You can write your letter to:
US Legal Department
100 Watchtower Drive
Patterson, NY 12563
i advocate this line of questioning against watchtower's policy.. 1) ask watchtower's lawyers for the number of on-file cases of sexual molestation of a minor within watchtower's records.. (if watchtower's lawyers refuse to give the exact number, then inquire if the number is "too large to count" and make sure that this statement, "a number too large to count" is repeated enough times so as to establish 'a life of its own'.
it should then be established, using ample watchtower literature, that watchtower keeps accurate records of the entire number of publishers, pioneers, auxiliary pioneers, elders, congregations, kingdom halls, assembly halls and a myriad other things on an ongoing basis throughout the entire organization worldwide and present this as a dichotomy).
2) ask watchtower lawyers for the number, even 1, of cases where the divine "two witness" rule employed by watchtower actually worked to the satisfaction of law enforcement.. ( i would like to read of the case where brother crap and brother piss sat there and watched as brother vile raped a child, and how this was brought to a satisfactory conclusion.).
You can write your letter to:
US Legal Department
100 Watchtower Drive
Patterson, NY 12563
you read that right.
there is a whole talk on the topic.. .
outline: safeguard your children from “what is evil” co-tk17-26-e. .
they certainly could have written that part much better and clearer as to what they mean but I can think of at least 3 or 4 reasons why they may say this.
First, is that some child pornographers incorrectly think that if they take pictures of children in either underwear or in swimming wear that they won't be charged with the creation of child pornography. So it is possible that they were meaning to help parents teach their children that if someone is trying to take pictures of them in immodest dress such as in their bathing suits or in their underwear that is wrong and they need to tell their parents that this is happening.
Second, that some girls may develop more womanly features at a younger age than their parents were hoping for or that their peers are and that they have to become aware of that and learn how to dress more appropriate with their changing body at a younger age.
Third, this talk is for all children even those that are still under age but are in their mid teens and that some people who they may consider as their cool older friends may want to take advantage of their naivety and want to get them to dress more inappropriately around them.
what does everyone think of the new executive order on religious liberty?
this would include a weakening of the johnson amendment so churches will be freer to either contribute to political campaigns and/or promote a candidate from the pulpit.
.
Just to be clear. Churches always had the right to say anything political that they wanted too, it would just put their charitable and tax-exempt status in jeopardy.
A lot of the items that got repealed will actually just now vary based on what state you reside in. For instance, the cost of coverage, if you have preexisting conditions, will be now determined if your state Insurance Commissioner wants to create and enforce a rule that requires insurance companies in that state to cover all pre-existing conditions at no extra cost.
what does everyone think of the new executive order on religious liberty?
this would include a weakening of the johnson amendment so churches will be freer to either contribute to political campaigns and/or promote a candidate from the pulpit.
.
Just to be clear. The President can't revoke the Johnson Amendment as it was passed by Congress, all he has the power to do is instruct the IRS not to enforce certain aspects of the law, like how he did with the individual mandate of the AHCA, Obamacare, he can change his mind at anytime and any future President can instruct the IRS to start to enforce it again.
what does everyone think of the new executive order on religious liberty?
this would include a weakening of the johnson amendment so churches will be freer to either contribute to political campaigns and/or promote a candidate from the pulpit.
.
What does everyone think of the new Executive Order on Religious Liberty? This would include a weakening of the Johnson Amendment so churches will be freer to either contribute to political campaigns and/or promote a candidate from the pulpit.
If it is a spending bill it would need 60 in the Senate.
great article by trey bundy on the recent conference held in london.. https://www.revealnews.org/blog/reveal-event-aims-to-pry-lose-documents-in-jehovahs-witness-cover-up/.
I can point to factual information wrong with the reveal article just in the first two paragraphs.
“There’s no question whether Jehovah’s Witnesses policies direct elders to keep child abuse secret from police. They do.”
During the ARC hearing this year the Australian Branch Representatives highlighted at least 6 instances since the last hearing where elders confirmed that the police was informed about reports of both historic child abuse that came to light and initial instances of child abuse. Even in the Conti case when Kendrick abused his step daughter, it is in the public record that the elders did not stop the wife and step daughter from reporting the crime and did not hinder any kind of prosecution against him.
“Or that Jehovah’s Witnesses leaders have violated court orders to hand it over.”
While yes Watchtower did not turn over the database files in the Lopez case initially following the appeal where the appeals court said that in Calfiornia even if evidence may not be admissible it is still discoverable information, Watchtower did turn over the information. The current issue is how much is Watchtower able to redact the information because there are concerns over third party privacy and the requirements of different jurisdictions and even times when the crime was committed, and so Watchtower is saying that it is not up to a superior court judge to decide which laws of other states are valid in a California case. Mr Zalkin in the Lopez case when it was remanded asked for sanctions against Watchtower for not turning over the database to him, but it came out later that Watchtower was ready to turn over the database when his client agreed to a protective order so the judge refused to hear a sanctions motion till the protective order hearing was completed.
Also the simple fact that the ARC received a copy of the Australian database proves that Watchtower will turn over that database when prescribed to do so by law.
“And why, even in the face of lawsuits and multimillion-dollar court judgments, do leaders refuse to change their policies in any significant way?”
This is a matter of opinion. England’s Charity Commission has determined that Watchtower has made some significant changes to their policy that is why they negotiated so that Watchtower of Britian would stop the appeal in their action. Also the August 1, 2016 policy letter made changes that everyone is calling for, at least in part, that regardless of if there are two witnesses or not, if the law requires that the abuse be reported it will be reported.
hey guys!
are there less assemblies in your country or area this year?
i'm noticing trends that they are becoming fewer and fewer.
Steve2:
Are there less assemblies in your country or area this year?
It is the number of actual events not the number of people attending the event.
hey guys!
are there less assemblies in your country or area this year?
i'm noticing trends that they are becoming fewer and fewer.
A lot of the requirements now for how many people a venue can hold is how well people can see the monitors. if you can't see the monitor then most of the convention is lost. They are increasing the number of dates and sites but reducing the number of people at each convention.