Posts by Abaddon

1093

THE NEWS IS BIGGER THAN DATELINE, BBC, CBC, ETC.

by AndersonsInfo in

if i told you that something bigger is on the horizon than dateline, bbc, cbc, sunday (australia), and all other tv programs which exposed the sexual child abuse cover-up by watchtower in 2002-2003, would you believe me?

have i ever misled you?

i'll answer that--no!

Abaddon

AuldSoul

I am assuming the 'cabal' that hyped this have plans beyond day 1, which should include that vital step; getting into court so a journal paper can become precedent.

Mass mailling to Dubbie will only work for those that can think independantly. The others will swallow the Dubby line... I came across this quotation whilst researching;

Given the Witnesses lack of toleration for individual autonomy and intellectual and spiritual independence among themselves, it is ironic that they have championed, however, reluctantly, the cause of individual liberty for everyone
(McAninch, "A Catalyst For The Evolution Of Constitutional Law," 1077).

Hellrider

They will of course try the "but transfusion is a matter of the individual JWs conscience"-defense, which

... won't work. That's why this idea is cool. It is NOT about relgious freedom, it is NOT about freedom of expression, it is about misrepresentation of secular facts. If they had only ever said 'this is our interpretation of the Bible', they'd be safe. It's their habit of twisting quotes and omitting information so as to build a credible argument that have got them here. Sweet. I too don't expect things to move quickly for a good while... but a sucessful class action would require the GB to tuck their trousers in their socks and kiss their retirement home good bye...

13

No, It's not BIG news

by ApagaLaLuz in

i'm sorry, i do not see this as being big news.

the ties to the un, yes that was huge for me.

the child abuse, yes, even bigger.

Abaddon

It's not big news doctrinally as it's got nothing to do with the supporting material for the doctrine being misrepresented, i.e. the Bible.

The misrepresentation occurs in the 'supporting evidence' for how right JW's are to believe this and how risk free it is that is drawn from medical and legal literature. If they had said 'it's our interpretation of the Bible' and nothing else they couldn't be done for it. It's just their perpetual desire to lend credibility to their doctrines through using secular sources and MISUSING THOSE SOURCES TO DO SO that is what has potentially got them in trouble. Ha! Ha! and thrice Ha! I say.

The fact that the JW's will be shown (if legal cases set precedents as suggested by this article) to have omitted information to falsely portray non-blood therapy as low risk and legal precendent as being in favour of a parent's rights to refuse blood for their children will sadly miss a lot of Witnesses.

But if legal cases based on this article end up awarding damages, they will be large damages and there will be a lot of them, or a crushing class action.

If property starts being sold to cover these damages, some of the R&F will wake up enough to smell the coffee... if it impacts upon them personally (i.e. if their hall is sold), they'll take a FAR more specific interest in the facts of the cases (human nature being what it is).

But contributions to the Worldwide Misrepresentation Work either by R&F or taken from people on the door as contributions for literature will likely drop massively as a result of the court case, if the precedent the article suggests is set in case law.

Now, there will be the old switch-eroo tried; going from "See Jah blesses us with sucess and new printing plants" will go to "See how Jah's people are marked for persecution by secular authorities", but the financial heart of the Borganisation could well be ripped out along with it's ability to generate more money and we'll be left with something less toothless than Christadephians.

Calling out around the world, are you ready for a brand new beat? / Summer's here and the time is right, for dancing in the streets...

If you expected the end of the Borg as we know it tomorrow, sorry, no dice. But a five-year+-long disembowelment sounds FINE to me...

1093

THE NEWS IS BIGGER THAN DATELINE, BBC, CBC, ETC.

by AndersonsInfo in

if i told you that something bigger is on the horizon than dateline, bbc, cbc, sunday (australia), and all other tv programs which exposed the sexual child abuse cover-up by watchtower in 2002-2003, would you believe me?

have i ever misled you?

i'll answer that--no!

Abaddon

I think the next step is important.

And that's having a court case testing this legal position.

If we want real news coverage (according to the journalist who's authored several articles in the UK press on issues regarding JW's) we need a court case. He points out the actual article is not rwally 'news' - to paraphrase him, it merely states what rational people already know, that refusing blood can be dangerous for your health and JW's are silly not to.

