trottigy

Pastors who endorse political candidates shouldn’t lose tax-exempt status, IRS says in filing | CNN Politics https://share.google/NFILrBBDGsX0jE8UP

I think it's important to review those three principles again, because it seems like some are not remembering them. The update didn't say all toasting is now okay. They just said they don't see a reason to prohibit it and instead want us to use principles for when it would be okay. If that's true for something as simple as toasting, wouldn't you have to apply these principles for everything? The slave is not saying all celebrations are okay now. This is from the transcript: 3.1. [Principle 1of3] Would Jehovah Be Offended by This? At 2 Corinthians 6:17, Jehovah gives us clear direction: “‘Therefore, get out from among them, and separate yourselves,’ says Jehovah, ‘and quit touching the unclean thing’; ‘and I will take you in.’” This principle emphasizes that Christians must stay far away from any symbol or custom related to false religion or spiritism. 3.2. [Principle 2of3] How Would This Affect Others in the Congregation? Romans 14:19 and 21 remind us: “So, then, let us pursue the things making for peace and the things that build one another up.” “It is best not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything over which your brother stumbles.” Even if a symbol or custom isn’t wrong in itself, we need to consider how others in the congregation might view it. We would never want our actions to offend others needlessly. At the same time, as mature Christians we respect the right that others have to make their own decisions based on their Bible-trained conscience. 3.3. [Principle 3of3] How Is This Symbol or Custom Viewed by People in My Culture or Community? The Bible principle at 1 Corinthians 9:20, 21, and 23 is: “To the Jews I became as a Jew in order to gain Jews; to those under law I became as under law, though I myself am not under law, in order to gain those under law. To those without law I became as without law, although I am not without law toward God but under law toward Christ, in order to gain those without law.” “But I do all things for the sake of the good news, in order to share it with others.” The principle here is that we take into account how others feel about and view matters. Knowing how a certain symbol or custom is viewed in our own country or community is very important. Something that is very offensive in our land or culture may be viewed as completely innocent in another land or culture. --------------------------- Let's use these for birthdays as an example: 1. Do we think Jehovah would be offended if we participated in a celebration that elevated one person over another, used astrological symbols as part of the celebration (i.e. cake in the shape of a moon/ round with twinkling stars/, making a wish while blowing on those stars/ candles), etc.. 2. How would this affect our brothers and sisters - especially ones and the truth for a long time? How will this affect our children and then doing their best to remain no part of this world? If it's a slippery slope to stop a prohibition on toasting, how slippery of a slope would it be to stop a Prohibition on birthdays? Is that really the slippery slope we want to ride down? 3. It's not judging to remember that our brothers and sisters who've been in the truth for a very long time would clearly be offended by birthdays. You can count me in as one of those who thinks a celebration set based an astrological time and based on astrology while using astrological symbols and that the day of one's birth has some significance that needs celebrating! 2 Corinthians 6:17 says "quit touching the unclean thing". We must avoid unclean/spiritistic practices. Jehovah says we have to be holy as he is holy. We wouldn't even want to touch this unholy thing IMO. Edit: seeing these principles tells you this is not just the thing between you and Jehovah. This is a thing that affects the entire congregation and that has to be taken into consideration as well.

Think of it as you being loyal right up until the end (at least the end of the prohibition). That said, it still might not have been appropriate. Just because the GB is giving us principles instead of a rule doesn't mean we don't have to consider the principles. There still might be times we'd avoid participating in a toast. So, well done good and faithful servant.

That is basically what the US addendum says - no objection to using online storage services for nonconfidential documents. The only confidential item sited is judicial matters. Different countries have different legal requirements for personal information, but most must allow online storage - as Google and Amazon are surely doing that.

The previous verse that cause this verse to start out with "therefore" "Let no man deceive you with empty words, for because of such things the wrath of God is coming upon the sons of disobedience." Does that remind you of 1st Corinthians 15:33 - Do not be misled? Or let no mam deceive you.

I don't think that's how that works or is even close to what the supreme court decision was about.

