put aside your religious or moral standards if you can for a moment and give me your viewpoint on this......... generally, the 'beautiful people' pair off with other 'beautiful people' in a sexual union for however long, and the average lookers meet other average lookers and so on down the line until you come to.......................those who don't appeal to the opposite sex due to appearance, injury, illness or mental capacity.. can, or should, these people be given access to those in the sex trade for 'relief' without cause for fear or stigmatising ?
or is it a case of "that's too bad" (meaning you're committing fornication and that cannot be sanctioned in any way)?.
have you ever needed to counsel a person (or their parents) on this ?
O.K., bluntly, what I'm getting at is this. At what point do you leave the moral aspect of paying for, or giving, sex and say that we should be able to facilitate sexual love for an adult who will likely never meet a mate due to the aforementioned afflictions
Or do we just agree that the ugly and disabled live their shortened lives and not break our moral taboos ?
put aside your religious or moral standards if you can for a moment and give me your viewpoint on this......... generally, the 'beautiful people' pair off with other 'beautiful people' in a sexual union for however long, and the average lookers meet other average lookers and so on down the line until you come to.......................those who don't appeal to the opposite sex due to appearance, injury, illness or mental capacity.. can, or should, these people be given access to those in the sex trade for 'relief' without cause for fear or stigmatising ?
or is it a case of "that's too bad" (meaning you're committing fornication and that cannot be sanctioned in any way)?.
have you ever needed to counsel a person (or their parents) on this ?
Put aside your religious or moral standards if you can for a moment and give me your viewpoint on this........
Generally, the 'beautiful people' pair off with other 'beautiful people' in a sexual union for however long, and the average lookers meet other average lookers and so on down the line until you come to.......................those who don't appeal to the opposite sex due to appearance, injury, illness or mental capacity.
Can, or should, these people be given access to those in the sex trade for 'relief' without cause for fear or stigmatising ? Or is it a case of "That's too bad" (Meaning you're committing fornication and that cannot be sanctioned in any way)?
Have you ever needed to counsel a person (or their parents) on this ? Did you tell them, "It's too bad you're a quadriplegic/unattractive/simple-minded, you'll just have to wait for the new system", or did you have some 'creative' advice.
lets say the people in my area know that i am a. apostate.
i walk in, sit and i behave.
after the meeting.
BOL, can you elaborate please ? " I also was aware one summer of the visiting guy from Bethel having armed security, apparently those guys think they are targets."
criticism is fine, but doesn't it have to be specific to work?.
if criticism is not to help but to hurt, isn't that called trolling?.
i understand that the posters here are on opposite ends of life's spectrum.. so some posts will sound critical but they are not.
If criticism is not to help but to hurt, isn't that called trolling?
Not necessarily. All of us, no matter how well intentioned in daily life, are prone to make criticism of people and ideas that we have no personal contact with. We generally are more careful and empathetic when being critical face to face. But, this here's the 'anonymous' internet and those of us who are more sensitive to conflict can find it harsher than usual.
and forum is built for differences of opinion.
Well it's a lot more than that. A meeting of minds, venting and a place of common interest. It's a microcosm of your world but with much sharper edges.
And most importantly say what you are criticising so the criticized might learn something.
That would seem self evident but.............people............ I guess on a forum like this most of us just bang down our immediate thoughts and don't ruminate too much on how it might be taken.
I've offended people in the past and have been horrified to find out that I had done so. I take more care these days to word things better.
brian kennedy is well known in uk jw circles as one of the few jw millionaires.
for a bit of background , see http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/146810/1/madeleine-mccanns-case-other-jw-connection.
he is now potentially looking to buy glasgow rangers football club , which went into administration last month.
Not to mention the 'Gers historical link to Protestantism !
ok - we have "direction".
delete the word society we don't talk about the society any more.
we talk about the organization.
Make sure your back-calls know.
looks like the earth is coming to support the woman and taking the flood of water that the dragon has disgorged out for the woman and her seed ( and i am sure by extension the other sheep) .
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/jehovahs-slander-action-over-husband-thrown-out-3039908.html.
wildelover.
"She then wrote a letter of complaint to the Witnesses branch office in Wicklow and it included photographs of her husband on a weekend break in Galway with the other woman, the judge said.
The branch sent a letter to the appeal committee, which changed its decision and told Ms Moram they "forgave" her."
The author of this article didn't miss this WTF? moment. The branch accepts the error of judgement and advises the appeal committee who don't apologise to the complainant but forgive her !
Spiritual indigestion was a term used at least until the 90's but used by older ones. To me it simply meant "I've had a gutsful"
And, yes, spiritual sacrifice was usually used with reference to using your three or four weeks annual leave to go pioneering. (It had nothing to do with pentagrams and virgins BTW)
Spiritual indigestion was a term we used to use for people who read copious amounts of the societys literature but didn't take the time to meditate on what they were reading. Something akin to chewing your food properly before swallowing.
so let's say armageddon comes,do you believe that all jw's would be destroyed because jehovah knows it's a false religion...it can't be denied,for the most part,they try to live by the bible...if anybody has to be punished i would say it's the leaders...i know that god wouldn't judge a whole organization but persons individually....so what i'm trying to ask is....do you think you're in a better position right now not for freedom but for salvation than the witnesses??
if by the time you're finished reading this post armageddon is here...would u wish that you still were a witness or are you satisfied that you've made god proud?.
"--i know that my thinking needs adjusting in some areas." - now, you just stop using Witness catch-phrases!
MSG20, Forums like this can be very difficult to negotiate first off. Because we can't see facial expressions, tone of voice or all the other nuances, we tend to imagine those qualities when we read your words.
If we imagine someone we don't like, speaking your words, you will get a terse / bad/ angry response.
All the best, I think you're going to be O.K.
