Steven Unthanks case . . . this might help fill some gaps. (page 2)

@BOTR . . . I agree with your take on this completely. The pressure this put WT under made for some startling admissions. The above eyewitness account is technically hearsay, but is still open to scrutiny by those also attending the public hearings. It is now available as an article on the net . . . and should be poked in front of as many noses as possible IMO.

sabastious

Many people here are upset about the developments. I have a strong opinion that Unthank succeeded. Once the WT complied with the law, there was no remedy a court could give. The case became moot. The wider picture shows that a single person forced the org into submission. He also is responsible for the admission tha the faithful and discreet slave is only a construct. It has no meaning in the real world. This was a damning accusation for them. It was a David and Goliath battle and David won.

If I break the law I go to jail or get a heafty, possibly life changing, fine. This is not the case with the "religion" of Jehovah's Witnesses. When they break the law they are only required to provide proof of correction and then no further action is taken. Do you not see the horrible double standard here, Band, I am sure you do. How does one make the religion accountable for their actions?

I agree that there is victory to drink over, but it really was humbling for me to see the absurdly wide disparity between classes of people in this world. It makes me shudder actually to think that I will be steamrolled by the system if I so much as break a tiny traffic law, whereas these total and complete chumps who's values and actions fly in the face that everything this country stands for get the treatment of a "Friend of the State."

That's what religion was supposed to be for government: supplementary and that's why the founding fathers supported it. It was supposed to be like a good friend that you can leave to their own devices and know that your citizens are being taken care of in a way that government shouldn't rightly be a part of.

-Sab

steve2

Thanks sizemilk. Lawyers can be legally slippery at the best of times. The Watchtower can be doctrinally slippery at the worst of times. Combine the two and "the faithful and discreet slave" is rendered into a mere parable that doesn't exist in actuality. A cornerstone teaching evaporates under a cloud of special pleading.

Funnily enough, a "simple" reading of scripture would have most people agreeing: Jesus never intended the parable to be taken literally...it was...a parable. I think it is a uniquely Watchtower-oriented teaching that has consistently taught that the faithful and discreet slave refers to a specific, limited number of individuals who are God-ordained to provide spiritual food to others at the right time.

I wouldn't be surprised if the JWs in the court that day who audibly gasped at the lawyers slippery discourse will remain loyal JWs: Shaken but not stirred. That's the nature of the beast from Brooklyn.

oppostate

Hey, Sizemik,

Thanks for the quotes. Do you know if it's possible to get a transcript of the procedings?

-- OppO

Violia

Indeed it was a huge victory for Steven Unthank and the children of jws in Victoria. The wts would never have willingly told the elders and others to get the working with children background check. For one thing it leaves them open to government intervention. They do not want anyone to examine their religion too closely - it is too easy to see they lie whenever it serves their purpose. The wts would just say they are trying to stay alive and Satan is making it hard on them. they see lying for "mother" as their duty. Lets see how many of them will lie for "mother" if mother hangs them out to dry.

Aussie Oz

I looked into getting transcripts of the hearings but they are / were only available to those directly involved.

Perhaps Mr Unthank can be asked to release them?

Oz

rebel8

Literally Vincent Toole Solicitors were arguing that the “faithful and discreet slave” should be struck off the charge list because they simply do not exist. In one broad sweeping statement the Watchtower Society and their in-house legal team completely destroyed the entire fabric and structure of the faith of some 7 million Jehovah’s Witnesses.
I've never been able to understand why this would shake anyone's faith. All they're saying is it is not a legally registered entity. What does that have to do with faith?

A collective gasp was heard? Really? Denying they are a legally registered organization (which is a fact) has nothing to do with denying its existence.

moshe

I casually mentioned to a JW in a parking lot at a KH in SC the gist what the WT lawyer said about the F&DS not exisiting as real people- just a theological arrangement.

The brother was aghast! "Its a lie!"

How can you be sure? It was in public court, they have a public record of what was said., I came back--

"Well, if it was true, we would have read about it in the WatchTower!" (gets into car and loudly closes the door on me)

OKkk, - he really believed the WT would rat on it's own self.

Knowsnothing

Vincent Toole Solicitors then went on to present arguments that the “faithful and discreet slave” do not exist as a “person” nor do they exist as an

“unincorporated body” and nor do they exist as a “body” of Christians.

That is demonstrably false.

The Watchtower Society and Vincent Toole Solicitors then presented rebuttal argument that the “faithful and discreet slave” did not exist but were nothing more than a:-

“theological arrangement

Weasel words, anyone? What is the distinction? Is that like saying the papacy or ecclesiatical hierarchy of the RCC don't exist because they are a mere "theological arrangement?"

I'm telling you man, they can get away with anything. The poor brainwashed JWs will give in and say it is yet another court victory for the truth.

Steven Unthanks case . . . this might help fill some gaps.

BroMac

sizemik