Does anyone have a mature comment to make?...
Do you think this could go somewhere? Maybe affect Watchtower and other religious groups that don't do any valuable community work?
defender of truth
JoinedPosts by defender of truth
-
6
Loss of Tax exemption for Australian religious organizations
by defender of truth ini have no clue when it comes to australian politics, but these articles got my interest.could this be the start of something?...it would take too much space to quote them all, but please read each one in order.
it might make more sense, what i am getting at.it seems to me that the debate we no doubt all want to see happen: 'why do religions, those who don't do any community work except advancing their own religion, get tax exemption?
', could be coming soon.or maybe i am wrong?www.crikey.com.au/2016/04/05/essential-voters-want-to-dump-religious-tax-exemption/http://m.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/tax-exemption-for-religious-groups-should-end-poll/2994952/http://m.theage.com.au/comment/easter-is-a-good-time-to-revisit-taxexempt-status-of-religious-organisations-20160323-gnpzjj.html^^ note who wrote the article, it says at the end.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/australian_sex_party^^ yes, the above is actually a real political party.
-
-
defender of truth
-
6
Loss of Tax exemption for Australian religious organizations
by defender of truth ini have no clue when it comes to australian politics, but these articles got my interest.could this be the start of something?...it would take too much space to quote them all, but please read each one in order.
it might make more sense, what i am getting at.it seems to me that the debate we no doubt all want to see happen: 'why do religions, those who don't do any community work except advancing their own religion, get tax exemption?
', could be coming soon.or maybe i am wrong?www.crikey.com.au/2016/04/05/essential-voters-want-to-dump-religious-tax-exemption/http://m.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/tax-exemption-for-religious-groups-should-end-poll/2994952/http://m.theage.com.au/comment/easter-is-a-good-time-to-revisit-taxexempt-status-of-religious-organisations-20160323-gnpzjj.html^^ note who wrote the article, it says at the end.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/australian_sex_party^^ yes, the above is actually a real political party.
-
-
defender of truth
I have no clue when it comes to Australian politics, but these articles got my interest.
Could this be the start of something?...
It would take too much space to quote them all, but please read each one in order. It might make more sense, what I am getting at.
It seems to me that the debate we no doubt all want to see happen: 'Why do religions, those who don't do any community work except advancing their own religion, get tax exemption?', could be coming soon.
Or maybe I am wrong?
www.crikey.com.au/2016/04/05/essential-voters-want-to-dump-religious-tax-exemption/
http://m.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/tax-exemption-for-religious-groups-should-end-poll/2994952/
http://m.theage.com.au/comment/easter-is-a-good-time-to-revisit-taxexempt-status-of-religious-organisations-20160323-gnpzjj.html
^^ Note who wrote the article, it says at the end.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Sex_Party
^^ Yes, the above is actually a real political party. Read the page, trust me. Brief description:
Now for the good stuff...The Australian Sex Party is an Australian political party founded in 2009 in response to concerns over the increasing influence of religion in Australian politics.
The Sex Party is registered at state level in Victoria, where it has parliamentary representation, and in the Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory.
http://m.theage.com.au/victoria/time-to-end-tax-exemptions-for-religious-groups-sex-party-20160313-gnhp5n.htmlReligious institutions should pay more state-based taxes, the Sex Party says, as it pushes to overturn long-standing exemptions.
The party wants new laws to be introduced to force religious groups to take on an increased share of the tax burden.
...But the Sex Party hopes that publicly debating the proposal will generate publicity and attract public support. "It's time to have the debate," Ms Patten said.
The party is currently drawing up a bill that would result in greater taxes for religious groups.
Ms Patten said she may seek to change the definition of charities to remove promoting religion as a tax-exempt purpose.
[the Watchtower of Australia states on the Charities page that their purpose is 'advancing religion'. Same thing... See here:
www.acnc.gov.au/RN52B75Q?ID=91956EB4-F967-4486-8D20-89B6E9A28BCC&noleft=1 ]
She hopes to introduce a bill into Parliament later this year.
www.outinperth.com/sex-party-petition-repeal-acls-charitable-status/
http://m.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/who-are-the-australian-christian-lobby-20160218-gmy67y.html
------------
You can sign their petition here if you wish to do so:
www.change.org/p/to-the-house-of-representatives-and-the-minister-for-social-services-review-the-charitable-status-of-the-australian-christian-lobby
Here are some great parts of the petition letter >>The signatories of this petition call upon Christian Porter (Minister for Social Services) and Kelly O’Dwyer (Assistant Treasurer) to reform the laws governing the charitable status of basic religious organisations and to review the charitable status of the Australian Christian Lobby in particular.
