Child custody problems

by A.proclaimer 9 Replies latest watchtower scandals

  • A.proclaimer
    A.proclaimer

    This is the letter that was read today in the congregation:

    To all congregations in the United States territory

    Re:child custody packet

    Dear Brothers:

    A packet of legal material is available to assist publishers who are involved in lawsuits over child custody and visitation matters in which our religion is under attack. The packet should be requested by the body of elders only in a case in which is evident that the publisher's religious beliefs will be at issue. For those facing secular issues on child custody or visitation, helpful information can be found on the October 2009, Awake!, pages 21 and 27; the December 8, 1997, Awake!, pages 3-12; the chart found in the April 22, 1991, Awake!, page 9; and the October 8, 1988, Awake!, pages 2-14.

    Notice how they use emotive language: "our religion is under attack". They must be having an issue with this if they sent out a letter to be read.

  • Finkelstein
    Finkelstein

    Maybe the question should be asked... What is a religion doing intervening and getting involved in child

    custody disputes ?

    I don't remember reading anything in the bible that would support that motion or directive.

  • 3rdgen
    3rdgen

    Does anybody remember when the WTBT$ insisted they were NOT a religion????

  • AudeSapere
    AudeSapere

    3rdgen asked: Does anybody remember when the WTBT$ insisted they were NOT a religion????

    Oh! I clearly remember that. And Kingdom Halls are not churches (although *sometimes* they were listed under churches in the phonebook - but not always).

    And this 'packet' has been referenced on this website many times. One most notable with poster 'alamb' where the elder speaking on behalf of the JW spouse denied that such a packet existed... Repeated denied its existance... All while the judge had a copy right in front of him.

    Makes me ill to think about it.

    -Aude.

  • BluePill2
    BluePill2

    Are there some links here to read about it?

    I will/am facing a child custody problem very soon (court date is set). I wrote a lengthy letter to the court and the governmental agency that will look into the matter. I wrote in a professional, business like tone without sounding vengative or hateful. My ex-wifes lawyer wrote to the court stating that I am attacking religious freedom and that has nothing to do with the case at hand. Although I explained that the treatment of our child and the reasons why our marriage broke apart where ALL tied to the "religion".

    My ex-wife offered me a deal: to give me a "hassle free" divorce, but I have to sign on the dotted line and forfeit all the rights to the child.

    This even reads awful "rights to a child". I held her in my arms when she was born, stayed all night awake because my wife had to undergo a surgery and was in recovery. I opted to not sleep one minute and watch over the Baby. It is a deep cut into my heart. Sometimes I think they won, that I would rather go back or make everything go away to get back to my daughter. Although, one day she might not even accept what I did (DA'ed myself).

    Religion? This is a spiteful, sanctimonious group of hypocrites that have tax-exemption and are milking their members for cash.

  • blondie
    blondie

    Until 1951 the WTS contended that all religion was false so they were not a religion. The confusion to the outside made them change.

    *** w51 3/15 p. 191 Questions From Readers ***

    ● In the past we regarded “religion” as anything that was against God’s will. Now many brothers are using the expressions “true religion” and “false religion” to make a distinction. Is this advisable?—D. D., California.

    The brothers are correct in using the qualifying adjectives “true” and “false” respecting religion, so as not to be misunderstood, especially by those outside the organization. In the past we have had to do so much needless explanation and extricating of ourselves from embarrassing positions by not being specific on this. The footnotes of the New World Translation show the early use by Latin-speaking Christians of the term religio as the equivalent of the Greek term thres·kei ′ a . It simply means “form of worship”, of which there can be a true and a false kind. Study over the footnotes in the New World Translation on the texts at Acts 26:5, Colossians 2:18 and James 1:26, 27, and see how the footnote renderings allow for the use of the term “religion” or “religious”, though the texts themselves use the expressions “form of worship” or “formal worshiper”. Hence it is well to make clear our use of the term “religion” by qualifying it as “true” or “false”, if the context or setting does not do this sufficiently.

