Hinduism, backdrop to the caste system

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
could not bring yourself to say it,

13,000 credible accusations against Catholic clerics since 1950, only 60 years

Protestant Church Insurers Handle 260 Sex Abuse Cases a Year, last one hundred years = 26,000

InsuranceJournal.com

feeling like a complete idiot yet?

now i apologise to you dear reader, for the hijacking attempt. i shall ...[text shortened]...
why are the Dalit men, women and children, termed 'untouchable'. Please answer intelligently.

I dont know why they are termed "untouchable". Tell me

Originally posted by karoly aczel
But its not you thread rob🙄😴🙄😴🙄😲

i know its not Karoly Poly, i is just messin!

now my illustrious son of the dawn, can you answer the question, why the Dalit men women and children should be termed, 'untouchable'.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I dont know why they are termed "untouchable". Tell me

because they are considered impure from birth.

'How can this be',? i hear you ask.

this begs another question.

why and on what basis are they considered, 'impure'?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
see if your little mind can assimilate this,

During the last 100 years, only eleven elders have been sued for child abuse in thirteen lawsuits filed in the United States; In seven of these lawsuits against the elders, accusations against the Watchtower Society itself were dismissed by the courts."

source wikipedia

now i want you to compare ...[text shortened]... general populace and when you have coughed it up, get your slimy hijacking butt out my thread.

I see you edited out the gay slur you originally included in your post. With your belonging to an organization that has bigoted attitudes towards homosexuals such as the Jehovah's Witnesses, it's not surprising that you wrote it originally. Your bigotry closes your mind and leaves you in ignorance.

You also seem to have a closed mind on the issue of the Indian caste system. Perhaps that's why you are so insistent in remaining ignorant on this subject and were unable to comprehend the analogy I gave. I'd suggest that you read it again, but it seems doubtful that a mind as closed as yours would be able to understand it.

That said, it also seems doubtful that you'd be able to understand that the number of lawsuits against an organization is not necessarily an indicator of the the frequency of child molestation nor whether or not the organization's policies serve to protect child molesters.

Be that as it may, you might find this interesting. From http://www.religioustolerance.org/witness7.htm

In the case of sexual abuse, the only witnesses are usually the perpetrator and the victim. As a result, proof cannot often be obtained unless the perpetrator is willing to confess to the crime. According to a 1995 article in the Watchtower, a publication of the Watchtower Society (WTS), if proof cannot be obtained, elders are to "explain to the accuser that nothing more can be done in a judicial (church disciplinary) way...the congregation will continue to view the one accused as an innocent person." The article suggested that "The question of his guilt or innocence can be safely left in Jehovah's (God's) hands."

And from the earlier CBS article:

But the elders dismissed her plea for help and sent her away with a warning: "You need to keep quiet about this. You don't want to drag his name through the mud. You don't want to drag the name of Jehovah's organization through the mud."

Bill Bowen, an elder for more than 20 years explained, "Anything that an elder says is viewed as the direct word of God."

Bowen, a former Jehovah's Witness went on, "You could even be excommunicated for questioning what an elder tells you to do. There's no negotiation here. You must obey what the elders direct."

But what silences most victims is that Jehovah's Witnesses require either a confession or two eyewitnesses to any accusation -- making sexual abuse almost impossible to prove.

With the perpetrators being protected by a policy that makes establishing the burden of proof unlikely and the fear of being excommunicated, it seems likely that the number of victims that would sue the JWs would be low.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
indeed I put it to you all, why are the Dalit men, women and children, termed 'untouchable'. Please answer intelligently.

Once again you still have posted no evidence that it is definitely part of Hinduism proper. None, zero, nada.

No one is questioning that the Indian caste system existed or that vestiges of it remain. Only that you have not provided evidence that it is definitely part of Hinduism proper while much evidence has been provided that it is not.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I see you edited out the gay slur you originally included in your post. With your belonging to an organization that has bigoted attitudes towards homosexuals such as the Jehovah's Witnesses, it's not surprising that you wrote it originally. Your bigotry closes your mind and leaves you in ignorance.

You also seem to have a closed mind on the issue of th s likely that the number of victims that would sue the JWs would be low.

yawn, such a crashing bore.

you really should get your slurs from a more up to date and reputable source, you have already been made to look a horses a$$, i see you did not learn the first time, i must therefore refer you to this article.

A press release issued in 2003 by Jehovah's Witnesses' Office of Public Information stated: "The elders may be required by law to report even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations to the authorities. If so, we expect the elders to comply."

The Watchtower magazine has outlined the following policy: "Depending on the law of the land where he lives, the molester may well have to serve a prison term or face other sanctions from the State. The congregation will not protect him from this."