Maybe Ukraine and Russia (the really big war) can be addressed soon?

That's the US advantage - how far away they are from nations who might attack. There is a lot of time to see missiles coming.

Pain caused by imperfection. Examples of that would be the pain I experience in my left knee due to arthritis. As arthritis will be a thing of the past along with aging - aches and pains from old age will be gone Also emotional and mental pain caused by imperfection. For example, dealing with one of your children having a child out of wedlock. Or them committing a crime and ending up in jail, or any number of things that our loved ones do that cause us pain. Or even dumb thing that we might do due to imperfection and bad choices and the suffering that comes from that (see David).

Halloween 🎃 ?

https://www.wola.org/2025/06/weekly-u-s-mexico-border-update-los-angeles-abrego-garcia-travel-ban-and-parole-termination/ On average only 664 deportations a day so far, but Mr. Miller wants 3,000 - almost 5 times as many. That is going to cause ICE to just arrest everyone they can to meet the quota.

But Paul also baptized Onesimus and he actively helped Paul in his ministry. And we don't know how long Onesimus helped Paul. We don't have to call the branch, we already know how they feel. This Watchtower spells it all out well - https://www.jw.org/finder?srcid=jwlshare&wtlocale=E&prefer=lang&docid=1977211&par=2

A quick look at the headlines shows just how insane the world we live in has become (all from BBC - https://www.bbc.com/😞 1. Austrian school gunman who killed nine was 21-year-old former pupil, officials say Six females and three males are among the dead, the interior minister says, after a local man opened fire in a secondary school in Graz. 2. UK sanctions far-right Israeli ministers for 'inciting violence' against Palestinians Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich will both face a travel ban, the UK says. 3. Middle East Greta Thunberg deported, Israel says, after Gaza aid boat intercepted 4. RFK Jr sacks entire US vaccine committee 5. Trump says LA would be 'burning to the ground' without troop deployment California Governor Gavin Newsom blasts the federal government's response to anti-immigration raid protests as "purposefully inflammatory". Even the book section: 6. How being alone can make you happier From spending time by yourself to making the most of being single, flying solo can be fulfilling – a philosophy championed by a new wave of books. NOTE: that picture is the cover of Frankenstein! The world has gone to the monsters!! May the Kingdom come! And take full control to end the madness.

What if the opposite is true? The Gaza situation and Ukraine war are ended. There is relative peace in the world and during that brief window of finally the dust has settled the nations say – “you know what would prevent the next major one? We could pool all of our armies together under the banner of the UN - INSTEAD of NATO and then things would be “fairer”. There would be “united” front instead of this coalition against that.” Just noting that a huge cataclysm doesn’t have to spark it. It could be the opposite. It could be a quite peaceful opportunity maybe even while the financial markets are also relatively stable – that could cause ones to want that to continue. NOTE: That would make giving power to the UN even more unexpected IMO.

Some have asked if it is ok to quote a paragraph of an article from JW.org. This is not a comment on the intent of the announcement, but is a comment on ALL copyright work (which would include work from JW.org). There is a legal principle known as "fair use" that answers this. This is a summary: Key factors considered in fair use decisions: Purpose and character of the use: Whether the use is for educational, research, or transformative purposes (adding new meaning to the original work). Nature of the copyrighted work: Whether the work is factual or fictional, and the copyright owner's potential market for the work. Amount and substantiality of the portion used: How much of the original work is used, and if it's the "heart" of the work. Effect on the potential market: Whether the use harms the copyright owner's ability to profit from their work. Based on this principle, a quote of a small portion of an article is ok. We ask that you always add a link to the source to verify accuracy.

It isn't in the terms of use. That was just a personal opinion by the poster. Edit: to me this would be a good opportunity to use a link rather than downloading material and attaching it to a message. This would especially be true if these are our brothers and sisters - they know JW.org.

Rather than bogging down this topic with that topic, please refer to the 1975 topic that was posted a while ago, here: There's plenty of information there. I just ask of everyone else, please don't paste about 1975 here.

