- Joined
- 14 Mar 04
- Moves
- 186449
Originally posted by Great King RatRight. Just when I decided to resubscribe I find this out. Man he's good....I mean REALLY good and by that of course I mean bad.
Nothing about this sounds out of the ordinary, exaggerated or untrue to me. Thanks.
Everyone on this website is FMF by the way. Even Russ.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 326101
16 Feb 16
Originally posted by HandyAndyThere's a school of thought among them that chess is totally wrong. I think their reasoning was that it's based on conflict, though I believe that was a while ago.
Correction:
59. They are forbidden to play chess without cheating
That's another thing about their teachings. They change, regularly.
Thus, the diktats of Judge Rutherford are no longer generally observed.
Another fact I think not yet mentioned...sorry if I've missed it...is that they teach and believe that the apostles were the first Governing Body. It is the modern day Governing Body that is seen as receiving updates on instructions from Jehovah, and obedience to them has to be total.
Originally posted by StartreaderThis is why sexual abuse of children can sometimes be covered up just like in other authoritarian religious power structures like the Catholic Church. Total obedience. Do what you are told. And so on.
It is the modern day Governing Body that is seen as receiving updates on instructions from Jehovah, and obedience to them has to be total.
Bernard Francis Law (born November 4, 1931) is an American cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church. He is the Archbishop emeritus of Boston, former archpriest of the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore, and Cardinal Priest of Santa Susanna, the American Catholic church in Rome.
Law was the Archbishop of Boston until his resignation on December 13, 2002,[1] in response to the Roman Catholic Church sex abuse scandal after church documents showed he had covered up sexual abuse committed by dozens of Catholic priests within his archdiocese.[2] One priest alone was revealed to have raped or molested 130 children for decades while Law and other local officials moved him between churches rather than going to the authorities.[2] Law orchestrated secret settlements for abuse claims made against at least seventy of his priests, in which families were paid to stay silent about the molestation and rape of their children.[3]
Just two years after resigning from his position in Boston, which the Church called "an important step in the healing process",[4] Pope John Paul II appointed Law as Archpriest of the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore in Rome in 2004. He resigned from this position upon reaching the age of 80 in November 2011.
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby (Page 274)December 17, 2015:
December 17, 2015:
"63.1" and "64.2" and "65.0" and "67.4" and 67.3 (4,101 / 61)
"63.1" and "64.2" and "65.0" and "67.4" and "67.3" and 70.4 (4,222 / 62)
My friends and almost friends,
all of the hundreds of Thumbs Up and Thumbs Down registered on these two hundred and eighty two pages pay a compliment to each of you
which suggests that you continue infusing this public internet forum with the same civility and/or incivility as you do with your family at home.
Regards, GB.
Originally posted by SeitseThe scandal and Cardinal Law's role in the coverup were exposed by the Boston Globe in 2001. The story is the basis of the film Spotlight, produced last year.
Bernard Francis Law (born November 4, 1931) is an American cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church. He is the Archbishop emeritus of Boston, former archpriest of the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore, and Cardinal Priest of Santa Susanna, the American Catholic church in Rome.
Law was the Archbishop of Boston until his resignation on December 13, 2002,[1] i ...[text shortened]... n Rome in 2004. He resigned from this position upon reaching the age of 80 in November 2011.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyYour smarmy post adds yet another incivility, Bobby. It must be contagious.
December 17, 2015:
"63.1" and "64.2" and "65.0" and "67.4" and "67.3" and 70.4 (4,222 / 62)
My friends and almost friends,
all of the hundreds of Thumbs Up and Thumbs Down registered on these two hundred and eighty two pages pay a compliment to each of you
which suggests that you continue infusing this public internet forum with the same civility and/or incivility as you do with your family at home.
Regards, GB.
17 Feb 16
Originally posted by HandyAndyThe Australian TV series in 2014 called "The Devil's Playground" about the cover up of child sex abuse in the Catholic Church's Sydney diocese was well done and suitable disturbing ~ it was billed as a psychological thriller after all.
The scandal and Cardinal Law's role in the coverup were exposed by the Boston Globe in 2001. The story is the basis of the film Spotlight, produced last year.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 326101
Originally posted by FMFWhy? Should he WANT a person to be suicidal? What would satisfy you?
Seeking to bring people's families into it: check.
Mentioning people's dead relatives: not in this post.
Failure to browbeat his supporters for their abusive behaviour: check.
Saying something like "I hope you are not suicidal" to a perceived opponent: not in this post.
😉
I sincerely hope you're not suicidal, and I hope the same for everyone else. Can there be any circumstances in which one's hope should be otherwise?
Originally posted by StartreaderThe only people you and Grampy Bobby have said "I hope you're not suicidal" to have been people you are in dispute with and/or insulting on this message board. You claimed it was a perfectly normal and common thing to say to people and yet neither of you have ever said it to anyone else, ever, as far as I recall.. One can only conclude that it's some kind of petty mealy mouthed swipe at a couple of people you disapprove of.
Why? Should he WANT a person to be suicidal? What would satisfy you?
I sincerely hope you're not suicidal, and I hope the same for everyone else. Can there be any circumstances in which one's hope should be otherwise?
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 326101
Originally posted by FMFNo. You've twisted my meaning again. And you know it.
The only people you and Grampy Bobby have said "I hope you're not suicidal" to have been people you are in dispute with and/or insulting on this message board. You claimed it was a perfectly normal and common thing to say to people and yet neither of you have ever said it to anyone else, ever, as far as I recall.. One can only conclude that it's some kind of petty mealy mouthed swipe at a couple of people you disapprove of.
At least, I hope for your sake it's deliberate. How very sad it would be if your reflex response to a person you're "in dispute with", to use your own phrase, were automatically to attribute false intention.
Originally posted by StartreaderThis is mere deflection. I have made a clear point about your behaviour and you are dodging it. How many other people have you said "I hope you're not suicidal" to on this forum apart from me? You have now said it to me repeatedly. Three times I think. Can you think of any poster you don't disapprove of or disagree with to whom you have made that same comment? You said it's a very normal and kind thing to say. So who else have you said it to?
No. You've twisted my meaning again. And you know it.
At least, I hope for your sake it's deliberate. How very sad it would be if your reflex response to a person you're "in dispute with", to use your own phrase, were automatically to attribute false intention.