Posts by Scully

10

The ever-broadening, ever-deepening, ONGOING FLOOD TIDE of spiritual food

by credulity in

midway through the "congregation bible study" at this week's midweek meeting, a paragraph of the "god's kingdom rules" book stated as supposed evidence that "god's kingdom rules":.

"spiritual provisions flow to us like an ever-broadening and ever-deepening river.

our bible-based publications - as well as recordings and videos, our meetings and conventions, and the material published on our web site - together amount to an ongoing flood tide of spiritual sustenance... are you not thrilled to see the fulfillment of jehovah’s promises of abundance in your daily life?".

Scully

Spiritual provisions flow to us like an ever-broadening and ever-deepening river of $h!t. Our Bible-based publications - as well as recordings and videos, our meetings and conventions, and the material published on our Web site - together amount to an ongoing flood tide of ~~spiritual sustenance~~ reading material that no sane person can keep up with... Are you not thrilled to see the fulfillment of Jehovah’s promises of abundance in your daily life? Not thrilled is exactly how I'd put it. And when it's bull$h!t WT propaganda, "abundance" is not a good thing.

As with the paragraphs covered in the midweek meeting a few weeks ago praising the organisation's practice of "not soliciting" for money, it is fascinating to see how rapidly the "God's Kingdom Rules" book has gone out of date. I wonder what is running through the minds of JWs in attendance as the above is read out at the same time as the output of "spiritual food", both in printed and electronic form and including the recently introduced videos, is falling off a cliff?

"Not soliciting for money"? Just because they don't pass a collection plate, doesn't mean they do "not solicit for money". That is the raison d'être for their existence! BAHAHAHAHAHA!

43

Which Things Did Your Overzealous Parents Ban?

by pale.emperor in

we all know the gb like to impose rules upon the rules... but did anyone else out there have parents that implemented rules upon those rules?

mine did.

my mum tended to copy whatever the elders wives were doing and took it to the extreme.

Scully

Capt'n Crunch was okay. Lucky Charms, Boo-Berries and Count Chocula were banned.

Dairy Queen was banned for a time, because it was rumoured to be made with blood products.

Scary movies, especially the paranormal genre were banned.

I watched The X-Files and Unsolved Mysteries because by that time I was a grown-ass woman and wasn't going to let people tell me what I could watch on TV after my kids were in bed.

Sports were frowned upon, except for gym class at school. After graduating, it was all "Why would you want to waste your time on exercise when you could be Pioneering™ / Going Out In Service™?"

Researching in the Bound Volumes™. I was finding inconsistencies, and was told it would be better for my Spirituality™ if I just read the current Publications™.

We couldn't watch TV shows that aired on Meeting Nights™.

We weren't allowed to buy/wear hockey jerseys for our favourite teams, because Idolatry™.

Creative writing. My mother used it to blackmail me, saying that if I didn't (Go In Service™, stop skipping Meetings™, stop having Worldly™ friends, get Baptized™ at the next Circuit Assembly™) she was going to show my short stories to the Elders™ and get me in trouble.

Really got $h@t upon when I accepted a referral from my family doctor to see a specialist to treat severe post-partum depression. "Don't tell the shrink you're a Witness™ or he'll think we're all crazy!" "They'll get you to leave The Truth™!!" and the straw that broke the camel's back: "If you turn your back on The Truth™, your three beautiful children would be better off if you took them out in the back yard and blew their heads off with a gun. That way they won't go down with you at Armageddon™ and will be Resurrected™ in Paradise™."

18

When the “blood fractions” was available for any pacient as an alternative treatment?

by RodrigoGuerreiro in

sorry if my topic question was difficult to understand (english is not my native language).

i will like to know the year when the so called “blood fractions” was available as an alternative to a whole blood transfusion.

my question is triggered by the curiosity about how long jw died or put their life at risk, refusing that type of treatment before the year 2000 (when the “new light” allowed that type of treatment).. thank you.

Scully

Regarding RhoGam:

When I worked in Maternity several years back (up until 2010), almost every JW female patient who would have been a candidate for the injection refused to have it. Most had a copy of their NO BLOOD document in their chart which affirmed their "choice" to reject this treatment, even when it was explained to them that they were risking the lives of any future children they might have.

12

So, is it the publicity, or act itself that "brings reproach on Jehovah's name"?

by stuckinarut2 in

as we all sadly know, a common expression used by the society and elders in cases of abuse, or scandals, is "if you talk about this, you will bring reproach on jehovah's name!".

this is uttered in order to deter making something known.. but really, if it is a case of abuse, is not the act itself the thing that brings "reproach on jehovah"?.

making it known is not the problem.. rather hiding it, or not disclosing it to authorities is the thing that brings reproach!.

Scully

I've always thought that it was the sinful / criminal behaviour and the measures taken to cover it up by others, particularly in the context of a family or organization that was reproachful.

Victims of any kind of abuse, whether it is domestic abuse, sexual abuse, physical abuse, psychological abuse, etc. should never be restrained from seeking assistance from authorities who can help to remove them from the source of abuse, or from speaking about their experience of abuse, or from seeking out others who have similar experiences - people who understand their recovery process. Anyone who wants to silence an abuse victim is perpetuating that abuse. Anyone who expects a victim/survivor of abuse to "respect" or keep silent in order to "protect" the abuser from the consequences of their behaviour is perpetuating that abuse.