We have not contacted the legal department, and we have not been contacted. We feel we are following the intent of the “terms of use” and even put the policy mentioned above in place to ensure that the site does as well. As noted, we also moderate the site to the best of our ability to ensure it is followed. There are always numerous opinions about what is right vs wrong, and this is why there are laws and regulations and courts to litigate the exact meaning and intent. We will follow that. That said, if you feel different and it would bother your conscience to even post a link, we are happy to remove whatever you posted that violates your conscience - within reason. You will just need to report each post that is yours and we can handle them one at a time as you report them. This is why the first post I made stated,

According to the ninth circuit in the US - there is a world of a difference: https://natlawreview.com/article/serving-perfect-10-no-protection-embedding We don't store the image - the software just displays whats at the other end. The copyright holder can move, edit or change it in any way they wish. It is not stored here.

And as I imagine, some will wonder if the "embedding" feature that many sites use is against copyright or not ... Is Embedding Photos on a Website Copyright Infringement? Ninth Circuit Says No. https://www.msk.com/newsroom-alerts-embedding-copyright It seems legal people that are way above my pay-grade have already asked this and gotten their answer. And here -> https://natlawreview.com/article/serving-perfect-10-no-protection-embedding Note: if you post a link and the software grabs the photo, it is not stored on our server - it is just diplaying what is at the other end of that link. This is why we don't want anyone to store/ upload a photo here, but instead use a link.

I can't answer for Discord or Telegram. I don't know why the link doesn't post correctly. All I can say is - they specifically said senidng a link is OK. As to this site "hiding" the video ... Here is an example: You COULD click the option that usually pops up at the bottom of a post after you post a link and select "Display as a link instead". Then the picture doesn't show at all OR if you hover a picture you can usually see the link at the bottom of the webpage or right at the cursor or click on the image and look at the page you are at: You can see that this link is at jw.org - or exactly jw-cdn.org . This is not jwtalk. I hope that helps. EDIT: note how that is different from the pictures that I made and uploaded. ALSO, as I was doing this I also noted that you could just hit backspace after the picture shows and only the link remains as text. There are lots of options. But - posting the link would be ok. If you don't like that the software automatically grabs the photo to show - you can adjust that.

I know many of you will have had the copyright announcement this week. It goes like this: Posting Material on Websites and Social Media: While we may share information from the organization’s websites by sending a link to individuals, we should not post on the Internet or on social media any artwork, electronic publications, trademarks, music, photos, videos, or articles from our websites. This would include theocratic programs on jw.org or JW Stream, such as monthly broadcasts, congregation meetings, circuit assemblies, and conventions. If you have posted such material on any website or social media without permission, please remove it. More information on this topic can be found in the April 2018 issue of The Watchtower, pages 30-31, and on jw.org under “Terms of Use.” You may wonder if you need to have a post removed or edited. We can remove something that you feel violates copyright policy, but you should know - the moderators ALREADY work hard to make sure posts DO NOT violate that policy. This explains why at times – we have removed or edited certain posts OR asked the poster to share directly, like music, rather than through this site - JWTalk. We do not want to violate copyright laws. In fact, we have a copyright policy on our site. It is here -> If you read that announcement, you’ll see that LINKS are OK. That is the very first sentence in that announcement: “While we may share information from the organization’s websites by sending a link to individuals”. The way many websites work now – IF you link to a picture, the picture or artwork shows BUT it directs to the source. Links are OK and do not violate copyrights. BUT if you download artwork or a song and post it THEN you have violated copyright. Why? Because it appears as if it is yours, but it is not – it belongs to the source/ creator of that work. So, to recap – LINKS to the source are OK, but do not upload as if the artwork or music is your own IF it is not.

390 pages of that here ..... As you said, "just stick to our current publications. We don't need to speculate." When I see something on JW.org that says , "this is it!" then I'll start to get excited.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cgrg7kelk45t Just so there is a link to a news article

Just add them in a post like you did the first post