joyfulfader: out of curiosity, how can one be outed by this forum?
Good question. It's happedned though as many have commented. Even on this thread. Maybe we've posted a few too many details and someone so inclined comes here looking, puts the pieces together.
I agree you could deny it. But apparently even that doesn't always work. Those types of elders are cowards and hypocrites, but they can also be ruthless bastards when they're on a crusade.
joyfulfader: i am all about theocratic warfare in reverse.
Amen to that! They invented it, we perfected it!!!
Phizzy, you seem to be familiar with the interrogation techniques of the BOE. I hope you haven't had to deal with them.
Good advice to newbie faders: be careful what you post, avoid any personal details!
MsD, thanks, glad you approve!
wasblind, love your sense of humor girl! You know you're my favorite one!!!
kurtbethel, you raise a good point about the "two witness" rule. Probably if one elder printed out some posts and the other elders read it then they'd have three witnesses on the Judicial Committee. But then, as you pointed out, you could turn it on them and point out that they are all reading "apostate" writing!
This just made me think, if a person doesn't confess, then a JC needs at least two witnesses. The elders on the JC cannot also be the witnesses. So they'd have to form a new JC using the previous elders as witnesses. The "accused" could continue to deny, deny, deny and hammer home the point that the other elders are all guilty of reading "apostate literature."
Theocratic Warfare, just as joyfulfader recommended.
bigmac, great point, men gotta' man-up or hand 'em over!
whathappened, I'm glad you're not a lurking elder too! ... lol