Is this a correct use of charitable money, money which includes Tax Payers contributions via Gift Aid ?
They are simply distributing their opinion as to the interpretation of various scriptures.
Their Charitable Status should be revoked forthwith.
Jehovah's Witnesses post 'anti-gay' 'Harness Your Habits' leaflet in North Devon
by OrphanCrow 42 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
scratchme1010
millie210:
I know several people who are non practicing gay people (is that a socially appropriate term? I am not sure?).
LOL! First, to address your question, no, it's not correct to address people's sexual orientation as something that you "practice". I'm quite sure that you don't practice your heterosexuality. Being gay isn't something that you acquire like license to practice a profession.
It is more accurate to refer to those gay people in the congregation as people repressing their sexual orientation (or trying to). Not having sex doesn't make a person gay or straight. It's still the same person, just not having sex.
I laughed, though, because the term "practicing" reminded me of the time when I was once questioned by the elders about me "practicing" homosexuality (they met with me after some brothers of the congregation saw me with my boyfriend having dinner) I said absolutely no. Technically I didn't lie; it was true because I was already a master at being gay, I wasn't practicing.
-
millie210
LOL good example scratch!
Thank you for helping me understand. I really want to be sensitive and aware and not dense!
So would not currently sexually active be correct? Or celibate?
I am searching for the right way to say someone gay or hetero, someone male or female - doesnt matter - who is basically standing outside the long arm of the law (in this case a judicial committee) because they are not doing anything that can be used as a technicality against them.
-
OrphanCrow
millie: I am searching for the right way to say someone gay or hetero, someone male or female - doesnt matter - who is basically standing outside the long arm of the law (in this case a judicial committee) because they are not doing anything that can be used as a technicality against them.
Haha, Millie! We used to call that being in the closet. Has it changed?
Maybe in JW land it has another term...celibate person seems close. Sorta like the Catholic monks, I guess
-
compound complex
millie:
Is the term you seek NPG (non practicing gay)?
http://www.jw-archive.org/post/83559641256/is-it-possible-to-be-an-npg-non-practicing-gay
-
scratchme1010
I am searching for the right way to say someone gay or hetero, someone male or female - doesnt matter - who is basically standing outside the long arm of the law (in this case a judicial committee) because they are not doing anything that can be used as a technicality against them.
If the person is an active (or practicing?) JW, I'm afraid that for that person will have to dodge a lot of bullets. As such, there will be a lot of scrutiny, there will be people who will be in that person's case, there will be people that will spread malicious slandering gossip. It doesn't matter how noble, how well, how perfect you are; once you are labeled a person who has "that problem", there's no way people are not going to see and judge everything you do through that glass.
To give you info about what you're inquiring, abstinent is a good term, non-practicing gay is now (emphasis on now) apparently acceptable too. More important, however, is looking into why on Earth anyone wants to be in a place where they have to explain themselves in those terms? Even when I was a JW I found it ridiculous that I had to explain my personal life to people just for their comfort.
-
LoveUniHateExams
Today the Sunday Mirror can reveal Keith Vaz, a married father of two, is leading a double life paying young male escorts for sex ... and is currently overseeing the biggest shake-up of Britain’s prostitution laws in a generation - a bit off-topic, but that's absolutely hilarious!
Our MPs do provide us with some much-needed entertainment from time to time, don't they ...
And paying for sex is currently illegal in the UK. Time to get the police involved?
What a gay day ...
-
darkspilver
a bit off-topic, but that's absolutely hilarious!
Well, as this thread's title says....
if he'd harnessed his habits....
Anyway, it's really just like buying a car...
Peter Tatchell, the human rights and LGBT campaigner, says that MP Keith Vaz has “not broken any laws” and should not resign over claims in a Sunday newspaper that he paid for sex with male prostitutes.
“We don’t demand that MPs who buy or own cars step down from committees when they are debating legislation to do with the car industry,” he said.
-
darkspilver
paying for sex is currently illegal in the UK
I understand from the below link that:
In England, Wales and Scotland, the exchange of sexual services for money is legal, but a number of related activities, including soliciting in a public place, kerb crawling, owning or managing a brothel, pimping and pandering, are crimes. Although the legal age of consent is 16, it is illegal to buy sex from a person younger than 18. In England and Wales, it is an offence to pay for sex with a prostitute who has been subjected to force even if the client did not know.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_the_United_Kingdom
-
LoveUniHateExams
it's really just like buying a car... - no, it's really not like buying or owning a car.
Peter Tatchell, the human rights and LGBT campaigner, says that MP Keith Vaz has “not broken any laws” and should not resign over claims in a Sunday newspaper that he paid for sex with male prostitutes.
“We don’t demand that MPs who buy or own cars step down from committees when they are debating legislation to do with the car industry,” he said - interesting view from Tatchell, a supposed human rights campaigner.
I'm a single heterosexual male. If I'm feeling lonely, should I pay for female escorts? Of course not!
And yet this is what is alleged against the 'Honourable' Member or Parliament for Leicester East, Keith Vaz.
There is no moral equivalence between paying for male escorts and paying for cars.
I understand from the below link that: [blah, blah, blah] - thanks for clearing that up.
It's also more hypocrisy from Labour. Twenty years ago, Labour MPs, when in Opposition, demanded that Tory MPs resign when those miscreants were caught with their pants down. Now, they seem to be recruiting the likes of Peter Tatchell to campaign for the sleazy MP. Don't they realise how ridiculous they look - the hypocrisy stinks.
What's good for the goose ...