Posts by defender of truth

45

Hold Me, Thrill Me

by Hold Me-Thrill Me in

jw
friends

i'm going to be honest and from the heart when i say that for 40 years in the jw religion i was very happy in my ignorance!

man, what a trip it was.

i loved every minute of it but then i was absent the bad in my religion.

defender of truth

Just so you all know I still attend meetings.

I recognize the problems but I also see that there are few options outside of the Society for a Christian who does not believe in the Trinity.

Is there any organization that is without flaw? Are they not all run by imperfect men and women?

Welcome HoldMeThrillMe :)

Can I ask you..

Do you feel that Jesus requires you to belong to a religious organisation?

Does going to the meetings make you feel closer to Jesus, or make you more able to be a Christian?

How do you benefit from going to the meetings?

Only asking ;)

77

Blood Transfusion: Letter of Understanding

by defender of truth in

http://ajwrb.org/science/blood-transfusion-letter-of-understanding.

"every parent among jehovahs witnesses worried about how local watchtower appointed elders will respond to letting their child have blood transfusion without opposing it should download this letter of understanding and be ready to hand a copy to them.

then ask those elders to leave them (the parents) and doctors alone to concentrate on the childs best interests.".

defender of truth

can you please show from the "Letter of Understanding" that it is an agreement. I do not understand.

I'll try to explain, seeing as Marvin has probably gone to bash his head against a wall somewhere.. ;)

From the LOU:
(Jehovahs witness parents/guardians usually don't want their children to have blood transfusions)...

"Knowing this, doctors will look for other ways to treat these children that do not involve blood transfusion. "

The above sentence, *quoted directly from the LOU* shows that this form, once signed, represents an agreement on the part of the hospital to avoid giving a blood transfusion as far as possible.

The part where the parent signs the LOU clearly states: "My signature is not agreement for blood transfusion".

How you can even suggest that Marvin is trying to deliberately mislead people into thinking that signing this form represents a parent authorizing or consenting to a blood transfusion, when he has provided a perfectly clear and readable scan RIGHT THERE ON THE PAGE READY TO CLICK ON.. is utterly beyond me.

22

Do you want to take action to support mandatory child abuse reporting? (UK or US mainly)

by defender of truth in

this quote is just for discussion purposes, not my political bias or anything... .

" a 'revolution in attitudes' is needed to safeguard children from sex abusers, according to the shadow home secretary, yvette cooper.in an interview with the independent on sunday, ms cooper said that the problem was wider than the historic cases uncovered through the jimmy savile scandal and the abuse of hundreds of children in rotherham.she said that childrens voices must be heard by organisations which had failed to act in the past, and pledged that a labour government would make the reporting of abuse a legal requirement... we need to introduce mandatory reporting so that no institution can ever be tempted to think that the reputation of the institution matters more than the protection of the child ... there has to be a stronger obligation to report and to act.labour has included mandatory reporting in the partys pre-election manifesto and has also said it will set up a cross-whitehall unit to tackle child protection.

"http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/child-sex-abuse-shadow-home-secretary-calls-for-revolution-in-attitudes-to-safeguard-vulnerable-10077725.html.

defender of truth

BTTT

93 needed to reach 7,500

https://www.change.org/p/educationgovuk-introduce-law-requiring-adults-working-with-children-to-report-alleged-abuse-mandatenow

Surely there are are a few more people who can take a minute to sign this one at least?

13

IMPORTANT: JW Congregation in Britain loses case!!!!!!

by Viva la Vida in

jw
friends

from the ruling: .

"we note that the congregation and the charity are one and the same entity in this case, so that whilst the congregation understandably wishes to follow its religious practices, its status as a registered charity brings with it, in exchange for public recognition and tax reliefs, a requirement to maintain certain standards of behaviour.

it also brings with it the risk that, if there are concerns about its activities, these might be inquired into by the respondent.

defender of truth

And this may help..

" In the most serious cases of abuse and regulatory concern, it may open a statutory inquiry. The purpose of an inquiry is to investigate and establish the facts of the case, so that the commission can:

identify the extent of any misconduct and mismanagement

assess the risks to the charity, its work, assets, beneficiaries and reputation

decide what action needs to be taken to resolve the concerns and ensure this takes place "

www.gov.uk/government/publications/statutory-inquiries-into-charities-guidance-for-charities-cc46

13

IMPORTANT: JW Congregation in Britain loses case!!!!!!

by Viva la Vida in

jw
friends

from the ruling: .

"we note that the congregation and the charity are one and the same entity in this case, so that whilst the congregation understandably wishes to follow its religious practices, its status as a registered charity brings with it, in exchange for public recognition and tax reliefs, a requirement to maintain certain standards of behaviour.

it also brings with it the risk that, if there are concerns about its activities, these might be inquired into by the respondent.

defender of truth

"TheOldHippie 3 hours agoFor those of us (at least I hope there are more than just me) who are foreigners and thus neither being familiar with the British judicial system nor with its specialized terms and language - could someone provide me/us with a "Charity vs. congregation for dummies" version? "
Thanks to Joe Grundy, Private Eye published a quite clear and concise article covering this situation. He even posted the text here:
www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/167980001/jw-child-abuse-makes-private-eye

13

IMPORTANT: JW Congregation in Britain loses case!!!!!!

by Viva la Vida in

jw
friends

from the ruling: .

