i'm still determined not to vote - just to write something unpleasant about pollies on the ballot paper.
if i lived in victoria, i just may, as an act of sheer bastardry, vote for julian assange (of wikileaks fame), but i don't live in vic, so i cant.. my objection to voting is that the political choice offers two self-perpetuating oligarchies (who are something like the governing body).
they make up a slate of candidates and election advertising consists of attempting to persuade swinging voters to vote for their slate of candidates.. anyway, i noted that k.rudd has made a video in chinese, aimed apparently at mainland china.
fulltimestudent:
My understanding is that Murdoch has dual US-Australian citizenship, and therefore has the right to vote in Australian and American elections.
Nope. He renounced Australian citizenship when he was naturalised as a US citizen in 1985.
the Murdoch press has been extremely vitriolic in this election, and we should be questioning this "right and practise" particularly when much of what is said is not legitimate discussion.
I absolutely agree.
about me, i am being raised in a jw family.
all of my family expect for one aunt, who had left but not disfellowedshiped thankly, are in jw.
my father is an elder and so is my grandfather.
maybe someone can explain to me how me a sinner was appointed by holy spirit to be an MS.
There's a fairly simple explanation. 'holy spirit' has absolutely nothing to do with it. Even JW literature more or less admits that.
For example, The Watchtower, 15 January 2001, page 14:
Those meeting the Scriptural requirements at the time of their appointment as overseers or ministerial servants may thus be said to have been appointed by holy spirit
Basically, their theory is that 'holy spirit wrote the Bible', so 'following JW interpretations of the Bible' equals 'appointment by holy spirit'. The decisions for appointments are made by JW elders, based on their subjective opinions of whether a person seems to meet the 'scriptural requirements'. And that's all. No magic 'appointment' by 'holy spirit'. Just... the person seems to meet the criteria.
pastor brian houston, senior pastor of the hillsong church franchise ( i think they are pentecostal originally) hooked up all 100 (or so) churches in his franchise on sunday august 18, 2013 and preached a sermon to his true believers:.
my friend sent me some information about this sermon.
this image was associated with details.
Sounds like a pretty boring sermon. The entire extract (and probably the whole sermon) could be summed up as "don't be a prick". But people probably wouldn't pay as much to hear that. And Hillsong is all about the cash.
a jw wrote the following in an attempt to discredit the evidence provided by vat 4956. comments on the author's logic would be appreciated.
does vat 4956 prove 587?.
many point to vat 4956 as proof that jerusalem was desolated in 587bce.
I haven't read all the responses, but after reading the apologist's comments about VAT 4956, it's clear that it was written prior to the Watch Tower Society's 'new light' claiming that the tablet's indication of Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year is actually accurate. Instead, the apologist relies on Watch Tower claims from the 1970s that it's an 'unreliable copy' (the apologist cites his source as "the Watchtower", but it was actually the Awake! of 8 May 1972). See also here.
i'm still determined not to vote - just to write something unpleasant about pollies on the ballot paper.
if i lived in victoria, i just may, as an act of sheer bastardry, vote for julian assange (of wikileaks fame), but i don't live in vic, so i cant.. my objection to voting is that the political choice offers two self-perpetuating oligarchies (who are something like the governing body).
they make up a slate of candidates and election advertising consists of attempting to persuade swinging voters to vote for their slate of candidates.. anyway, i noted that k.rudd has made a video in chinese, aimed apparently at mainland china.
fulltimestudent:
3. Funny thing, that Rupert Murdock has only one vote (well, maybe two votes, one in Australia and one in America) but through his newspapers has an opportunity to influence the not-so-bright, and therefore in practise he could have a million votes. Is that democracy?
Murdoch doesn't have a vote in Australian elections. He is not an Australian citizen.
A lot of people don't seem to realise that newspapers present opinions of the publishers, even in articles that are supposed to be purely news (as opposed to editorial). I think the right to vote (and ideally, also the right to reproduce) should be IQ tested.
i'm still determined not to vote - just to write something unpleasant about pollies on the ballot paper.
if i lived in victoria, i just may, as an act of sheer bastardry, vote for julian assange (of wikileaks fame), but i don't live in vic, so i cant.. my objection to voting is that the political choice offers two self-perpetuating oligarchies (who are something like the governing body).
they make up a slate of candidates and election advertising consists of attempting to persuade swinging voters to vote for their slate of candidates.. anyway, i noted that k.rudd has made a video in chinese, aimed apparently at mainland china.
Other readers, note that mP resorts to attacks, claiming I 'lied' about numbers.
Actually, I didn't contradict any numbers he provided, but I clearly indicated that there are other factors quite apart from Liberal policies that affect asylum seeker numbers.
The 'lib policy' didn't 'stop the boats'. World conditions (for example in Sri Lanka in 2009) generate different waves of asylum seekers, compared to other periods where there are fewer asylum seekers. The 'libs' quite happily - and equally dishonestly - claim that 'their policy' 'stopped the boats', whereas there were actually other international factors, for which the policies of the 'libs' were entirely incidental. It is quite naive to believe that Howard's policies, in isolation from everything else, 'stopped the boats'.
i'm still determined not to vote - just to write something unpleasant about pollies on the ballot paper.
if i lived in victoria, i just may, as an act of sheer bastardry, vote for julian assange (of wikileaks fame), but i don't live in vic, so i cant.. my objection to voting is that the political choice offers two self-perpetuating oligarchies (who are something like the governing body).
they make up a slate of candidates and election advertising consists of attempting to persuade swinging voters to vote for their slate of candidates.. anyway, i noted that k.rudd has made a video in chinese, aimed apparently at mainland china.