Once articles in legal journals (of massive interest to us but of 'yeah, well, that's obvious' interest to most people) lead to actual court cases, it's newsworthy enough for the mainstream press to take an interest in. I can see his point;

US law may allow JW's to be charged with misrepresentation over their blood doctrine

... is, let's face it, a headline WE would read, but most other people...? Whereas...

JW sell 15 European Headquarters to pay for payouts to victims of their blood doctrine

... is far more interesting to the general public...

1093

THE NEWS IS BIGGER THAN DATELINE, BBC, CBC, ETC.

by AndersonsInfo in

if i told you that something bigger is on the horizon than dateline, bbc, cbc, sunday (australia), and all other tv programs which exposed the sexual child abuse cover-up by watchtower in 2002-2003, would you believe me?

have i ever misled you?

i'll answer that--no!

Abaddon

quango

Deary dreary... You sneer out of fear or because you do not understand.

Let me put it in simple terms;

The journal this is published in is a legal equaivalent of peer-reviewed scientific literature. The journal is not a publication that specialises in unfounded speculation, but rather in articles addressing law that are held to be a fair representation of or commentary on law.

This article has obviously been reviewed for publication and the main thrust of the article (JW's are liable to suits under the law of tort as religious belief is no justification for secular representation) is held to be sound by very well-regarded legal experts This is a legal theory which will become legal fact if a case based upon this theory's presumptions succeeds, which on the basis of the paper it should.

If this happens, then the floodgates of litigation open; the WTBTS could be whacked with a massive class action by thousands of non-JW's whose realtives have died as a result of the blood doctrine - they are a rich Organsiation, so it's easy to see how this could happen. Those within the Organsiation might sue singly or as a group if the publicity makes them feel that they have been deceived.

I think this is likely to make a very big hole in the finances of the Corporate arm.

1093

THE NEWS IS BIGGER THAN DATELINE, BBC, CBC, ETC.

by AndersonsInfo in

if i told you that something bigger is on the horizon than dateline, bbc, cbc, sunday (australia), and all other tv programs which exposed the sexual child abuse cover-up by watchtower in 2002-2003, would you believe me?

have i ever misled you?

i'll answer that--no!

Abaddon

Is this already being translated into Dutch, or shall I organise it?

This is... interesting.

As shown in Excerpt 1, under the law of tort, religious beliefs do not excuse secular misrepresentation. If a religious organisation misrepresents secular facts, they can be sued for it even if the issue pertains to a doctrinal belief. As shown in Excerpt 2, the Organisation's literature makes use of misleading quotations (gosh, really...?). As shown in Excert 3, the Organisation's literature omits important information () regard differences in rejection rates between those who underwent transfusion (and therefore were not anaemic) and those who did not. Excert 4 provides a summary.

My chief hope is that it will lead over a short (5 year) time span to financial disaster for the Corporate Arm of the Borg. There is definite hope that there will be some within the Borg who will leave due to this. I am not up-to-date enough with the recent splitting of corporate and 'theocratic' arms to know what impact this could have at Congregation level (i.e., is the money divided up craftily enough to stop the forced sales of Kingdom Halls to pay for litigation if the publishing arm runs out of money?).

My dad is a HLC member... I think I'm gonna casually ask him if he's head about the blood thing yet...

128

It Seems That My Children Are Not Trained

by Gary1914 in

jw
friends

i just returned home from the kingdom hall.

i am an elder.. after the meeting all the elders were called to the back room.

i thought this was an impromptu elders' meeting.

Abaddon

Gary

First of all, I think you are fabulous. You have been raised in a religion that you are begining to realise is... well.... not condusive to a happy life is the mildest thing I can say without getting into details, but you know what I mean. But you're a decent man. Good job!

Second, there are two alternatives to leaving. Honestly with all the osracism that will generate, and dishonestly. Please don't think I am loading those terms morally; I chose the dishonest route and would do the same again; as they don't play fair why should YOU play fair??

If new working hours mean your current meeting times are impossible, you chnage congregations. If you bump into ex-members of your Cong at times that clash with your cover story, you're going to the doctor/dentist/vet, whatever.

Of course, you don't start going to the meetings at the new Congregation. Your cards will be sent to them, as they share a hall there will probably ne a discussion about you. The new Elders will pay a call when you don't show. Tell them about the overtime you work, the terrible insomnia your partner is suffering, the constant colds and coughs the kids get, complain moan and bitch. Don't touch anything doctrinal or fall for them asking trigger questions.