In the context of WT (and its Elders™) wanting to keep the abuse from becoming public knowledge in order to keep ~~Jehovah~~™ / the Organization™ free from Reproach™, what they fail to recognize is that

the abuse itself is reproachful
the covering up of the abuse is reproachful
the silencing of victims of abuse is reproachful
the requirement to suspend belief of an allegation in favor of an abuser when there aren't two eyewitnesses to the abuse is reproachful
the failure to recognize their part in aiding and abetting abusers by way of flawed policy is reproachful
the failure to protect women and children from abusers is reproachful
the failure to report or assist victims/families to report abuse to the authorities is reproachful

In other words, EVERYTHING they do and believe with regard to child sexual abuse and domestic abuse is REPROACHFUL. The ENTIRETY of their patriarchy which puts women and children down and elevates males to a superior position is REPROACHFUL.

There's no baby in the bathtub, folks. Just dump the shitty water they expect you to swallow and move on.

94

why won't legal department simply release all the secret pedophile files?

by poopie in

jw
friends

what do you think there hiding?.

Scully

You know what, guys?

Elders™ who are aware of sexual abuse of children can pick up the damn phone and make an anonymous report to child welfare authorities. All they need to say is This child told me that they were being sexually abused. The Child Protection Services will follow up. The WT doesn't need to be notified, nor will they be implicated.

Anyone, including the child themselves, can contact CPS and file a report. Why the hell not keep their number in your wallet or phone and give it to a child who comes forward with allegations.

The goal is for the children to be safe. If the molester is a parent, they'll end up in jail where they belong.

94

why won't legal department simply release all the secret pedophile files?

by poopie in

jw
friends

what do you think there hiding?.

Scully

Finkelstein:

When it does occur they just basically handle it in similar fashion as another act of sexual misconduct.

That's the problem. It is NOT sexual misconduct. It is a CRIME, and it rightly ought to be handled by the Superior Authorities™ who are trained in investigating these CRIMES.

Sure they see this behavior as wrong but there was little defined action for the elders to respond to,.

How about just being a decent person and report it to the police? Are they really that daft that they just sit there wringing their hands, knowing that a child is being raped on an ongoing basis, that they can't figure out the fucking right thing to do??

In the past they admonished individuals to bring the incident to the local law authorities because in doing so would bring reproach onto "Jah's" organization.

The real Reproach On Jehovah™ is not on the people reporting child sexual abuse to the authorities, it's on the bastards who are doing the molesting, as well as those dingbat Elders™ who know about it and sit on their hands, and also who utter threats to the families of victims that they'll be DFd if they go to the police or warn other parents about the sexual predator in their Congregation™/Circuit™/District™/Zone™. It's their disgusting behaviour that reflects reproachfully on the ENTIRE Organization™.

94

why won't legal department simply release all the secret pedophile files?

by poopie in

jw
friends

what do you think there hiding?.

Scully

There's a delicious irony in seeing WT use tactics that come straight from the Catholic Church's playbook when their priests were being investigated for child sexual abuse.

It's obvious that they're just as Spirit Directed™ as the Church of Rome.

106

Does anyone have info on the guy that sued Jw in Canada

by poopie in

jw
friends

because he was shunned by his customers?.

Scully

Is it just me, or does David Gnam gets slimier every time he opens his mouth?

I thought Judicial™ matters were supposed to be confidential??? Why is he recounting the reasons for Mr. Wall's expulsion from the Congregation™?

I'll bet dollars to donuts that he's counting the time for his Field Service Report™.

27

Asking for help with wife

by Are you serious in

hello everyone, my wife wants nothing to do with my awakening.

every time i try explaining something she tells me she doesn't want to hear it.

i believe she's afraid of learning something she's not ready for.

Scully

The clincher for me (and Mr. Scully, about 6 months later) was an entry in the Insight on the Scriptures volume, under the heading "Lie".

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002738

While malicious lying is definitely condemned in the Bible, this does not mean that a person is under obligation to divulge truthful information to people who are not entitled to it.

So the questions arise:

who has the right to decide who is entitled to truthful information?
what if the Society is withholding truthful information from JWs?
why should I be worried about lies of omission from the Society?
do I have the right to refrain from divulging truthful information to people who are not entitled to it, such as the Elders™, the Circuit Overseer™, the District Overseer™, etc.
how do I feel about being told in Public Talks™ and so on, that we should be honest in all things, while the GB endorses the idea of not being "under obligation to divulge truthful information to people who are not entitled to it"?
how would I feel if I found evidence of the GB engaging in this practice? (if you have one of the old Creation books, you can do this easily by looking up all the citations in the references and comparing them to what they print in the book. This was something that a former member alanf did several years ago.)

At any rate, this was something that brought down the whole house of cards for me and then Mr. Scully. We were both absolutely disgusted by the dishonesty of the entire operation. Clearly, the Society felt that Joe and Jane Publisher were "not entitled" to their honesty. We set a date (January 1, 1995) for our first day of freedom, and never looked back.

23

Admins & Mods ... who are they?

by Tallon in

jw
friends

this is just a general query, and am hoping someone can clarify.. a lot of web forums usually list the usernames of the admins & moderators.

i have not seen listed, unless someone can show me otherwise, the admins & moderators of this web forum.. from what i can gather, simon is the owner & admin of this web forum.

scully has just locked a discussion thread - so i'm guessing that s/he is either an admin or moderator.. who are the admins & moderators ?.

Scully

PS: I am a "she". :)