Incomes relative to Religions in USA.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No it isnt, that is where you are wrong, if you read the court transcript, there are
separate actions, one against the perpetrator Kendrick for abuse which I am not
contesting and one against the congregation of Jehovahs witnesses on the basis of
negligence which I am, that is what it is about, look, do yourself and me a favour and
read the court transcripts, her own parents contradict her claims.

You said in this thread that it was about the JW policies did you not?

Originally posted by divegeester
You said in this thread that it was about the JW policies did you not?

dude i will say this for the last time, please don't be so intellectually lazy and read the
court transcripts, they are rather fascinating, to be honest.

So far not a shred of evidence that the congregation was guilty of negligence.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
silent lambs, oh dear, they are really impartial, i am reading the actual court transcript
at the moment,

Candice Conti's lawyers,

And Candace turned, during her high school
years, to self-medicating for treating her trauma and
treating her own feelings that she couldn't share with
anyone. She self-medicated with drugs. And she
self-me ...[text shortened]... ing crack cocaine is self medicating, anyone else on crack because they are self
medicating?

Attack the victims character, classy Rob, real classy.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
silent lambs, oh dear, they are really impartial, i am reading the actual court transcript
at the moment,

Candice Conti's lawyers,

And Candace turned, during her high school
years, to self-medicating for treating her trauma and
treating her own feelings that she couldn't share with
anyone. She self-medicated with drugs. And she
self-me ...[text shortened]... ing crack cocaine is self medicating, anyone else on crack because they are self
medicating?

Whether silentlambs.com is impartial or not is neither here nor there, what i have copied from that article is the crux of the case and why the Watchtower lost. Their policy with regard to how they deal with claims of child abuse has been found unlawful in a court of law.

On a side note, why are you a subscriber if you're not playing chess here again?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
so Jews and Hindus work harder, than Catholics and black Americans???

It is individual effort race does not mean one is less likely or more likely to
work harder. Religion may play apart since some believe you don't work you
don't eat, but even that doesn't "mean" one will work harder. It is up to each
person to put out effort and make something of themselves, if that isn't being
done it does not matter what race or religion they belong to.
Kelly

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
If you read the court transcript you will see that at the outset, the lawyers for the WTBTS, state that Mkendrick is and I quote, 'the villain', not the congregation of Johavhs witnesses...

Yes, this is what the lawyers for the WTBTS did "state". They stated that the Jehovah's Witnesses congregation was not at fault. This is indeed what the lawyers for the WTBTS said. Did the court accept what the defendants' lawyers said? It seems not.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
...[the victim's] own parents contradict her claims.

Were the molested child's parents also Jehovah's Witnesses?

Don't Jehovah's Witnesses often choose the organisation over their own children when there is conflict? Didn't galveston75 admit here to shunning his own child for years?

Why wasn't the victim and her family [in the case we are discussing] shunning the child molester in an organized way - as is the much discussed approach of the Jehovah's Witnesses - along with the rest of the congregation?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Attack the victims character, classy Rob, real classy.

another epic fail, I am not attacking the victims character I am merely reproducing
what the victims, own lawyers stated in the court transcript, does anyone else use
crack cocaine to self medicate? the term seems rather strange to be honest, sorry
officer I am not really getting high, I am self medicating, does that sound reasonable
to you. If she was anything other than a victim, at the time, she would be termed a
'crack head'. Self medicating with meta amphetamines, that is some spin.

Originally posted by FMF
Were the molested child's parents also Jehovah's Witnesses?

Don't Jehovah's Witnesses often choose the organisation over their own children when there is conflict? Didn't galveston75 admit here to shunning his own child for years?

Why wasn't the victim and her family [in the case we are discussing] shunning the child molester in an organized way - as is t ...[text shortened]... discussed approach of the Jehovah's Witnesses - along with the rest of the congregation?

read the court transcript and don't be so thoroughly intellectually lazy.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Whether silentlambs.com is impartial or not is neither here nor there, what i have copied from that article is the crux of the case and why the Watchtower lost. Their policy with regard to how they deal with claims of child abuse has been found unlawful in a court of law.

On a side note, why are you a subscriber if you're not playing chess here again?

I am reading the court transcript, i don't care what the impartial and objective silent
lambs, cough cough, has to say, and there is no evidence that the congregation was
negligent and thus complicit in her abuse by Kenndricks, not a shred.

In fact, when Kendricks initially confessed to molesting his step daughter in 93/94,
the congregation elders did not believe that it was, 'inadvertent' and immediately
placed him on restrictions. He was not allowed to be anywhere near to children, not
in the house to house ministry, not alone, not in a car and was monitored at every
meeting and every time he was in the congregation. The Police were informed by
Mrs Kendricks, who initially stated that she wanted the matter to be kept confidential
and within the family, but later, herself, went to police. The congregation stated that
she could go to the police if she liked, but did not advise her either way, as its not
their remit to sway anyone with personal decisions. After which, the police
conducted an investigation, child protection agencies were involved and Andrea the
step daughter was given support and counsel, as was Mrs Kendricks, on how to deal
with the situation. Again, where is the evidence that the congregation were
negligent and thus complicit in the abuse? There is not a shred.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Whether silentlambs.com is impartial or not is neither here nor there, what i have copied from that article is the crux of the case and why the Watchtower lost. Their policy with regard to how they deal with claims of child abuse has been found unlawful in a court of law.

On a side note, why are you a subscriber if you're not playing chess here again?

I have my reasons, Shirty, mghrn55, radioplastic69 and some other turkeys were
chiding me in the clan forums that as a non subscriber I had no right to be there, even
though it was a public forum and the site advertises that you can play for free, now
they need to find a different reason to whine.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
read the court transcript and don't be so thoroughly intellectually lazy.

You are dodging three point blank questions.

Nevermind. The fact that you have dodged them rather makes the intended point.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
another epic fail, I am not attacking the victims character I am merely reproducing
what the victims, own lawyers stated in the court transcript, does anyone else use
crack cocaine to self medicate? the term seems rather strange to be honest, sorry
officer I am not really getting high, I am self medicating, does that sound reasonable
to you. ...[text shortened]... would be termed a
'crack head'. Self medicating with meta amphetamines, that is some spin.

You seek to blame the victim for being messed up after being sexually molested as a child by a Jehovah's Witness brother?

Originally posted by FMF
You are dodging three point blank questions.

Nevermind. The fact that you have dodged them rather makes the intended point.

the fact that you have not read the court transcript and yet deem yourself somehow to
be knowledgeable about it is a testimony to your arrogance and laziness and is more a
reflection of you than my attempts to get you to do so and evaluate the case for
yourself, either you are uninterested in what actually transpired or you have some
deep seated motives for not wanting to do so, I cannot say, suffice to say until you do,
your position is one both of ignorance and prejudice, but hey, it never stopped you
making vile insinuations before even as you are doing even now, why stop the habits of
a lifetime.

Originally posted by FMF
You seek to blame the victim for being messed up after being sexually molested as a child by a Jehovah's Witness brother?

no, i am asking why someone uses meta amphetamines as a course of self medication,
have you ever heard crack cocaine being used as a self meditative technique before,
perhaps you can provide evidence, oh but wait, you don't do evidence, you only make
vile and slimy insinuations and try to palm off your opinions as some type of evidence
when they are in fact meaningless and irrelevant. When you do, let me know, ill be in
my office. Remember crack cocaine as a therapeutic drug useful in self medication.