Incomes relative to Religions in USA.

Originally posted by FMF
Does it strike you as odd how robbie has claimed numerous times - in his bouts of "we're awesome" chest beating - to have rescued people from substance abuse, and yet for him here to exhibit a sneering attitude to a drug user who was a victim of sexual abuse at the hands of a Jehovah's Witness "brother"?

Would your drug and alcohol counselor brother recognize ...[text shortened]... kindred spirit in terms of compassion and awareness when it comes to relating to addicts?

Compassion is the one attribute we can categorically say Robbie hasn't demonstrated in this thread.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Compassion is the one attribute we can categorically say Robbie hasn't demonstrated in this thread.

The sneering started with his post at the bottom of page 16.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
please forgive me, but is it not termed drug abuse, rather than a self medicative
technique? Indeed, how one can possibly reason that either alcohol or drug abuse is a
self medicative technique is quite beyond me. Why haven't doctors prescribed crack
cocaine as a valid form of treatment if it to be considered a self medicative technique,
is ...[text shortened]... n in fact, it is evidently clear that its ultimately destructive and is a
form of self abuse.

What they are doing is ultimately destructive and a form a self abuse, but they are ultimately self medicating the high levels of anxiety, depression and suicidal thoughts they are suffering.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
read the court transcript you metaphorically intellectually lazy bum!

Can you publish the link you are using to read the court manuscripts please.

Thanks

Originally posted by divegeester
Can you publish the link you are using to read the court manuscripts please.

Thanks

google candace conti court documents or are you too lazy to do that as well.

Originally posted by FMF
The sneering started with his post at the bottom of page 16.

LOL, your vile and slimy insinuations are both irrelevant and meaningless and are stinking up the thread.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
What they are doing is ultimately destructive and a form a self abuse, but they are ultimately self medicating the high levels of anxiety, depression and suicidal thoughts they are suffering.

they are self mediating by abusing themselves, with harmful and in this instance dangerous and illegal substances. Is it not the case that such 'medication', is likely to increase levels of anxiety, depression, suicide, guilt, etc etc rather than help to alleviate it? and if such is the case, how can it be termed, medication.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
LOL, your vile and slimy insinuations are both irrelevant and meaningless and are stinking up the thread.

I suppose next you'll be telling us that the court's guilty verdict against the Jehovah's Witnesses is a "vile and slimy insinuation" too.

Originally posted by Proper Knob earlier on the thread
Evil prevails when good men do nothing Rob, if you think that the people who were involved with this were powerless to do anything then you are either clueless or just brazenly lying.

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

Here's an interesting extract from the July 1, 1989 letter about the sexual molestation of children [and other things that could be damaging to the WBTS], "TO ALL BODIES OF ELDERS IN THE UNITED STATES":

Elders share the obligation to shepherd the flock. However, they must be careful not to divulge information about personal matters to unauthorized persons. There is "a time to keep quiet," when "your words should prove to be few." (Ecclesiastes 3:7; 5:2) Proverbs 10:19 warns: "In the abundance of words there does not fail to be transgression, but the one keeping his lips in check is acting discreetly." Problems are created when elders unwisely reveal matters that should be kept confidential. Elders must give special heed to the counsel: "Do not reveal the confidential talk of another." (Proverbs 25:9) Often the peace, unity, and spiritual well-being of the congregation are at stake. Improper use of the tongue by an elder can result in serious legal problems for the individual, the congregation, and even the Society.

While we as Christians are ready to forgive others who may wrong us, those in the world are not so inclined. Worldly persons are quick to resort to lawsuits if they feel their "rights" have been violated. Some who oppose the Kingdom preaching work readily take advantage of any legal provisions to interfere with it or impede its progress. Thus, elders must especially guard the use of the tongue. Jesus faced opposers who tried to "catch him in speech, so as to turn him over to the government." (Luke 20:20) He instructed us to be "cautious as serpents and yet innocent as doves" in such situations. (Matthew 10:16) Where such a threat exists, our position as elders should be in line with David's words: "I will set a muzzle as a guard to my own mouth, as long as anyone wicked is in front of me."-Psalm 39:1.

In recent years, this matter has come to be a cause for increasing concern. The spirit of the world has sensitized people regarding their legal "rights" and the legal means by which they can exact punishment if such "rights" are violated. Hence, a growing number of vindictive or disgruntled ones, as well as opposers, have initiated lawsuits to inflict financial penalties on the individual, the congregation, or the Society. Many of these lawsuits are the result of the misuse of the tongue. As elders, remember that ill-advised statements or actions on your part can sometimes be interpreted legally as violating others' "rights."

Whole document here: http://jwleaks.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/wtbts-1989-boe-letter-re-child-abuse.pdf

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
google candace conti court documents or are you too lazy to do that as well.

As well as what 😕

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

Here's an interesting extract from the July 1, 1989 letter about the sexual molestation of children [and other things that could be damaging to the WBTS], "TO ALL BODIES OF ELDERS IN THE UNITED STATES":

[quote]Elders share the obligatio .files.wordpress.com/2012/06/wtbts-1989-boe-letter-re-child-abuse.pdf[/b]

The problem of course is that the leadership has a cult grip on the congregation who will accept anything the leadership dictates. It is typical cult behaviour; to circle the wagons to protect the greater good which in this case is the organisation itself, which is loved and protected above all; even a molested child; even their own loved ones if it calls for it.

Originally posted by FMF
I suppose next you'll be telling us that the court's guilty verdict against the Jehovah's Witnesses is a "vile and slimy insinuation" too.

No, its as far as i can discern, a miscarriage of justice, there is not the slightest evidence of negligence on the part of congregation. As the brother pointed out in his testimony, confidentiality is paramount to a minister/client relationship. For example if i went to a catholic priest for absolution and confessed to serious misconduct, would i expect the priest to announce the details of my misconduct to the congregation the very next week, indeed its ludicrous to expect that he would do so. Please tell me why its different for ministers of Jehovahs witnesses and try to refrain from slimy insinuations in the process.

Originally posted by divegeester
The problem of course is that the leadership has a cult grip on the congregation who will accept anything the leadership dictates. It is typical cult behaviour; to circle the wagons to protect the greater good which in this case is the organisation itself, which is loved and protected above all; even a molested child; even their own loved ones if it calls for it.

yawn, more self certified opinions of a zoob who has as yet failed to read even a shred of evidence, prejudiced much?

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

Here's an interesting extract from the July 1, 1989 letter about the sexual molestation of children [and other things that could be damaging to the WBTS], "TO ALL BODIES OF ELDERS IN THE UNITED STATES":

[quote]Elders share the obligatio .files.wordpress.com/2012/06/wtbts-1989-boe-letter-re-child-abuse.pdf[/b]

and were exactly in the letter does it demonstrate that the congregation were negligent and complicit in the abuse? where in fact in the entire testimony is there evidence that the congregation was negligent and thus complicit in abuse, you have not said.

Originally posted by divegeester
As well as what 😕

as well as read the court transcripts, need i spell everything out for you?