The Australian Christian Lobby claims its primary purpose is advancing religion. Advancing religion means promoting “a belief in a supernatural being, thing or principle and acceptance of canons of conduct which give effect to that belief.”
Currently, basic religious organisations like the ACL are entitled to tax-exempt status because advancing religion is presumed to be of public benefit...
The Charities Act should be reformed to exclude the advancement of religion from automatic tax exemption.
Basic religious organisations should be required to demonstrate the public benefit of their activities. (The law currently deems "prayerful intervention by closed or contemplative religious orders" to be of public benefit!)
Currently, basic religious organisations are not only presumed to be of public benefit and given automatic tax exempt status, they also don’t have to submit financial statements to the Charities Commission and they don’t have to comply with the Charities Commission governance standards.
These exemptions should be reformed. All charities should be treated the same, with the same financial reporting requirements and the same governance standards.
-
5
2015 Wt Library CD Rom 2015
by moggy lover indoes anyone know if the 2015 edition of the wt library is available on cd rom?
does anyone have it for download?.
cheers.
-
-
-
18
Evolution is a Fact #35 - Nature Red in Tooth and Claw
by cofty ingenes only get copied to future generations if the bodies they help to build succeed in surviving and reproducing.
these sort of genes thrive in the gene pool and genes that build unsuccessful bodies don't.
this blindingly obvious fact is at the very core of understanding evolution by natural selection.. being born, finding food and shelter, escaping predators, fighting opponents, attracting a mate and raising the next generation - the challenges faced by living things are daunting.
-
-
defender of truth
Here are some examples of ancient predators, from another thread:
ziddina 4 years ago
...extremely ancient forms of life - that predate humans by millions of years - show clear evidence of predation - predators and prey existed VERY early in the fossil records, from the Cambrian era [540 million years ago] to our modern world of lions, tigers and bears...
http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/prehistoric-world/cambrian/
http://bjo.bmj.com/content/88/2/164.full
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2011/12/07/anomalocaris-sharp-eyes-predator/
www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/222352/theists-why-does-god-allow-suffering?page=3
The following example was also given by Cofty on the same thread. See the page for full details..
Taung child lived 2.5 million years ago in the Pliocene era.
Professor Lee Berger of Wits University's palaeoanthropology unit discovered that a bird of prey similar to the African crown hawk eagle had swooped down and seized the child with its large talons and beak, killing it immediately. He said the evidence was so convincing he could "prosecute the eagle killer in court".
www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/222352/theists-why-does-god-allow-suffering?page=8
-
26
My mom died at 96 (without a visit from her granddaughter)
by BONEZZ indon't get here much anymore.
my mom, if you remember, really wanted to see her granddaughter before she died.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcpuj96a8lg.
-
-
defender of truth
I am so sorry for your loss. I don't know what else to say..
-
11
Wifely Subjection: Mental Health Issues in Jehovah’s Witness Women
by defender of truth inwhat do you think of this article?.
is there anything that relates to your own experience?.
i just came across it while searching for references on the consequences of sexism in the jw organization.. www.icsahome.com/articles/wifely-subjection--mental-health-issues-in-jw-women-csj-14-1.
-
-
defender of truth
What do you think of this article?
Is there anything that relates to your own experience?
I just came across it while searching for references on the consequences of sexism in the JW organization.
www.icsahome.com/articles/wifely-subjection--mental-health-issues-in-jw-women-csj-14-1
-
40
I went to see my Dr about the blood card issue
by purrpurr ini booked a double appointment so that she wouldn't be rushed.
i explained that i'd been brought up in the jw's and woken up to what a load of shite it was.
i explained that they have changed the blood card and that the elders in the cong are being told to effectively force people into signing it.
-
-
defender of truth
@pale.emperor
Sexist? Again, many religions and a male only clergy etc. and have their reasons.
It isn't just the clergy aspect, that is only part of it, the entire JW society is patriarchal.
It also depends on how you define sexist.
Let's assume for now you are a man.
Please imagine: You are told that you cannot carry a microphone, lead a group in field service, give a public talk, or conduct a Bible study with a JW woman present unless you wear a head covering. If there are no hats available nearby, a towel or napkin placed on your head will suffice.
You cannot make any decisions on how a congregation is ran, how serious incidents of sin are dealt with, how child abuse is dealt with... You must follow the orders of women, you can have no position of responsibility whatsoever.
It doesn't matter how competent, intelligent or reliable you are compared to the sisters in the congregation, you are to do as you are directed by the women at all times.. during meetings and field service, as well as at home with your wife.
But don't worry, we will counsel your wife to not beat or mistreat you, and suggest that it would be a good idea to ask your opinion before making the final decision.
All because you are a man.
Do you think that would be sexist?...
By the way, 'other religions do it' is not much of a defence. See this link:
www.patheos.com/blogs/scienceonreligion/2012/03/180/
Let me guess what you might reply... The Bible says the man is the head of the woman, right?
Who wrote the Bible? Men. Men who lived in a patriarchal society.
Claiming sexism is okay if it is a command in the Bible, or that it's not discrimination if it is something sanctioned within the Bible, is pretty slippery ground to walk on.. Especially when slavery, and rape victims being sold to their rapists, was also an acceptable way to treat people during that time period.
If you are not allowed to do something, purely because of your gender and nothing else, that is discrimination.
www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/quotes/women-submission.php
Homophobic? It certainly calls homosexuality a sin, but then so do many other religions.
Jehovah's Witnesses teach that homosexuality is an abhorrent act and a perversion.
www.religioustolerance.org/hom_jeh.htm
www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/quotes/homosexuality.php
Is that hateful? What do you think?...
I think that whether they promote hate fuelled against homosexual people, or express hatred of homosexual people, is irrelevant. It is avoiding the issue.
Young homosexual people grow up in this religion being taught that their natural feelings are unnatural and obscene, and that if they act on them, God will judge them and destroy them at Armageddon. They are told repeatedly that God hates the practicing of homosexuality.
This teaching may extend to many other religions, but that is because the Bible itself promotes discrimination against people who are homosexual.
Arguing over the exact meaning of homophobia and whether JW's hate homosexuals is pointless. (Many people use the word 'homophobic' interchangeably with 'anti-homosexuality')
Their teachings express God's hatred of it. Their children are taught it is a vile sin:
"All unrepentant homosexuals must die, to cleanse the earth. And we can't wait until that happens... But it's okay, because it will be God doing the killing, not us. So, that isn't technically homophobic (!)."
There's a homosexual baptized member in my hall and he's treated the same as everyone else.
That is only because he is not acting on his natural feelings.
Try considering things from the other side of the fence.
-
11
Jehovah’s Witnesses’ lock down deal for $700M Brooklyn plot
by defender of truth inthe jehovah’s witnesses appear to have achieved a handshake with their bffs: jared kushner, aby rosen and lvwrk.. the pricing is roughly $700 million for the witnesses’ 733,000-square-foot world headquarters at 25-30 columbia heights and a 1.1-million-square-foot as-of-right development site at 85 jay st.. the same group purchased 1.2 million square feet in dumbo heights for $375 million in 2013 from the witnesses and are now leasing to such companies as wework and etsy.. tech outfits have been circling the brooklyn waterfront properties — and the large “watchtower” on the sign could someday be swapped for a name like “facebook.”.
bob knakal of cushman & wakefield has been running the sale for the witnesses, who are moving to warwick, ny.. multiple contracts were handed out for the properties and, so far, all are unsigned.. there has been interest globally, and local bidders have included l&l holding, east end capital, equity one and vornado realty trust.
when reached, the parties declined comment.. .
-
-
-
40
I went to see my Dr about the blood card issue
by purrpurr ini booked a double appointment so that she wouldn't be rushed.
i explained that i'd been brought up in the jw's and woken up to what a load of shite it was.
i explained that they have changed the blood card and that the elders in the cong are being told to effectively force people into signing it.
-
-
defender of truth
Well done, Purrpurr. I'm amazed by how you handled that. :)
"forcing people to sign this thing against their own wishes"
OldHippie: That is not exactly true, is it? I have not signed a card in my whole life, and nobody has objected or commented.
Sir89: "Coerced" is probably the better term.
I agree with Sir89. Coercion, not forced.
Bear in mind though, OldHippie, there is going to be a different situation for each Witness.
Some Secretaries will chase up any in there group who haven't given them a copy of this new document. Especially if you are unlucky enough to have the Secretary as your group's elder!!
Imagine, they pass you the form, and weeks later you haven't given them a signed copy to go in the congregation file... Don't tell me they wouldn't notice. :(
Finally, how much freedom do people living at home have to make this decision?
