Originally posted by robbie carrobieSurely the 'sons of Satan' are those who commit child sexual abuse and those who are involved in the coverup?
I agree the machinations of the Devil and his agents are well known, clearly divesgeester the son of Satan would be better placed to look at his own conduct. Perhaps FMF can help him?
Originally posted by FMFRobbie's behaviour is far from exemplary, but he didn't actually draw any such parallel.
You would seriously draw a parallel of any kind between divegeester's behaviour on a message board and pedophiles in your organization having sexual intercourse with children?
I think you also need to realise that the issue here is not 'do the JWs condone child sex abuse' but 'do the JWs report child sex abuse to the local authorities'. Several of your comments seem to suggest you have confused the two.
It is of course obvious that divegester is not actually concerned about child sex abuse either but sees this as a way to criticise JW's. And of course that doesn't mean he is wrong in his criticism.
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadThankyou and once gain FMF's transparent insinuations are exposed as lies and divegeesters attempt to utilize the serious subject of child abuse to give vent to his hatred for Jehovahs Witnsesses falls flat on its face. This of course is itself a reaction to the roasting that he recently took in the general forum for being caught terming the ladies there 'bitches', and for posting puke worthy love texts about FMF his hero, which naturally I mocked. They are simply so transparent and predictable not to mention tediously monotonous these days that they are being exposed at every turn. I almost feel sorry for them.
Robbie's behaviour is far from exemplary, but he didn't actually draw any such parallel.
I think you also need to realise that the issue here is not 'do the JWs condone child sex abuse' but 'do the JWs report child sex abuse to the local authorities'. Several of your comments seem to suggest you have confused the two.
It is of course obvious that dive ...[text shortened]... s this as a way to criticise JW's. And of course that doesn't mean he is wrong in his criticism.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThis from the man who used to routinely chastise people for 'making it personal'. What a weapon. 😞
Gee this whole trollin thing is not working out for you dude, people now see through you and your flunkie. You have little to offer anyone here in a spiritual context. Adios Amigo happy beating up on old guys and getting flame grilled by RHP's ladies.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSorry Robbie but the everybody's at it excuse is not acceptable.
Actually child abuse is a societal problem but of course divesggester uses it to vent his hatred of Jehovahs Witnesses. So predictable, so see through and so very very boring. I expect its simply reaction because in the general forum, the ladies the have exposed him as being a rather unsavory character terming them bitches etc. Clearly he is a very poor advertisement for not only for Christianity but morality of any kind.
1 edit
Originally posted by Captain Strangeits not an excuse, you stated that its a problem of what you termed 'cults', the facts of the matter are that its a societal problem and no amount of prejudicial assertions on your part can change that FACT. Shoddy very shoddy Captain, too much Dark Jamaican Rum no doubt.
Sorry Robbie but the everybody's at it excuse is not acceptable.
Originally posted by twhiteheadAbsolutely not. I have never once asked robbie if he condoned sexual abuse of children. I do not for one second think that he does and I have never once suggested that he does. The question has always been, does he condone the covering up of sexual abuse of children by his organisation, which of course he does. I have not confused the two, and if you can cite a comment where you think I have, then please do.
I think you also need to realise that the issue here is not 'do the JWs condone child sex abuse' but 'do the JWs report child sex abuse to the local authorities'. Several of your comments seem to suggest you have confused the two.
Originally posted by twhiteheadOf course he did. He said: "Divesgeester would be better focusing on his own morality and behavior." In other words, he ruled out responding to criticism about the covering up of the morality and behavior of child sex abusers (in his organisation) from someone on account of the "morality and behavior" he claims that someone displays on a message board on the internet.
Robbie's behaviour is far from exemplary, but he didn't actually draw any such parallel.
