Which I think most people recognize as being a mistake.
What is your basis for this assertion?
this is becoming more common.
this is from the last part of the article: .
"this was about sexual gratification and you are a hypocrite because you became an elder and you investigated a sexual matter even with this in your sexual background.".
Which I think most people recognize as being a mistake.
What is your basis for this assertion?
this is becoming more common.
this is from the last part of the article: .
"this was about sexual gratification and you are a hypocrite because you became an elder and you investigated a sexual matter even with this in your sexual background.".
That doesn't mean they shouldn't pay for their crimes.
I didn't say they shouldn't. But when it comes to light that a person committed a crime long in the past most enlightened societies take into account how that person has lived since then. This is one reason there is a statute of limitations for many crimes.
My take is that we should not confuse or conflate our outrage over the pervasive institutional covering up of crimes such as pedophilia by the WTBTS and other religions with how each individual case should be dealt with.
my wife is taking a literature course at a local college.
this was her final topic of the semester: why rational people buy into conspiracy theories?i automatically thought of this site and of jws.
the jws i knew, were the kind of people that would believe in conspiracy theories, and i noticed a small following on this site.. the article that was referenced for this course was: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/26/magazine/why-rational-people-buy-into-conspiracy-theories.html?_r=0.
Here's another interesting tidbit from the article referenced in the OP:
The Backfire Effect - Efforts to debunk inaccurate political information can leave people more convinced that false information is true than they would have been otherwise.
We should keep this in mind when we attempt to talk to "still-in" JWs about TTATT.
When we point out anything wrong with the religion to someone that is not ready to hear it, we will likely only convince them they are right and we are an apostate. Weird, but true.
my wife is taking a literature course at a local college.
this was her final topic of the semester: why rational people buy into conspiracy theories?i automatically thought of this site and of jws.
the jws i knew, were the kind of people that would believe in conspiracy theories, and i noticed a small following on this site.. the article that was referenced for this course was: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/26/magazine/why-rational-people-buy-into-conspiracy-theories.html?_r=0.
my wife is taking a literature course at a local college.
this was her final topic of the semester: why rational people buy into conspiracy theories?i automatically thought of this site and of jws.
the jws i knew, were the kind of people that would believe in conspiracy theories, and i noticed a small following on this site.. the article that was referenced for this course was: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/26/magazine/why-rational-people-buy-into-conspiracy-theories.html?_r=0.
cantleave: Challenge everything, fact check everything, examine both sides and apply Occum's razor.
Generally a good strategy, but we must be careful with Occam's razor. It gave us a flat earth and a geocentric universe.
Check this out:
my wife is taking a literature course at a local college.
this was her final topic of the semester: why rational people buy into conspiracy theories?i automatically thought of this site and of jws.
the jws i knew, were the kind of people that would believe in conspiracy theories, and i noticed a small following on this site.. the article that was referenced for this course was: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/26/magazine/why-rational-people-buy-into-conspiracy-theories.html?_r=0.
my wife is taking a literature course at a local college.
this was her final topic of the semester: why rational people buy into conspiracy theories?i automatically thought of this site and of jws.
the jws i knew, were the kind of people that would believe in conspiracy theories, and i noticed a small following on this site.. the article that was referenced for this course was: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/26/magazine/why-rational-people-buy-into-conspiracy-theories.html?_r=0.
Q: Would the US government ever do something illegal?
A: Iran-Contra. Now there's a conspiracy theory that turned out to be true.
my wife is taking a literature course at a local college.
this was her final topic of the semester: why rational people buy into conspiracy theories?i automatically thought of this site and of jws.
the jws i knew, were the kind of people that would believe in conspiracy theories, and i noticed a small following on this site.. the article that was referenced for this course was: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/26/magazine/why-rational-people-buy-into-conspiracy-theories.html?_r=0.
This is a very interesting observation:
Distracted: if you say you believe [9/11} happened just the way the government says it happened, you do believe in a conspiracy theory ... it's just that you believe the official version
Especially taken in light of Cofty's comment:
So clearly, there are delusional egos on both sides of many of these controversies.Cofty: If you ever get into a conversation with conspiracy nuts they very quickly become abusive and arrogant. Their ego is fed by the delusion that they know better than everybody else.
this is becoming more common.
this is from the last part of the article: .
"this was about sexual gratification and you are a hypocrite because you became an elder and you investigated a sexual matter even with this in your sexual background.".
What Winkle did was wrong, but it was nearly 40 years ago.
People can change.
Has anyone read any other reports that indicate the victim's age at the time? This article only say she was a "schoolgirl" and that "She was a child when [Winkle] did that. [He] were an adult." That's open to a wide range of ages.
some people point out the subliminal pictures in the wtbts publications but sometimes things are just so obvious, such as the title of the book above.. the person who came up with the title for this book must have had a good old laugh.. interestingly, this book first came out in 1988 and has not been included in the online library but nothing has replaced it.
the org is really going backwards when they ditch old light and cannot come up with anything new.
they are real wankers ;)..
She: "Is that a Watchtower in your pants, or are you just glad to see me?"
Me: "It's Awake! and: yes I'm glad to see you!"