Watchtower Right?

by patio34 37 Replies latest social current

  • imallgrowedup
    imallgrowedup

    Phantom -

    You have a point in that I have oversimplified. In fact, in my first post on this thread, I made several references to the fact that I believed that my definitions did not fit all conservatives or all liberals. In fact I even qualified my statements by saying:

    IMHO, these are the basic differences between conservativism and liberalism, and that there are varying shades in between.

    Additionally, because I hate being sucked into political debates, I intentionally kept it as short and sweet as possible. (It may have looked like a long post to you, but for me, it was just about as long as a sigh!). Anyway, one of the things that I am constantly awed at is how "both sides" see themselves in the other sides' view of themself! I really don't know how to eliminate this - I wish I did. But again, I say, we all have our world views, and this is why there is and always will be - debate and differing opinions on different subjects. And I also believe that as long as people disagree, there are those who are going to take their disagreements as far as war. It's an unfortunate consequence of being able to think for one's self.

    Phantom, I've really enjoyed debating all this with you. I know we have two threads going at the same time on this, and I think that's kinda cool! But I don't know if we will ever see eye-to-eye - not in the sense that one of us will try to come and drop a nuke on the other - but that we do come from different corners, and as such, will have a very difficult time changing our opinions. They are what they are. I accept mine and I accept yours. I think you feel the same. But I don't know if we can really make any further progress here. What do you think?

    growedup

  • Phantom Stranger
    Phantom Stranger

    I concur with your assessment... and...:)

    At the same time, just know that I feel a need to enter discussions in situations like this, not as arguments intended to change the other's mind, but as oppoturnities for those involved to clearly set forth their positions for evaluation - because there are many on this board, more every day, who are political-philosphy neophytes and are in the process of searching out the positions and outlooks that resonate for them. To me, that's the value of a db - not in winning an argument, because that's pretty fricking rare - rarer than the "winners" think.

    Since I believe that JW-based thinking is more reactive than proactive, more reactionary than progressive, I want to represent the liberal, progressive, secular-humanist, moral-relativist school as being different from the pot-smoking whiners we are made out to be on talk radio. When I was in the JWs, I tended to have pretty conservative opinions on the issues I did form opinions about... and the process of changing and growing, I changed those. Don't worry, I don't think all conservatives are like Rush and Sean Hannity.

    In a sense, I guess that "staking out a claim" on my part is somewhat analogous to your handing out flyers - hoping to catch someone at an opportune moment... although I think that addressing those visiting an XJW discussion board is a voluntary act that breaks the analogy :)

    Regards,

    PS (the "dogmatic bully" - ROFL! :)

  • imallgrowedup
    imallgrowedup
    To me, that's the value of a db - not in winning an argument, because that's pretty fricking rare - rarer than the "winners" think.

    LOL! That is SO true!

    Being on this board has really enabled me to see a trend in both political and religious thinking among ex-jws, and from what I can tell, there are so very many that are in your camp. It would be grossly unfair of me to say that ALL ex-jw's follow in your footsteps, because I can think of two right off the top of my head on this board that don't - and one in particular has joked with me several times about how liberal he thinks Rush Limbaugh is!! But my point is that I admit to oversimplifying from the first post on this thread because I just didn't want to spend forever on this topic, and I certainly didn't want to "get into it" with anyone. It is not my intention to do that. So, for what it is worth, I do recognize that "liberals" come in all shapes and forms as far as how liberal or conservative they may be on any particular issue. I believe the same is true with conservatives. For example, you won't see me out there with the real fundamentalists who are protesting some perceived societal "abomination" (for want of a less controversial term). Contrary to stereotypes of conservatives, I may disagree with a trend in society - even from a non-biblical standpoint - but it doesn't mean that I have the need to go out and do everything in my power to ensure that whatever the perceived "abomination" is does not become a part of our society. As I've said, I believe in free will. It doesn't mean I have to like what the choices are, or that I have to agree with them - whether biblically or in principle - because I do believe that people have the right to choose what is "right" for them - obviously, including myself! So as you've pointed out, conservatives also come in all shapes and sizes (although I do believe there are certain core beliefs that bind each side's comrades together - but I ain't going there again!)

    I kind of have to laugh because in so many ways we are really saying the same thing, just with the ever-so-slightest twist. Admitedly, I don't always "articulate" exactly what I am trying to say, but I think in spite of it, you catch my drift. Just so you know, it's nice to meet someone here who will debate things such as this without getting out of control. It makes me feel like I can be a little more open and give a little more detail without shedding my own blood from hitting my head against the wall all day long! So, thanks for meeting me on a level playing field.

    growedup

  • jst2laws
    jst2laws

    Hello Pat,

    I'm sorry I didn't look at this thread earlier. It is my kind of philosophical/religious/political discussion.

    I belief there is the influence of a major movement involved here that separates average Christianity and religion in general from the heart of this issue. It used to be known as Fundamentalism but most of them prefer the designation of 'evangelical'. They are fairly unique to the US and are generally paranoid about secularism. Most of these people, as conservatives who feel things were better in the "good old days", want more of God and religion in government and feel secularism is ruining American Society. Not all republicans are fundamentalist, but most fundamentalist are republicans.

    With this influence on the republican party and the background religious principle that "If God is on our side, any harm caused is God's will", you get a government that can commit atrocities without guilt. It is not just Christianity that is violent, but it is ALL EXTREME RELIGION, such as Christian fundamentalist and Moslem fundamentalist.

    Oh, and to speak again to the original point, the WTS is "warlike" because that's what happens when you go for moral absolutism, black-and-white, right-or-wrong thinking.

    Thanks for that phantom,

    Steve

  • patio34
    patio34

    Isn't it so nice when we "play" together so well?

    Hi Jst2Laws,

    Not all republicans are fundamentalist, but most fundamentalist are republicans.

    With this influence on the republican party and the background religious principle that "If God is on our side, any harm caused is God's will", you get a government that can commit atrocities without guilt. It is not just Christianity that is violent, but it is ALL EXTREME RELIGION, such as Christian fundamentalist and Moslem fundamentalist.

    Bravo for the summation I highlighted! And the underlined sentence is right on target too. Thanks for that.

    Imallgrowedup and PhantomStranger, I'm really enjoying your discussions too.

    Pat

  • Cicatrix
    Cicatrix

    LOL Well, Phantom Dude, I guess that explains why I'm so mixed up. My father is a Baptist Republican and my step-mom is a Presbyterian Democrat:) My biological mother still thinks like the JWs-that all politics is from "the debil":)

  • Cicatrix
    Cicatrix

    Here are some of the facts: These quotes are are on "tape" and in the archives of all media!!! "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998 "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 "There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" - Rep Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is is calculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 These were sent to me by my VERY Republican father, lol.

  • Elsewhere
    Elsewhere
    What struck me is odd is the Watchtower teaching that Christians, in general, are inclined to be warlike (a polite term). Why would that be?

    This is because they think they know what gawd wants and that gawd is on their side, which is also why muslims are so willing fight against the evil western christians... gawd, err, allah wants them to.

    There are few things more dangerious than a human who believes that a supernatural all-powerful deity is on their side!

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit