The form is a document showing that the two parties have come to an agreement.
If they had not come to an agreement, they would not be signing the form. The form proves that they have come to an agreement.
Would you agree?..
defender of truth
JoinedPosts by defender of truth
-
77
Blood Transfusion: Letter of Understanding
by defender of truth inhttp://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.".
-
-
-
3
'Going Clear' Director Calls for End to Scientology Tax-Exempt Status !!
by defender of truth ingoing clear director alex gibney is calling for an end to scientology's tax-exempt status.in a los angeles times op-ed on saturday, documentary filmmaker gibney, whose going clear: scientology and the prison of belief aired on mar.
29 on hbo, addressed the church's tax-exempt status, and why the status should be revoked.
"regarding 'private interests,' it seems clear that scientology is ruled by only one man, [scientology head] david miscavige," gibney wrote in the op-ed.
-
-
defender of truth
Going Clear director Alex Gibney is calling for an end to Scientology's tax-exempt status.
In a Los Angeles Times op-ed on Saturday, documentary filmmaker Gibney, whose Going Clear: Scientology and the Prison of Belief aired on Mar. 29 on HBO, addressed the church's tax-exempt status, and why the status should be revoked.
"Regarding 'private interests,' it seems clear that Scientology is ruled by only one man, [Scientology head] David Miscavige," Gibney wrote in the op-ed. "Further, powerful celebrities within the church, particularly Tom Cruise, receive private benefits through the exploitation of low-wage labor (clergy members belonging to the Sea Org make roughly 40 cents an hour) and other use of church assets for his personal gain."The director goes on to allege that numerous church activities have violated public policy or been illegal, and lawsuits and an FBI investigation have uncovered false imprisonment, human trafficking, assault, harassment and invasion of privacy allegations.
Gibney writes that "a proper criminal investigation that followed the money — a virtual river of cash from tax-exempt donations and fees — could sort out some of these issues. Or a congressional subcommittee investigation could force Miscavige — who was unwilling to answer questions for [Going Clear author Lawrence] Wright's book or the film — to testify under oath about allegations of abuse."
The Going Clear director provided an example of the 1983 Supreme Court ruling that upheld the decision to revoke the charitable status of a faith-based college. In Bob Jones University vs. United States, the Supreme Court said that "government has a fundamental, overriding interest in eradicating racial discrimination in education ... which substantially outweighs whatever burden denial of tax benefits places on [the university's] exercise of their religious beliefs" in regards to the college's rule that interracial dating was forbidden.
Gibney explains that Going Clear exposed how Scientology's success to be granted tax-exemption by the Internal Revenue Service involved lawsuits and the "vilification of its agents" in 1993.
"It seems to me that our government has a "fundamental, overriding interest" in protecting individual liberty by not subsidizing harassment or surveillance by gun-toting private eyes," Gibney wrote, concluding with, "The 1st Amendment should not be a smokescreen to hide human rights abuses and possible criminal activities."
The church provided The Hollywood Reporter with a five-page letter — an attempt to make a final stand against the film prior to its premiere date — that aims to discredit Gibney's sources (former Scientology members) in the doc film. In the letter, THR is referred to videos published about Gibney and the former members with the following titles: "Mike Rinder: The Wife Beater," "Marty Rathbun: A Violent Psychopath" and "Sara Goldberg: The Home Wrecker," amongst others.
The Church of Scientology did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/going-clear-director-calls-end-787965
If you think Scientology is a cult, and want to actually do something about it:
-
39
Petition to Revoke Scientology's Tax Exempt Status
by ABibleStudent infyi, if you feel that scientology's tax-exempt status should be revoked, you can sign a white house petition to revoke its tax-exempt status at https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/revoke-scientologys-tax-exempt-status.. i signed the petition even though i have mixed feelings about this petition.
i would prefer that dangerous cults like scientology be reformed by suspending its tax-exempt status until it makes needed changes and i do not like targeting a specific organization when the whole system should be changed.
on the other hand this type of action may help to promote debate about revising the tax codes in the us.. i do prefer revising the tax code like i wrote about in revise tax code to protect children from sexual abuse .. peace be with you and everyone, who you love,.
-
-
defender of truth
Good work so far :)
If you are serious about reaching the target, I think you have one shot.
Contact Alex Gibney on Twitter, the director of the 'Going Clear' documentary. He can get this the publicity it needs.
Here is his twitter:
www.twitter.com/alexgibneyfilm
And this is why I think he will help you...
'Going Clear' Director Calls for End to Scientology Tax-Exempt Status in Op-Ed
www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/going-clear-director-calls-end-787965
Go for it. ;)
"13,325 followers"
-
77
Blood Transfusion: Letter of Understanding
by defender of truth inhttp://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
Also, Fisherman...If the LOU does not represent an agreement, and it makes no difference whether a parent agrees to sign it or not, how do you explain the following quotes?.."As institutions show more respect toward parents’ faith and try harder not to use blood, Witnesses often seem eager to avoid involving child-welfare authorities to facilitate transfusions, and more accepting that Canadian case law is firmly on the doctors’ side, some hospital officials say."
David Gnam, one of the Witnesses’ lawyers who has handled many of the transfusion cases, also said there has been no official change in policy, though he is aware that some hospitals have patients sign forms.
“I’ve been involved in cases representing Jehovah’s Witnesses patients and occasionally it’s been in everybody’s best interests to come to some sort of agreement between the parties,” he said. “But that’s just individual hospitals, doctors and patients.”Still, evidence suggests that the number of cases that end up before a judge has dropped significantly. The Canlii website, which catalogues many Canadian court decisions, includes nine separate child blood-transfusion rulings from 2000 to 2007, but just three in the five years since then.
Disputes arise when parents refuse transfusions on behalf of children below the age of consent. Hospitals in the past typically approached child-welfare authorities, who asked the courts for an order giving them temporary custody so they can ensure the transfusion is administered.
It also asks parents to sign a letter of understanding — drafted with the help of one of the church’s hospital liaison committees — that says the institution recognizes their religious objections and will try to avoid transfusions if at all possible. The letter is not a consent form, but adds that where the child is at imminent risk of serious harm or death, medical staff will press ahead with the transfusion. “What is beautiful about this [the letter of understanding] is that it’s a symbolic way of embodying respect and dignity and when we do this, we don’t need to call Children’s Aid.."
" McMaster Children’s Hospital has a similar letter of understanding...McGill Children’s Hospital in Montreal has had such a protocol for about a decade, and found that it brought about a “real, significant drop” in conflicts, said Lori Seller, a clinical ethicist at the facility. "
http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/blog.html?b=news.nationalpost.com/2012/12/20/without-fanfare-jehovahs-witnesses-quietly-soften-position-on-blood-transfusions -
45
Hold Me, Thrill Me
by Hold Me-Thrill Me ini'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 inhttp://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 inthis 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
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 infrom 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 infrom 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 infrom 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: