i have two honest questions for everyone here.
i understand that most here want retribution from the courts against watchtower for child abuse allegations.
but let us take away the instances where someone was accused of child abuse and then later put back into a position of authority, such as an elder or an ms. let us just take the cases where a regular publisher or even an appointed person, with no previous accusation of child abuse has come up against that person.
I know that I can't be apart of these X-JW communities because it doesn't seem like anyone apart of these communities can move on.....RO
"Why can`t ex-JW`s leave the WBT$ and just move on?"..
The thread is complete..
Watchtower isn`t the problem,ex-JW`s are..
...........................
The sermon is over
Would anyone like to say a prayer?
i have two honest questions for everyone here.
i understand that most here want retribution from the courts against watchtower for child abuse allegations.
but let us take away the instances where someone was accused of child abuse and then later put back into a position of authority, such as an elder or an ms. let us just take the cases where a regular publisher or even an appointed person, with no previous accusation of child abuse has come up against that person.
Outlaw. Do u really think that I believe that the lawsuits will just dry up because some new laws are passed.....RO
No..But.....You`d like them to.....
(Have you figured out what a "strawman argument" is yet?)
My point is that we as a society of people should work with legislatures to pass laws to protect children.
No..
Your point is to take the focus off,the WatchTower Protecting JW Pedophiles..
Like your doing right here..
Also u think that the lawyers who are fighting for these children are all saints. Some lawyers just want to make the buck and don't care what happens to their clients in the long run.
Watchtower protecting Pedophiles,is the lawyers fault?..LOL!!..
You forgot the Catholics!..
No WBT$/JW Pedophile Argument is complete,until you Blame the Catholics..
How about if the lawyer,is a GawdDamn Catholic?!..
......................................................
None of you WBT$/JW Apologists come up with anything original..
You`re all WatchTower Parrots..
...............................................
Pretty WatchTower....Pretty WatchTower..
Don`t Blame The WatchTower!..
BRRAAAAAAAK!!..
i have two honest questions for everyone here.
i understand that most here want retribution from the courts against watchtower for child abuse allegations.
but let us take away the instances where someone was accused of child abuse and then later put back into a position of authority, such as an elder or an ms. let us just take the cases where a regular publisher or even an appointed person, with no previous accusation of child abuse has come up against that person.
Just because people here feel that it is a waste of time to get new laws made because u feel that no matter what watchtower won't follow them. I think that if legislators make laws with teeth it would help.....RO
Your:
..Still looking for ways not to blame the WBT for their self-inflicted pedophile problems.
..Discouraging people from taking the WBT$ to court..
..Discouraging people from suing the WBT$..
You want laws,you just don`t want them applied to the WBT$..
You think the WBT$ should get a "Pass" for Crimes against Children..
It`s not going to happen..
Welcome to the Real World..
i have two honest questions for everyone here.
i understand that most here want retribution from the courts against watchtower for child abuse allegations.
but let us take away the instances where someone was accused of child abuse and then later put back into a position of authority, such as an elder or an ms. let us just take the cases where a regular publisher or even an appointed person, with no previous accusation of child abuse has come up against that person.
some were studying with witnesses, others were family members of witnesses and some the victim was a child of witnesses so the ARC counted those because the elders did not report those cases to law enforcement....RO
As they should..
Those JW Elders were given instruction by the WBT$,to Protect Pedophiles..
You want more laws the WBT$ won`t follow..And..
You`d like to take people's attention off of Suing the WBT$..
More laws the WBT$ the won`t follow,with no financial punishment..????
...........................
Are you thinking maybe after the WBT$ Is convicted of Hiding Pedophiles,with the new laws..
Reward the entire group of WBT$ GB "Rock Star" Popes,with an all expense paid trip to a Children`s Theme Park?..
i have two honest questions for everyone here.
i understand that most here want retribution from the courts against watchtower for child abuse allegations.
but let us take away the instances where someone was accused of child abuse and then later put back into a position of authority, such as an elder or an ms. let us just take the cases where a regular publisher or even an appointed person, with no previous accusation of child abuse has come up against that person.