If you can keep this up, the visits could tail off quite quickly. If you don't give them anything doctrinal to get interested in, they'll get bored with you, especially if you make their visits as unpleasent, tedious and annoying as possible. You'll be classed as an inactive Witness. Your contacts with family still in will still be allowable by their doctrine.

You can then learn, think, plan decide what you want to do without being under the constant pressure they keep you under to stop you learning, thinking, planning and deciding things for yourself.

If you decide honesty is the best course, hold on for a few days and see what the BIG NEWS is, and if it is as BIG as it is made out to be, maybe you get to really stick cats amongst pigeons and take other people with you. Maybe it'd be worth hanging on until your next talk to give you the platform (hoho) from which to give other JW's the heads-up?

But all the best to you and your family.

1093

THE NEWS IS BIGGER THAN DATELINE, BBC, CBC, ETC.

by AndersonsInfo in

if i told you that something bigger is on the horizon than dateline, bbc, cbc, sunday (australia), and all other tv programs which exposed the sexual child abuse cover-up by watchtower in 2002-2003, would you believe me?

have i ever misled you?

i'll answer that--no!

Abaddon

Well, I haven't the foggiest but will watch with interest. Skeptical interest, but that won't surprise anyone who know me...

I don't know why the pre-release PR hasn't included the British media though; I just 'pinged' one of the most reliable members of the UK press (for publishing exposes about JW's) and he hadn't heard a thing about it.

Obviously networked news transmission has grown in power with the Internet, but if this is big as it is said to be, we also need to contact those who aren't in the Contacts files of x-JWs or active on the Internet in places like this. In other words, the majority.

And that means mainstream media.

It might be that there IS a press kit, but that it is only being released when the news breaks to avoid warning the Borg Central Command, as the first thing you do with a press kit that says (for example) 'Governing Body are all women' is call them up and ask for a comment. But professional media are used to working with news embargoes.

However, I think the 'cabal' behind this BIG NEWS are unlikely not to have thought about this... we will all see...

102

Tookie is running out of time

by jt stumbler in

city leaders rally against violence .

pending execution causes concern over reaction

by jeremiah marquez

Abaddon

I really really really wasn't going to get involved in this discussion.

I know what I think.

I know what a lot of American's think.

And I know perfectly well it is cultural differences that make people who I would otherwise think of as good members of society approve of something I find utterly vile.

This is not about 'good' pinko-commie liberal faggot Europeans who are opposed to the death penalty and 'bad' rabid right-wing American Republican Christians with 'Save the Unborn' AND 'Fry the Murderer' placards in the trunk of their car.

This is about people being a reflection of the society they grew up in. But when someone says;

I also wish that the victims families could actually kill him themselves, if they so chose. He shot his victims, so I have no problem with taking a shot gun to him until he dies.

... I really think the line between justice and revenge has been crossed, let alone that between sanity and insanity. That form of tribal insanity is one of the reasons that Iraq has so many problems, yet you want to extend it to the USA?????

Now, I feel killing people is wrong because killing people is wrong, and when we start making up instances (outside of justifiable self-defence) when killing people is right, we undermine the principle that killing people is wrong.

Beyond this the facts are death penalty is intrinsically unjust because innocent people die.

If you are willing to have yourself or your friends or family killed because of judicial indifference, incompetence or unimpartiality (all of these have resulted in unsound executions), then go ahead, support the death penalty. That is as simple as it gets.

If you are an American and you support the death penalty, whatever praiseworthy and laudable reasons you have for supporting the death penalty, you are supporting a system that in practice is extremely racist. A black defendant is far more likely to be given the death penalty for the same class and severity of crime than a white person. You are also supporting an econmically unjust law, as one thing rich people can normally succesfully avoid is being executed.

So, even IF you are 'right', and the death penalty is a 'good' thing, you are STILL supporting a penalty that is unfair and racist in its application, even IF you can justify everything else about it.

I can understand cultural differences making the sanctity of life as a founding principle less important in the USA than it is in Europe. But I cannot understand complacency in face of a legal penalty that is demonstrably flawed.

29

Bedridden morbidly obese people

by Elsewhere in

jw
friends

every now and then i see a news article about a 600 pound man or woman who is so fat they are bedridden and cannot get out of bed.

they normally need a family member to clean them on a regular basis and feed them.

i once saw an article about a man whos skin had literally bonded with the fabric upholstery of his couch and needed to have to fabric surgically removed.. ive been sitting here wondering.

