by Crumpet 24 Replies latest watchtower scandals
I agree with Severus and I've read the whole article. I will be doing a critique of the article real soon, too. It is very well-written and professional. This material very definitely CAN be used in court. Tracts can be made from it, Press Releases, EVERYTHING! Just respect copyright laws (Fair Use, etc) Besides if you get the article, you can photocopy it and give it to health workers from what I understand (Barb?)
Randy Watters
Net Soup!
- That JW's do lie/misrepresent in the publications How Can Blood Save Your Life? and You Have The Right to Choose.
I think if you researched WT and Awake mags for the last 50 or so years on the subject of blood tranfusions a PATTERN of lies,half truths and total deception on the subject will arise. I believe they have shown a long term disregard for the facts about blood and thereby endanger the health and very lives of those who look to the WT as their spiritual shepherd.
If this holds up in court, which I believe it could, the potential damage awards can bankrupt the Society. It didn't take long for the Boston Archdiocese to file for bankruptcy after the Catholic Church scandal.
I just finished reading the full article and it has very strong legs to stand on.
Here is what The Watchotwer wrote back in 1952 concerning legal liability and vaccinations. I am sure they feel the same today, The Watchtower will NOT assume legal liability for any misrepresentation it has made concerning blood transfusions. --VM44
"The matter of vaccination is one for the individual that has to face it to decide for himself. Each individual has to take the consequences for whatever position and action he takes toward a case of compulsory vaccination, doing so according to his own conscience and his appreciation of what is for good health and the interests of advancing God's work. And our Society cannot afford to be drawn into the affair legally or take the responsibility for the way the case turns out." Watchtower magazine, 15 December 1952 p.764
But does that "conscience decision" still come with shunning?
In brief, the book "Tort of Misrepresentation for Dummies" we will excerpt the chapter on Jehovah's Witnesses and Blood Transfusions:
A fiduciary relationship is a trust relationship of special responsibility toward others.
The representatives of the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watchtower Bible and Tract Corporation have such a relationship toward congregation elders and congregants (however much they have attempted to release those bonds of unholy matrimony).
Elders are legally NOT representatives of the corporate entities, however they still have a fiduciary responsiblity toward the congregants.
At the point of indoctrination, those in a fiduciary relationship toward others have a heavy responsibility before the law when it comes to relating secular facts. In the case of the elders, they will trust that the information received from above is true and will act accordingly. In the case of congregants, information from either higher source will be heavily weighted by their trust of the source.
Any decisions congregants might make based on this trust with regard to communicated religious beliefs is entirely outside the bounds of law. But if the decision was in any part influenced by misrepresented secular data, it constitutes a tortuous violation of the fiduciary relationship through misrepresentation. This portion is what has already been successfully tested in court. This portion HAS PRECEDENT. Keep this in mind, everything up to this point has already been upheld. Portions of this, such as the fiduciary relationships between the various entities, have been precedent for decades.
As this precedent relates to Jehovah's Witnesses, no one has tested this versus the blood doctrine. If the organization had never stated a single medical fact there would be nothing to pursue. However, they did. A lot. Wherever they misrepresented secular facts as part of the indoctrination they violated the fiduciary relationship in an actionable way.
Did that hit home?
Severus suggests correctly that JWs might pursue this. However, I believe the easiest case to press would be one involving an unbelieving mate losing their spouse.
The point is, whenever and wherever it starts, it will not stop. They cannot risk exposure to this degree of litigable threat.
Hopefully everyone including Eduardo and West70 followed that.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul
Am I understanding this right that ANY MISQUOTE of secular sources made by the WTBS could be used as grounds to sue them if that MISREPRESENTATION of facts has led to mental, emotional, or physical damage to a person who has made poor choices due to the fact that the WT has misled them?
What about how the WT misquotes secular sources when trying to prove the 607BCE date as grounds for them being God's ONLY channel of communication on earth?
Without believing this foundation doctrine, many would not have become JW's in the first place, thereby avoiding all the pain and suffering that lay ahead for them.
OR
How about the many misquotes of secular sources in the "Trinity" booklet?
NewLight2
Newlight, sh-h-h! We don't want them to stop before we get our money back.
Randy, I was so glad to get your opinion and know that what you do will be extremely helpful. I have not heard a word from GaryB on this. I respect his opinion and would like to hear what he has to say, since this has touched him in such a personal way. Where is Farkel, and Tom Tally ? Can they stilll post here? Are they posting somewhere else? Bill Bowen, kimbrelee north, atty. Bill could lput somethign up on his site. What about Ray Franz, has he any comment? I know it is early and the entire article is not out yet.
.
I have so little to offer ,but I can e-mail..
I know this article has not provided the instant gratification, that some of us long for. We will have to wait and see how far this can go.
weds
The JW asks:
- Why would the Society lie about this?
- If the Society lied about this, what else did they lie about?
- Am I willing to trust the Society with my life based on this information?
VERY good point Severus. In fact, this very line of thinking is what brought ME out of the WT.
Once I came to the conclusion that Ministerial Servants and Elders are NOT appointed by God's Holy Spirit (after having personal experience with those that are up to no good) it started a domino process of investigating their other grandiose claims and in a matter of DAYS the entire house of cards collapsed.