Outlaw:
If you feel that there is a difference between a strawman and strawman arguments that is your opinion. But my question and ability to defend my argument still stands. Explain exactly what you think is a strawman argument. Explain with facts.....RO
WTF??!!.....LOL!!..
I cut and pasted the definition for you,from Wikipedia..
Go back and read it.....
Another cut and paste won`t change anything..
Bring a dictionary,so you can understand what you`re reading..
i have two honest questions for everyone here.
i understand that most here want retribution from the courts against watchtower for child abuse allegations.
but let us take away the instances where someone was accused of child abuse and then later put back into a position of authority, such as an elder or an ms. let us just take the cases where a regular publisher or even an appointed person, with no previous accusation of child abuse has come up against that person.
You're calling me a strawman so like I asked. Please point out a factual thing that I have said that is wrong. Not a spelling or a grammar issue, a factual statement that I made that is wrong. And please present your argument with facts and not your opinion or supposition.....RO
No..I have not called you a strawman..
I said you present Strawman Arguments..
Obviously you still don`t know what that means..
Please point out a factual thing that I have said that is wrong.
Read my comment above..
i have two honest questions for everyone here.
i understand that most here want retribution from the courts against watchtower for child abuse allegations.
but let us take away the instances where someone was accused of child abuse and then later put back into a position of authority, such as an elder or an ms. let us just take the cases where a regular publisher or even an appointed person, with no previous accusation of child abuse has come up against that person.
Outlaw. I am sorry that I misspelled toe to toe.....RO
Don`t be sorry..Get spell check..Grammarly is good too..
Plus..
Learn to use an online dictionary so you understand what words mean..
i have two honest questions for everyone here.
i understand that most here want retribution from the courts against watchtower for child abuse allegations.
but let us take away the instances where someone was accused of child abuse and then later put back into a position of authority, such as an elder or an ms. let us just take the cases where a regular publisher or even an appointed person, with no previous accusation of child abuse has come up against that person.
I am not an apologist.....RO
Yes you are..
I am very educated.
No your not..
just because you go straight to emotion for your argument
That never happened......Another Stawman Argument..
You want to go tow to tow on intelligence on this matter, I will take you on.
You`ve already lost on the intelligence part....It`s "Toe to Toe"..
Tow means to pull something..
Just out of curiosity,what are you planning to pull?
I will go up against you any time you want.
You`re beating yourself up pretty good,without my help.....LOL!!..
i have two honest questions for everyone here.
i understand that most here want retribution from the courts against watchtower for child abuse allegations.
but let us take away the instances where someone was accused of child abuse and then later put back into a position of authority, such as an elder or an ms. let us just take the cases where a regular publisher or even an appointed person, with no previous accusation of child abuse has come up against that person.
Just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean that I am a straw man.
Just because I don't cow-tow to some of you who feel that Watchtower and/or all religion should be sacked that I am a straw man.....RO
You`re not a Strawman
You`re an ill-educated Watchtower/JW Apologist,presenting Strawman Arguments..
And..
You`re not smart enough to understand what a Strawman Argument is,even though I cut and pasted the definition for you..
Your "WatchTower Education" is showing..
i have two honest questions for everyone here.
i understand that most here want retribution from the courts against watchtower for child abuse allegations.
but let us take away the instances where someone was accused of child abuse and then later put back into a position of authority, such as an elder or an ms. let us just take the cases where a regular publisher or even an appointed person, with no previous accusation of child abuse has come up against that person.
Let's say that someone in Austria,
So let's say I am the parent
Now lets say that the elders tell everyone.....RO
A strawman argument.
From Wikipedia
A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".
The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e. "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's actual proposition.[2][3]