I've had enough of your BS accusations and distortions. Feel free to go on swallowing News Limited tripe and misrepresenting other sources. I've got better things to do than put up with you calling me liar.
an interesting read the emporia gazette: www.emporiagazzette.com.
the israelities needed moral codes, civil codes and holiness codes.. when the jews were getting ready to go to the promise land, god.
had to prepare them to become a nation.
mP:
Gen says that he did marry his half sister.
Yes, Genesis does say that.
There is no evidence Abraham existed. This is why I said purportedly.
The story of Abraham, along with the rest of Genesis, was almost certainly written some time around the Neo-Babylonian period.
the more i read about ritual shunning and disfellowshiping in the society, the more i wonder how the governing body and elders have pulled the proverbial wool over the eyes of the congregation.
first, the society doesnt consider itself a church (unlike the ancient christians, who did consider themselves to be part of a church).
yet, like other sectarians, they have their hands out for contributions and exercise immense power over their members.
Phizzy:
Elders were very wary of conducting funerals for DF'd ones because of this, not knowing exactly what to say.
JW elders aren't allowed to give a funeral talk for a 'disfellowshipped person' unless the person was considered to be 'giving evidence of repentance', and even then, the service can't be at a 'Kingdom Hall'.
The Watchtower, 15 September 1981, page 30:
Should he die while disfellowshiped, arrangements for his funeral may be a problem. His Christian relatives may like to have had a talk at the Kingdom Hall, if that is the local custom. But that would not be fitting for a person expelled from the congregation. If he had been giving evidence of repentance and wanting God’s forgiveness, such as by ceasing to practice sin and by attending Christian meetings, some brother’s conscience might allow him to give a Bible talk at the funeral home or grave site. Such Biblical comments about the condition of the dead provide a witness to unbelievers or comfort to the relatives. However, if the disfellowshiped person had still been advocating false teachings or ungodly conduct, even such a talk would not be appropriate.
Our Kingdom Ministry, March 1997, page 7:
What if the deceased was disfellowshipped? The congregation would generally not be involved. The Kingdom Hall would not be used. If the person had been giving evidence of repentance and manifesting a desire to be reinstated, a brother’s conscience might allow him to give a Bible talk at the funeral home or graveside, to give a witness to unbelievers and to comfort the relatives. Before making this decision, however, it would be wise for the brother to consult with the body of elders and give consideration to what they may recommend. In situations where it would not be wise for that brother to be involved, it may be appropriate for a brother who is a member of the deceased person’s family to give a talk to console the relatives.
However, this appears to be a softening of their approach from the 1960s.
The Watchtower, 1 September 1961, page 544:
• Is it proper for one of Jehovah’s witnesses to conduct a funeral for one who dies while disfellowshiped?—E. B., United States.
A congregation of Jehovah’s servants should not hold the funeral service of one who dies while disfellowshiped; nor should a dedicated Christian officiate at such a funeral, regardless of the fact that the rest of the members of the family might be witnesses of Jehovah and in good standing. Neither should any of the congregation attend such a funeral. We never want to give the impression to outsiders that a disfellowshiped person was acceptable in the congregation when in truth and in fact he was not acceptable but had been disfellowshiped from it.
i'm still determined not to vote - just to write something unpleasant about pollies on the ballot paper.
if i lived in victoria, i just may, as an act of sheer bastardry, vote for julian assange (of wikileaks fame), but i don't live in vic, so i cant.. my objection to voting is that the political choice offers two self-perpetuating oligarchies (who are something like the governing body).
they make up a slate of candidates and election advertising consists of attempting to persuade swinging voters to vote for their slate of candidates.. anyway, i noted that k.rudd has made a video in chinese, aimed apparently at mainland china.
mP:
The lib policy which stopped the boats saves lives
The 'lib policy' didn't 'stop the boats'. World conditions (for example in Sri Lanka in 2009) generate different waves of asylum seekers, compared to other periods where there are fewer asylum seekers. The 'libs' quite happily - and equally dishonestly - claim that 'their policy' 'stopped the boats', whereas there were actually other international factors, for which the policies of the 'libs' were entirely incidental. It is quite naive to believe that Howard's policies, in isolation from everything else, 'stopped the boats'.
because it make the journy in those boats worthless so they stop. Even under the Labor policy mahy people still die along the way. WHy dont you tell the truth and talk about this ?
Under any policy, people who take actions that are independent of the policy may still die, or may have any of various other outcomes. But a policy that increases the likelihood that people may hear that a particular action won't get them into Australia, then it's more likely to decrease the number of asylum seekers trusting people smugglers and attempting to arrive by boat.
Secondly its not the Lib fault those irresponsible people get on boats they know are in terrible shape. Its their own fault, the blame for the deaths belongs with them. Just this year hundreds have died along the way, there have been numerous stories about this, where many drown or go missing. By keeping the current policy, many of these people try their luck and die.
The current policy dissuades people from coming by boat, because they won't be settled in Australia. Of course, not all refugees will hear about whatever policy is in place, but the likelihood of those people drowning will be the same irrespective of the policy. People who are desperate enough to pay people smugglers - often spending their entire life savings - and get on board a dangerous boat are not victims of Australian policy. They are victims of the people smugglers who greedily take advantage of those people's desperation.
The actual number of people who arrive by boat is actually relatively small compared to the number of refugees Australia takes each year, and despite claims of the 'libs', Australians in general - apart from a xenophobic minority - do not feel 'swamped by boat people'. The main concern (among sane people) is that it is too dangerous to attempt to get to Australia on a leaky overcrowded boat.