A 2002 memo to all congregations stated: "Our position is that secular authorities deal with crime while elders deal with sin." Even where there is no mandatory reporting requirement, victims or others having knowledge of an incident of sexual abuse must not be discouraged from reporting it.

source wikipedia

it makes your hijacking butt seem downright, so last century, please if you are going to try to slur and throw accusations around, make sure they are up to date. this is the third time your hijacking butt has tried to hijack my thread, all other attempts shall henceforth be ignored.

in the immortal words of buggs bunny, what an ultramaroon, what a nim-cow-poop, what a gull-a-bull, what an im-bess-il

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Once again you still have posted no evidence that it is definitely part of Hinduism proper. None, zero, nada.

No one is questioning that the Indian caste system existed or that vestiges of it remain. Only that you have not provided evidence that it is definitely part of Hinduism proper while much evidence has been provided that it is not.

actually the question has already been answered,

why are they termed , 'untouchables', the answer, because they are deemed impure from birth.

question, why and on what basis are they deemed to have been born, 'impure' ? lets see you slither out of this.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yawn, such a crashing bore.

you really should get your slurs from a more up to date and reputable source, you have already been made to look a horses a$$, i see you did not learn the first time, i must therefore refer you to this article.

A press release issued in 2003 by Jehovah's Witnesses' Office of Public Information stated: "The elders may ...[text shortened]... rtal words of buggs bunny, what an ultramaroon, what a nim-cow-poop, what a gull-a-bull!

Your seeming inability to comprehend what is written is astounding.

Like they say, "There's no point in arguing with a bigot".

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
BROKEN PEOPLE
Caste Violence Against India’s “Untouchables”

With little land of their own to cultivate, Dalit men, women, and children numbering in the tens of millions work as agricultural laborers for a few kilograms of rice or Rs. 15 to Rs. 35 (US$0.38 to $0.88) a day. Most live on the brink of destitution, barely able to feed their families a ...[text shortened]... r those with a weak constitution, prepare your mind!


http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/india/

Same old story.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
actually the question has already been answered,

why are they termed , 'untouchables', the answer, because they are deemed impure from birth.

question, why and on what basis are they deemed to have been born, 'impure' ? lets see you slither out of this.

And once again you still have posted no evidence that it is definitely part of Hinduism proper. None, zero, nada.

You also have not posted any reasonable refutation of the evidence that it is not a part of Hinduism proper.

Quite frankly, I don't think you can do either and so you instead continue your dancing around it.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Your seeming inability to comprehend what is written is astounding.

Like they say, "There's no point in arguing with a bigot".

oh yes, which of these words did i author?

(1 Corinthians 6:9-10) . . .What! Do you not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men,  nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom.

also

(1 Timothy 1:10-11) . . .fornicators, men who lie with males, kidnappers, liars, false swearers, and whatever other thing is in opposition to the healthful teaching according to the glorious good news of the happy God, with which I was entrusted.

also

(Romans 1:24-27) . . .Therefore God, in keeping with the desires of their hearts, gave them up to uncleanness, that their bodies might be dishonored among them, even those who exchanged the truth of God for the lie and venerated and rendered sacred service to the creation rather than the One who created, who is blessed forever. Amen. That is why God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites, for both their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature;  and likewise even the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error.

comforting, isn't it?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
And once again you still have posted no evidence that it is definitely part of Hinduism proper. None, zero, nada.

You also have not posted any reasonable refutation of the evidence that it is not a part of Hinduism proper.

Quite frankly, I don't think you can do either and so you instead continue your dancing around it.

answer the question and you shall receive the answer, perhaps you are afraid you shall incriminate yourself, as you do, when asked if you are a sinner.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
And once again you still have posted no evidence that it is definitely part of Hinduism proper. None, zero, nada.

You also have not posted any reasonable refutation of the evidence that it is not a part of Hinduism proper.

Quite frankly, I don't think you can do either and so you instead continue your dancing around it.

There you are ToO. I thought I lost you there for a while. 😉

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
oh yes, which of these words did i author?

(1 Corinthians 6:9-10) . . .What! Do you not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, [b]nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men,  nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revile ...[text shortened]... in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error.[/b]

comforting, isn't it?[/b]

You just continue to go further and further off the deep end....

Which is the usual ploy of yours when you have no reasonable argument.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
answer the question and you shall receive the answer, perhaps you are afraid you shall incriminate yourself, as you do, when asked if you are a sinner.

And once again you still have posted no evidence that it is definitely part of Hinduism proper. None, zero, nada.

You also have not posted any reasonable refutation of the evidence that it is not a part of Hinduism proper.

Quite frankly, I don't think you can do either and so you instead continue your dancing around it.