    *** w51 8/15 p. 511 Questions From Readers ***

    Why has the Watchtower Society suddenly approved the use of the word “religion” relative to the worship of Jehovah’s witnesses?—P. L., New York.

    We are not trying to make a new language, but we want to use the language we have to the honor of God’s name, and do so with as little confusion as possible in Kingdom preaching. In the English language the word “religion” means the service or adoration of God or a god, as expressed through certain forms of worship. So the religion may be either true or false, depending upon both the god being worshiped and the form or manner of expressing the worship. If we practice the true form of worship of the true God Jehovah, and if we are speaking the English language, then when discussing our worship we may properly use the English words that will so limit our meaning, namely, “true religion.”

    The word “religion” is used in the English Bibles in several places. It is used in the King James Version at James 1:26, 27. There James distinguishes between the vain or false religion (1:26) and the pure or true religion (1:27), and does so by appropriately qualifying in each instance the same Greek word, thres·kei ′ a . The Greek threskeía is equivalent to the Latin religio, both simply meaning “form of worship”, of which there can be a true and a false kind. From the Latin religio comes the English word “religion”. Study over the footnotes in the New World Translation on the texts at Acts 26:5, Colossians 2:18 and James 1:26, 27, to see how they allow for the use of the words “religion” and “religious”. When the Bible uses the term “religion” it is either properly qualified or the context or setting indicates whether it is speaking of the true or the false. Note how the setting shows that at Isaiah 29:13 it is false religion and at 2 Timothy 3:5 it is true religion, reading both texts from the Moffatt translation.

    This viewpoint on the use of the word “religion” was not suddenly adopted by the Society. Careful readers of the Society’s publications have noticed that during the past few years when religion was being discussed the publications were careful to limit any condemnation to false religion. Two years ago Awake! quoted Moffatt’s translation of 2 Timothy 3:1-5, 13, and identified the religion mentioned in that text as being true by inserting this qualification in brackets, as follows: “Though they keep up a form of [true] religion, they will have nothing to do with it as a force.” (September 22, 1949, page 9) So this matter had been under careful study and consideration for a long time, and what was brought out on it at the Theocracy’s Increase Assembly at Yankee Stadium in New York last year was further enlargement and welcome clarification, and not some new idea brought forth suddenly. None should feel upset by the use of the term “religion”. Because we use it does not put us in the class of the tradition-bound false religions, no more than does the calling of ourselves Christians put us in with the false Christians of Christendom.

  • blondie
    blondie

    Since 1987 till 2008 the WTS has had the custody packet announced about once a year at the service meeting and printed the announcement in a KM. For 5 years it hasn't (why?). So if you weren't attending or had access to a KM since 2008 it might seem a sudden start.

    *** km 1/08 p. 7 Announcements ***

    A packet of legal material is available to assist publishers who are involved in lawsuits over child custody and visitation matters in which our religion is under attack. The packet should be requested by the body of elders only in a case in which it is evident that the publisher’s religious beliefs will be at issue. For those facing secular issues on child custody or visitation, helpful information can be found in Awake! of December 8, 1997, pages 3-12; in Awake! of October 22, 1988, pages 2-14; and on the chart found in Awake! of April 22, 1991, page 9.

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    Work with your lawyer. There is a custody packet out there; I am looking for it. It is very rare for visitation to be denied by the courts.

    http://www.freeminds.org/legal/custodynotes.htm

  • Anony Mous
    Anony Mous

    I have copies of the literature in this 'packet'. It's a booklet that explains how to lie to the courts and how to make it sound in cross-examination like you're against their religion. Especially when your ex is attempting to make it 'short-n-sweet', get a lawyer. The courts don't listen to any of your arguments especially if you're going up against the child's mother, the mother will retain custody in 80% of the cases.

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    On the flip side Anony Mous, it's a rare cusody case indeed where the father is denied access. I couldn't even get that for my violent, abusive, bite-marks-on-baby ex-husband.

    So BluePill has every right to expect generous visitation with his child if not joint custody.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit