by RunningMan 19 Replies latest jw friends
HMMM Perhaps this is why they've been having all those 'Theocratic Bonfires' up there! Bring your Hotdogs, marshmellos, time slips, RV books, do not call lists, telephone lists, territtories...,they're cheap they only proved the matches on a dontaion basis of course! Wow just think of the NEW LIGHT from those fires ahhahah and the warm fellowship ahhah!
Venice
More info on privacy at: http://www.privcom.gc.ca/information/02_05_d_08_e.asp
I've e-mailed them to with a specific question on religious orgs. Will let you know if anything comes back.
Venice: You're funny! LOL!
Skimmer: I don't mind if the WTBTS turns into martyrs. Martyrs are, after all, dead.
Expatbrit
The Watchtower's Legal Defense:
It is a violation of "freedom of religion" because we believe we are mandated by Matthew 24:14 to keep these records....and Jehovah is a God of order bla bla bla...You violate our 'Christian' conscience not allowing us to keep these records....
Would it work?
Expatbrit: I agree with you. Adding to their martyr complex is the lesser of the two evils. I just want to see them go down!
SKIMMER,
The one on Chief of Police was a Supreme Court reversal. Being Federal that covers all the USofA. What is curious about those matters is that DOESN'T run right out and kill the ordinances in every little nook, cranny and burg. They have to be taken out, one-by-one, based on the precedent. Frequently a nasty Lawyer's Letter will do it, sometimes more court. But this time it usually won't go the Supreme Court.
Again, w/ the proposed NDNCL Project, a Lawyer's Letter of REVOCATION OF THE RIGHT OF EASEMENT should be effective.
The Right of Easement is used by salesmen, you neighbor, JW's, newspaper boys, other churches and invited guests alike. It allows
anyone to approach your door on a reasonable pathway from the nearest
public thoroughfare. This is for such purposes as warning you that your house is on fire, delivering mail/bills/notices, complaining to you about anything and so on. (I have done all of the above.) This legal doctrine is usually considered to be broadly applied.
If you disagree w/ some (or all) of the users of this venue, you may
1) post signs to prohibit passage or 2) specifically notify individuals
that you decline their visits/further visits.
These could be filed w/ the local KH. It would be prudent to inquire which one 'possesses' your territory. Worded properly, it could have several effects.
1) Make it indefinite in term. This could keep away that annual Elders visit someone mentioned. Their most likely recourse would be a trip to the County Recorder's office to check for changes in ownership.
2) It would give the Congregation Secretary something to do. More notations than a one-liner would be required. An initial and annual trip to the County Recorder's office would be required. He would certainly earn his keep.
Note that gated communities have attacked the Right of Easement using the most direct of all approaches: WALLS.
Mustang
Disclaimer: same as previously stated in this thread.
Mustang,
If you are a lawyer, would you mind taking a look at the thread I started in Kids, Families forum? The title is "Circle of friends" I am looking into finding a lawyer tomorrow and have tons of info I downloaded off the web. I would be interested in your opinion.
BTW if you go to your profile and where there is a signature message box, you may type in your disclaimer, so every time you don't have to type it out. Just before you post make sure you check the "include signature in message" box
wendy
Perhaps you have not heard much about the situation in Blainville, Quebec. but this case is apparently an important one in which precedent could be set in Canada. just check a search engine for lots of news stories on the canvassing bylaw in blainville that is being challenged. this started over 2 years ago iirc and the branch has focused a great deal of legal manpower on blainville. they are telling us that a precedent, if unfavorably set, will cause a ripple effect thru-out quebec and possibly canada. one CO told us that municipal gvmts from all over the country had inquired into the blainville situation to check the progress for just this reason. so i think it unlikely that anything major will happen until this is resolved. anyone have more up-to-date information on this?
mox
I saw a clipping on the new H2O about a week or 2 after it started on something similar in Steubenville, Ohio??? These crop up occasionally, but this one seemed to be win for the ordinance, at the moment. They frequently get smashed. Any news on this one???
Oh, BTW, does anyone subscribe to the old-fashioned "news-clipping" services?? JW's in the news could get some mileage there.
Mustang
I would just like to add one comment regarding charities,
religious organizations, and non-profit organizations. I work
for a non profit organization, and we have just spent a
considerable amount of work on complying with the privacy
legislation. All of our member communications must now
include a privacy statement and provide an option to
opt our of future mailings. We also have appointed
a privacy officer, and will make any records available
to individuals on request. The privacy statement also
appears in our magazine, at least annually.
At the current time, the legislation applies to finanicial
institutions, and any organization that shares information
accross provincial lines. It will likely be extended further
in coming years. I am not aware of any exemptions.
NEWS FLASH: The Blainville Canadian situation reportedly has been ruled on, in favor of WTS. See Orbison's post on this, entitled
"Witnesses Can Keep Visiting".
Not knowing the real inclination or "flavor" of Canadian Law & Courts, I was unsure of how this would go. I felt that they patterned their law in the direction the U.S. goes, but also
have the British influence and some socialist overtones from
whatever direction.
While I felt that they could have gone much more conservative, it appears that they have ruled as the U.S. typically does. That is
in favor of the religious freedom, even if it is not so orthodox.
