem to trouble the elders and org at all. All us active faders could be sitting in the same hall as a convicted child abuser but at least "mother" says weirdy pedey is OK so not to worry...
"shepherd the flock" book - page 38 - chapter 3 par.20 ........ (talking about disqualifying servants and elders) 20. if the sin occurred before he was appointed as an elder or a ministerial servant, the elders will need to take into consideration the fact that he should have mentioned this possible impediment to his being qualified when elders interviewed him just prior to announcing his appointment.
moreover, the nature of the sin may reflect greatly on his qualifications to serve.
for example, the sin may involve past child abuse, and this would likely disqualify him for many years.-w97 1/1 pp.
I've commented on this before but I think there is one very extreme circumstance where this might be acceptable. There is the potential situation, using a UK example, (very rare I am sure) where a person is convicted of a sexual offence under the age of consent - for example two 15 year olds. Typically in the UK this would not be prosecuted but it is legally possible. So in legal terms the offender has commited an offence and could be forced to sign the sex offenders register. Of course the individual is not a pedophile in the real sense of the word but does have a conviction for having sex with a legal minor.
Should a person like this be branded as a pedo for the rest of their life? Should this bar them from becoming an elder at a future point?
Of course I am not even remotely proposing that it acceptable for a pedophile to become an elder ever, just suggesting that there could be a situation where there is absoutely no risk since there is a difference between someone who is a genuine pedophile and the specific circumstance I have described.
The other key point to make is that the above paragraph in the flock book does not narrow the field to the circumstance I am describing. It does allow for the scenario where someone who has genuinely abused children could be given the opportunity to become an elder or ministerial servant. allelsefails is 100% correct - the risk posed by this loose policy is great.