"we note that the congregation and the charity are one and the same entity in this case, so that whilst the congregation understandably wishes to follow its religious practices, its status as a registered charity brings with it, in exchange for public recognition and tax reliefs, a requirement to maintain certain standards of behaviour.

it also brings with it the risk that, if there are concerns about its activities, these might be inquired into by the respondent.

defender of truth

For those with not much spare time, this article presents a clear overview:

www.thirdsector.co.uk/jehovahs-witnesses-body-again-told-cannot-appeal-opening-statutory-inquiry/governance/article/1342175

68

New December KM with changes all over

by pixel in

is not on the public website yet, but here it is, full more changes:.

to the 2015 school:.

bible highlights: brothers as- signed this part will have two min- utes to consider one interesting and practical scriptural point from the weekly bible reading.

defender of truth

Counsel: The school overseer will use two minutes after each student’s presentation to give commendation as well as constructive counsel based on Benefit From Theocratic Ministry School Education. When the school overseer introduces a student’s part on the program, he will not announce the point of counsel the student is working on. After each presentation, the overseer should give the student sincere commendation, announce the point of counsel the student is working on and state specifically why the student did well on that point or kindly explain why it would be beneficial for the student to give that particular point further attention.

This was not a very 'loving provision' from the faithful slave, was it? At our last midweek meeting, every person on the school was publically told that they needed to "work on that", and hinted at why they had not passed.. You should have seen their sad, depressed looking faces.

One of them looked most displeased. The sister who had just been publically counselled that she "needed to work on that for next time".. was the School Overseer's wife

21

Questions that were never answered for me

by WasOnceBlind in

i have always been a very rational and thoughtful person.

there where always questions i had growing up regarding things i was taught.

of course asking questions while being a jw is a big no no!

defender of truth

If god is love, why does he allow so much suffering? From what I remember their main answer was that it started in Eden when Satan challenged Gods right to rule. However, I refuse to believe that a God of Love would let billions thru history suffer and die just to prove a point!

Hi WasOnceBlind.

This thread discusses this issue in depth from both sides, particularly on the topic of innocent animals suffering. Please read it sometime, and feel free to post your thoughts on it, if you have any..

www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/222352/theists-why-does-god-allow-suffering

77

Blood Transfusion: Letter of Understanding

by defender of truth in

http://ajwrb.org/science/blood-transfusion-letter-of-understanding.

"every parent among jehovahs witnesses worried about how local watchtower appointed elders will respond to letting their child have blood transfusion without opposing it should download this letter of understanding and be ready to hand a copy to them.

then ask those elders to leave them (the parents) and doctors alone to concentrate on the childs best interests.".

defender of truth

"What are you saying? Make your point."

Make your point??
I already have, repeatedly. Also, you have no right to order me around. A 'please' wouldn't hurt, would it?

If you would like to explain the difference between:

Elders sitting on a judicial committee and possibly reproving or disfellowshipping a rape victim, because they should have fought (even to the point of death) rather than acknowledge the rapists power and accept that it would happen, which would have the same eventuality except that the victim and possibly their family survives if they just accept it and let it happen..
on the other hand, elders (with the Watchtower choosing to allow it, as you admitted)

helping to draft a document that acknowledges the hospitals power to 'violate' their child (assuming the parents see it that way) with a blood transfusion, rather than fighting the system, even to the point of loss of life, to prevent this from happening.

That is my point. It is just a thought that occurred to me. I am not going to repeat myself.

I am not criticising either the document or any who use it, as consent is not required anyway and it will make things go more smoothly for all concerned. It is a good thing, and I am glad the Watchtower allowed it to be used.

I am not talking about consent or agreement with the transfusion happening.
There were rape victims who went along with it quietly, perhaps because they didn't have any choice except to be harmed or lose their life, who have been told by elders that they need to repent. The Watchtower taught that they should have fought back at all costs and been harmed or killed, otherwise they were indicating some degree of consent and could not be sure of a clean conscience.

Do you not think there is any comparison?
Please explain why or why not specifically, if you have time.

For now, though, your discussion with Marvin will probably take up your time and mental powers. And it is more important to anyone following this that you talk to him about the blood issue.
So I understand if you don't respond.
It's all just 'commentary' any way.

That's the beauty of freedom of speech on this forum.
This isn't a Watchtower 'study', where we must all make a statement that agrees with, and directly relates to, the printed statement,
in 30 seconds or less ;)

77

Blood Transfusion: Letter of Understanding

by defender of truth in

http://ajwrb.org/science/blood-transfusion-letter-of-understanding.

"every parent among jehovahs witnesses worried about how local watchtower appointed elders will respond to letting their child have blood transfusion without opposing it should download this letter of understanding and be ready to hand a copy to them.

then ask those elders to leave them (the parents) and doctors alone to concentrate on the childs best interests.".

defender of truth

"Using the term agreement referring to the document on this thread led me to believe that you were referring to the document as an agreement."

Perhaps that's because, funnily enough, it is an agreement.
The form represents an agreement on the part of the hospital, that the hospital will only administer a blood transfusion if they have to.

As you said yourself:

"In fact, such document is a concession from the hospital to use medical alternatives first before exercising their power to administer blood."
"The hospital, having agreed to use the ABP first.."

"Since you did not clarify what you meant"

If you don't understand what someone has said, or what they meant by a word, why not just ask them rather than making assertions?

Ah, this must be what you are meaning, what you said on page 2:

"So, the parents are not agreeing that the hospital give blood to their child by signing the document.."

The document states that. Do you think that Marvin, having acquired and posted the letter, had not read it and thought that it was a consent form? Why did you think that the above point needed to be made? We can all read..

"Your remarks on this thread about the document also led me to believe that it was a covert document, secretly allowing blood transfusions."

Where did he say that?

"It seemed to me that you meant that it was a secret agreement."

Where did he say that?
Not advertising something is not the same as keeping it secret.

"I wonder how many people believed that too until I showed that it was not."

Everyone here is free to interpret, or misinterpret, what other people write. That is not always the fault of the writer.