Incomes relative to Religions in USA.

Originally posted by FMF
The jury found the JWs guilty. That is not a personal opinion of mine. It is a fact.

so what, i am not disputing that they have been found guilty, i am contesting that there
is no evidence that they were complicit in the abuse, do try to differentiate, it may save
you from making these type of irrelevancies and wasting both your time and mine.
Once again, i am not contesting that they were found guilty , i am not contesting that
abuse took place, i am contesting that the wtbts as complicit in that abuse.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have not disputed that abuse has taken place, not once in this thread, I am merely
not in a position to sate the extent of or the nature of the abuse, but for the sake of
argument i will comply and without having read the details acquiesce that abuse has
taken place, one wonders what you will whine about now FMF.

If you did "not dispute that abuse has taken place" then why did you refer to McKendricks' child molestation as "alleged abuse"? You have been caught out and now you are dropping the word "alleged", is that it?

Originally posted by FMF
If you did "not dispute that abuse has taken place" then why did you refer to McKendricks' child molestation as "alleged abuse"? You have been caught out and now you are dropping the word "alleged", is that it?

because i have not read the details, yawn.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
so what, i am not disputing that they have been found guilty, i am contesting that there
is no evidence that they were complicit in the abuse, do try to differentiate, it may save
you from making these type of irrelevancies and wasting both your time and mine.
Once again, i am not contesting that they were found guilty , i am not contesting that
abuse took place, i am contesting that the wtbts as complicit in that abuse.

Well we'll see what happens if the JWs appeal the case. Until then, and that decision, the things you are "contesting" are just your personal partisan opinions.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
because i have not read the details, yawn.

So you ARE or you are NOT dropping the word "alleged"?

Originally posted by FMF
Well we'll see what happens if the JWs appeal the case. Until then, and that decision, the things you are "contesting" are just your personal partisan opinions.

We shall see. The case already went to a review in which the sum was reduced from
28 million to about 10 million, the perpetrator faced a law suit of 3 million. Why we
should be fined for the individual action of a person not acting within the confines of our
standards and against everything for which we stand for I find hard to believe, but then
again, Californians also found O.J Simpson, not guilty.

Originally posted by FMF
So you ARE or you are NOT dropping the word "alleged"?

if it makes you happy FMF, i will drop it, otherwise, it stays until I have read the court
papers in their entirety, for it is surely folly to reply to a matter before one has heard
the details.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
if it makes you happy FMF, i will drop it, otherwise, it stays until I have read the court
papers in their entirety, for it is surely folly to reply to a matter before one has heard
the details.

What do you mean "...otherwise, it stays until I have read the court papers in their entirety"?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
sorry tell me again what it is the should have done, that they did not do.

Booting him out the congregation would have been a start, or is a conviction for child molestation not worthy of that?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
is there any legal precedence which states that a secular or religious body must make an announcement about the sexual misdeeds of any of its members, either then or now, if you please.

I don't know but wouldn't you say that there was a moral responsibility to do so, particularly for an organisation that claims a moral authority?

--- Penguin.

Originally posted by Penguin
I don't know but wouldn't you say that there was a moral responsibility to do so, particularly for an organisation that claims a moral authority?

--- Penguin.

Especially for an organisation which claims to be Gods own.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Booting him out the congregation would have been a start, or is a conviction for child molestation not worthy of that?

the meetings are open to the public, anyone can attend and we cannot stop them
except to call the police if they make a disturbance, its a public meeting, disciplinary
action was taken and an announcement made to the effect that he was no longer a
trustworthy character, although as I have stated and you seem unable to assimilate,
confidentiality laws prevented the nature of his crime from being disclosed. The abuse
took place prior to the brothers being aware of it and as soon as they were aware, he
was monitored and efforts made to make sure there was no contact with the plaintiff,
visits being made to the parents of the plaintiffs, step parents to make sure that this
was the case, the brothers in fact did everything they could under the law and remain
blameless.

Originally posted by Penguin
I don't know but wouldn't you say that there was a moral responsibility to do so, particularly for an organisation that claims a moral authority?

--- Penguin.

what is it about confidentiality laws which prevent the disclosure of the details being made public, that you fail to understand?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Especially for an organisation which claims to be Gods own.

still waiting for your evidence that the WTBTS was complicit, so far, nada.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
still waiting for your evidence that the WTBTS was complicit, so far, nada.

The Watchtower has just lost a multi-million dollar law suit because it's procedures with regard to child abuse have been found to be unlawful. I'm sorry if it's a bitter pill to swallow, but that is a fact. Now if you want to know why that is why don't you read through the trial transcripts yourself, i'm not going to spoon-feed it to you like you are some small baby.

Suck it up 'Corporate Carrobie®' your organisation has been busted. 🙂