story in the guardian: .
"--freedom of expression, as guaranteed by article 10 of the european convention on human rights, includes the right “not to express an opinion which one does not hold”, hale added.
“this court has held that nobody should be forced to have or express a political opinion in which he does not believe,” she said.--".
The point is, you cannot
Precisely the point I was making Simon, even though LUHE has twice asserted you can legally refuse to serve someone because they are gay and show them the door.
As you say and as I said first, you cannot. I was making no comment on whether or not the legislation is ill-conceived, simply that LUHE does not understand British law but as usual he has buggered off when shown to be wrong.
story in the guardian: .
"--freedom of expression, as guaranteed by article 10 of the european convention on human rights, includes the right “not to express an opinion which one does not hold”, hale added.
“this court has held that nobody should be forced to have or express a political opinion in which he does not believe,” she said.--".
I don't know Simon, I'm simply answering LUHE's point that you can refuse to serve someone and ask them to leave without getting into trouble in the UK.
story in the guardian: .
"--freedom of expression, as guaranteed by article 10 of the european convention on human rights, includes the right “not to express an opinion which one does not hold”, hale added.
“this court has held that nobody should be forced to have or express a political opinion in which he does not believe,” she said.--".
LUHE this is from the CAB site.
Someone who provides goods, facilities and services would be discriminating against you if, because of your sexual orientation, they:
story in the guardian: .
"--freedom of expression, as guaranteed by article 10 of the european convention on human rights, includes the right “not to express an opinion which one does not hold”, hale added.
“this court has held that nobody should be forced to have or express a political opinion in which he does not believe,” she said.--".
If he doesn't want to serve a customer, he doesn't have to. Assuming he owns the premises, he can order anyone to leave his shop.
Not under British law he can't. If he tells them to leave because they are gay, Muslim, disabled etc he could be found guilty of discrimination or a hate offence.
i think to the world in general it is fucking stupid but what about the every day jw?
is that all that they can say and is this type of public statement commonly known to the r&f?
their statement they abhor it.
They abhor paying out millions to victims, they abhor being found out.
not only are their different translations from different denominations ,like the greek orthodox ,russian orthodox ,roman catholic .various protestant versions and others as well as the nwt of jw`s.. however various denominations print different versions of the bible which fair enough may only be minor differences yet at the same time they are differences to what they previously printed .?.
and some have serious discrepancies .. as if they are trying to get to the true meaning of what god or jesus christ actually said or meant ?.
are they for real ?
Yeah well God inspires every Bible translator you know but they get different results because he has a great sense of humour.
when did you guys start to doubt your faith in god?'.
what made you doubt your faith in god?.
thanks !.
At the very beginning even before reading books on evolution it was the way the elders came round after I phoned my sister and said I was leaving the JWs. Well, I said to them, I have a phone conversation with my sister and you turn up. She'd phoned my other sister's husband who lives in another country and he phoned our elders!
Thinking about that after we'd been shunned by all my family and all of our friends for two years I thought where is Jehovah in all of this? Even if that religion is wrong doesn't he care about me? Then I figured it out, he wasn't asleep or off playing golf, he just didn't exist.
there were numerous objections and claims that watchtower lawyers made to try and get out of being held responsible for their negligence and malice.
here’s the juicy ones:.
montana is a mandatory reporting state, but watchtower lawyers claimed that the law for reporting abuse only applies to “individuals” and they are “corporations”.
If WT was smart they would tell the elders not to discuss these matters out side the congregation except to call the police and advise victims to do the same - Crazyguy
You would think so but they've got away with breaking the rules of civilised society for over a hundred years. What amounts to tax evasion because they do no charitable works and forcing people not to have blood or fear disfellowshipping.
They've become over-confident with their successes and think they can keep getting away with it. The way petty criminals keep getting away with it and then break the law big time. They are getting caught. They will pay out big time and be astonished that their God doesn't protect them
i’m happy to say that, yet as always with the wts there is a price to be paid.
i’ll explain how this is working out.there’s a new development in the family that’s making the final break possible, and sadly is where the penalty for leaving is going to happen.
only one person of all the jw family history is left that could start a fifth, he’s my nephew.
Sorry your nephew is having to go through this Longgone. If he says his parents won't speak to him if he leaves he's probably right, people tend to know the family they live with very well.
All I can say is he's lucky to have you there for him, plus the other relatives who've realised TTATT. It's sad young people lose parents to this horrible cult. We're here for you both.
so as a child and youth growing up as a witness, (i'm 43 now) we often heard the expression "new world order".. the society just doesnt use that expression anymore.
so what was the reasoning behind them amending that expression?.
I find that It's a quite scary term, personally, and it conjours up lots of images of violence and intimidation. I never liked it so I don't know if I suppressed the memory of i that It's a quite scary term, personally, and it conjours up lots of images of violence and intimidation. I never liked it so I don't know if I suppressed the memory of it - Diogenesister
Oh they definitely used it. That's why I tried to humorously associate it with new world gas stoves because we had one in our kitchen when I was a child. I looked at it and saw 'new world ' on it and thought, how strange that's what we believe is coming soon. You see white goods have a lot to answer for!