Abaddon

I think about 5% of people with a significant excess of weight have a pre-existing physical condition that leads them to accumilate weight. Everyone else, at the end of the day, is eating too much and doing too little. This is not to say we should all be skinny and identical; some people are genuinely 'large-boned' and will never be slim, others are naturally slim. There is not a 'right' body weight, just a healthy RANGE of body weights for a given height, which range from nice and 'athletic' and pleasingly rounded. But extreme overweight normally takes eating LOADS.

I used to work with a woman who ate two boxes of doughnuts and three two liter bottles of Coke in a morning (and then go and have lunch); she was sat in an office with a glass wall right in front of me. She was huge - and had no medical condition other than those caused by being obese. She had to browse the entire time, it was not nice.

Most people, if they are overweight, need to do more and eat less. There's no 'magic' in this, it's maths, and the genetic variation in metabolisms probably has a smaller effect on one's ability to lose weight than a person' own self-control and drive. Of course, this is not to say that eating less and doing more is easy - there's a multimillion dollar industry built around endless variations of 'do more eat less', although most are flawed as they try to make it sound easy, so end up concentrating on the 'eat less'.

46

Is Change Possible for Homosexuals?

by nicolaou in

i don't know, you'd think we'd be used to reading crap like this but it still gets my goat.. nic' .

*** w74 8/15 p. 487 is change possible for homosexuals?

thinking transformed.

Abaddon

zen

No-one disputes hair colour or eyecolour is genetic. People don't question a talent for music (beyond what can be explained by early exposure) that runs in families. People will happily ascribe personality traits of children to their parents or grandparents, even if there could be no rote-learning or imitation involved.

Funny how the minute people claim homosexual oriontation might be at least partially genetically-linked it'a suddenly is so hard for many people to accept.

while humans have some reflexive programming, there is far more aquired programming by experiences which gets linked to partially formed systems...

I'd actually diagree - not because we don't HAVE aquired programming, but because our autonomic, reflexive and instinctive subconsious systems far out-weigh the acquired programming. It't normally these things don't act as differentiators as they are engaged in the everyday tasks of keeping the body going and looking out for sabre-tooth tigers, food, and sex.

Because our sex drive IS one of the mosty basic and essential. It's not like aquiring a taste for olives. It lies UNDER the programming we acquire, and will steer what acquired programming is received.

the sex system exists and can be triggered to give very pleasant stimulation which can cause attachments similar to any sort of drug addiction... combine this with fear and excitement of the forbidden and fetishes and other non-standard desires can result...

Obviously sexual likes can be aquired, even unusual ones. But I haven't seen any sucseful attempts to classify homosexuality as a fetish. Your ideas also fail to account for homosexual acquisition in environments are gay-neutral or gay-postive. If you were right, the children of gay couples would almost always be gay. As it is, they are as gay as the lids of average couples.

there seems to be certain imprinting times, not unlike some animals, where events prior and after these critical times frames dont matter as much as what happens during these time periods....

And undoubtedly experience does shape SOME peopels sexuality. But to reject the primacy of genetics?

it has been found by some researchers that drugs like LSD can erase many of the aquired imprints and then cause a re-imprinting based on current circumstances.

But I don't think you have specific examples of LSD causing a chnage in sexuality, so the relevence of this is moot.

I personally dont believe most children are born hetero nor homosexual and dont know what either of them means but acquire this by experiences which are far to variable to show any direct cause and effect relationships....

Why can't it be genetic? I'm not syaing it is 100% genetic, but when evidence is certainly tipping that way (not that I care), I don't get the need to want to insist it is, after all, environmental (even though many gay people would laugh themselves silly at the idea). Is this just a hunch or do you have any research where this is a conclusion?

I dont believe sexual desires are chosen, but discovered just like one discovers they like chocolate over vanilla or vice versa.... the strength of those desires seems likewise a discovery. perhaps if an egghead child learned of imprinting they could directly cause their own sexual desire choice, but few seem to understand that much at the critical ages

Again I feel you are looking at the NON-REPRESENTATIVE examples of homosexuality. No one is saying some people don't become gay because of experience or deliberate decision. But the majority? It is scarsely credible.