In my case, as a born-in, as soon as I was old enough to sign it, my parents and grandparents basically gave me the form, said I needed two witnesses at the next meeting to watch me sign it, then watched me do it and checked over the form to see I had filled it in correctly. (you may now have more of an idea of what my family is like.)
Congregations and families, in many cases, are very close-knit.
Social pressure is extraordinary in this religion.
Experiences will vary, but young adults living at home will have little say in this. Unless they want to risk major fights or getting reported to elders, many people living at home will be pressured to sign it, whereas they may have never got around to it before or not bothered to update it every few years.
Remember, there is no justification in a Jw's mind for not having one, to not have one is like toying with disobeying God and losing out on everlasting life.
p.s. Just remembered, my family even bought me a highly visible see through keyring with my card in it, and told me I should wear it all times on my house keys.
Depending on how caring/controlling one's congregation or family is, some will be coerced...
It is this arrangement where the elders hand them out to everyone in their group, and the announced reminder of giving copies to those who witness you signing it, that bothers me.
Also, each secretary will be fully aware of who has the new card, congregations are not that big. (at least here in the UK.)
I hope that some can slip through the cracks without getting unwanted attention.
Or do what PurrPurr did. ;)
-
20
Lurking JWs: Do people really need to know and use the word "Jehovah" or other language equivalents, to truly know God?
by Island Man inwatchtower puts forth the argument that you can't really know god unless you know and use the appellation "jehovah" or its equivalent in other languages.
is this really true?
i say it's not true and i will demonstrate to you why.. god's name is not a mere label that we have to use to communicate with him so that he knows we're talking to him.
-
-
defender of truth
For example, the gospels show that Jesus never directly addressed God in prayer with the name "Jehovah". He always addressed him as "Father".
Great point, and one that completely debunks the whole JW concept that: 'God gave us his name in the Bible, therefore we must use it when we speak about him, and when we speak to him'.
It's simple, really.
How many people talk to their human father using his name?
At some point, your dad will have told you his name.
Let's say your Dad told you his name is Bill.
Do you then feel obligated to use his name every time you speak to him? Or every time you speak to people about him?
(My father Bill is great. Bill is wonderful. I really love Bill.)
Would that even be respectful?
Would it indicate love and respect if you were to call him anything other than Papa, Dad, Father etc.? (variations of terms meaning 'Father' may depend on your country, you get the point.)
Even if your Dad accepts you calling him Bill all the time, would he then refuse to listen to any of his other children unless they also called him Bill when they spoke to him?
No loving father would do that.
Why Should We Use God's Name? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
1. Why has God given himself a name?
Undoubtedly, you like to be called by your personal name rather than by a title, such as “man,” “mister,” “madam,” or “woman.” A name helps to distinguish you as an individual. God is called by such titles as “Sovereign Lord,” “God Almighty,” and “Grand Creator.” (Genesis 15:2; 17:1; Ecclesiastes 12:1) But he has also given himself a name to help us to establish a personal relationship with him. In English, God’s personal name is Jehovah.—Read Isaiah 42:8.
Let me highlight the childish logic used here:
"Undoubtedly, you like to be called by your personal name rather than by a title, such as “man,” “mister,” “madam,” or “woman.” A name helps to distinguish you as an individual."
Undoubtedly, you would like to be called by your personal name when your children are speaking to you...
No?
Of course not.
"Son, I would like you to call me Bill from now on. No more of this Father or Papa nonsense. It is not acceptable to talk to me without using my personal name" ;)
A 'title' (or non-personal name, depending on how you view the word) such as Dad, or Pa, would do just fine.
Wouldn't you agree?
www.someecards.com/life/fathers-day/dad-daddy-pa-pop-or-father-a-guide-to-titles-for-new-fathers/
The logic used in that Watchtower only works if you are just talking to a friend, not to a parent.
You would usually call a buddy from school or work by their first name. Obviously.
But would you talk to your parents using their personal name?
Even if you viewed your father as a close friend, and he had told you his name, you still would likely not call him by his personal name.
Even if you chose to do so, and he accepted that, there would certainly be no obligation to do so.
It is not as though you have more than one Father, so you need to use his name to avoid any confusion.
Yet Jehovah's Witnesses claim that anyone who doesn't use the personal name of their Heavenly Father, like they do, is not a true worshipper!
Sorry for the long post. :)
