my momma walked in caught me dozing and she saw what was on my desk ... a bottle of coffee liqueur.. she said if i get drunk she would talk to the elders and have me disfellowshipped.
you would do me that favor???
i didn't say that but i thought it.. .
Isn't that your moms cabinet if you are still living at home? hhhmmm.... someones got some splainin' to do !!
No kidding, huh? I mean, 10 years at Bethel rooming with a drunken elder, and not knowing coffee liquor is worthless to get you boozed up? something doesn't add up...
i've posted a few times on this site but really just like to read the posts.. i wanted to know if anyone can tell me about a book for teens that the dubs have.
my mother gave it to my 13 year old son and i'm really angry.
i have made it very clear i want nothing to do with those people and do not want my children exposed to it.
Probably the Young People Ask book. Other than some puritanical views on conduct, the kid won't get much doctrine out of it, and if he's 13, he'll probably secretly laugh his ass off if he even reads it at all.
permanent make-up.
has anyone here looked into it?
are you happy you did it and how often to you have to have it touched up?.
I agree with the last post, talk to a really good tattoo artist rather than a cosmetic tattooist, and see if they have any observations. Then you can go back to the cosmetic artist with a little better info. If you go for it, go really REALLY subtle. Just highlights. That black tattooed liner looks strange if you don't go full makeup. Also, lip liner is odd without lipstick.
The pic in your avatar shows you very tan. This could be a problem. Since cosmetic tattooing is deposited more shallow, tanning is going to fade the tattoo very quickly. You will also have to commit to having zero sun hitting the tats for 3-4 weeks while it heals. Maybe more. That means a HUGE hat, or stay indoors. Your ink will fade quickly with lots of CA sun exposure, and also too much sun too soon could make the tat area photosensitive which will itch like hell.
my momma walked in caught me dozing and she saw what was on my desk ... a bottle of coffee liqueur.. she said if i get drunk she would talk to the elders and have me disfellowshipped.
you would do me that favor???
i didn't say that but i thought it.. .
Man, you could drink the whole bottle and all you'd get would be a sugar coma...
not a society apologist!!
just wanting to know what you all think.
does this "sound" fair & balanced, you decide.
LOL @ Tex's "law"
not a society apologist!!
just wanting to know what you all think.
does this "sound" fair & balanced, you decide.
Are you really that obtuse? Let's consider this clever little piece of wordsmithing, AGAIN, shall we?
all in the Christian congregation would want to consider their personal and moral responsibility to alert the appropriate authorities in cases where there has been committed or there exists a risk that there might be committed a serious criminal offence of this type (see ks91, page 138) In child abuse cases such authorities might include the family doctor, the Social Services, the NSPCC, or the police.
This is all the loophole they need to completely negate this "policy." It says that all need to "consider" or think about whether or not they MIGHT have a responsibility to report. If so, the reporting MIGHT include people like CPS, or police. So the JW might report, which implies that they might not. And if they consider their responsibility to report allegations of child rape, and come to the conclusion that it is NOT their responsibility to alert the proper authorities, what "policy" have they violated by that decision? Because I see no way to violate this "policy," no matter the decision to report or not.
my daughters scripture teacher recently told the scripture class that in nsw, australia there will be no more scripture classes.
the reason was that it was too hard to find teachers.
a couple of weeks later a letter was read in the congregations to that affect, and saying that it is a parents responsibility to spiritually raise a child.
Very good point Ozzie. There are churches (and other organizations like the hospital,) around here that offer classes geared toward the proper handling of abuse allegations. Anyone who works in a capacity that involves children can take them, regardless of denomination.
I've never known a single JW to attend one, unless they work for the school district.
not a society apologist!!
just wanting to know what you all think.
does this "sound" fair & balanced, you decide.
Surely you must admit that JWs child abuse policy really is very good and that no religion has a better one in the imperfect state that we are in.
No. The JW's "policy" is NOT A POLICY. It sucks. It bites ass, to put it in the best possible terms. It is one of the WORST "policies" in all of Christendom. In 30 seconds using google, I found multiple examples of ACTUAL policies adopted by a variety of religions.
This is what you don't get. And until you do get it, and a lot of other JWs get it, the Kingdom Hall will continue to be an unsafe place for any parent to take their children. If the local elementary school had a "policy" like the WT's, they would lose all Federal and State aid, and rightly so. They would be a haven for any molestor to work for and have access to children. This is the state of the Organization.
By claiming that those ridiculous two sentences and two minutes of "training" at the annual KM school constitutes a "policy," they are putting all trusting families at risk of assault by predatory opportunists by giving these families a false sense of security. After all, the WT has their best interests in mind, yes? (that was sarcasm.)
This is disgusting and reprehensible, and by knowingly defending such a disgusting and reprehensible "policy," you become a willing participant in the victimization of families.
i attended my mother's memorial at the kingdom hall saturday afternoon.
even with the jw sermon tagged on, my cousin did a lovely service for her.
there were many jws and non-jws in attendence.
Very typical, but very sad. I'm so sorry Merry.
not a society apologist!!
just wanting to know what you all think.
does this "sound" fair & balanced, you decide.
I don't think anyone thinks you are a molestor. Personally, I am quite disturbed by your continued defense of WT "policy" because it is blind, unwavering defense by people just like you that allow the kind of abuses stated here to happen. People like you turn a blind eye to the giant holes in the "policy," instead making the victims of abuse ever more vulnerable to continued assaults, or further victimization due to ostracism. The WT's "policy" of handling such matters privately, makes likely still more victims, since parents of potential victims are given no warning about the vulnerability of their children to child rapists in the congregation, unless they see it in the secular news media.
This defense of such a deplorable policy is what makes us furious. Your continued assertion that the WT has the best policy bar none, is horribly damaging and misleading. Until JWs open their eyes, and quit believing that everything handed down from the WT is exempt from scrutiny, your children will be among the most vulnerable to assault by trusted members of the congregation... people who are trusted, that should not be... simply because the closed door policy of the Judicial Committee prevents elders from warning those who are most at risk.
Think critically, for once.
