Posts by cognizant dissident

42

Aus Bethel 06 Annual Report - INCREDIBLE 50% DECREASE in donations

by jwfacts in

i just purchased the 2006 annual report for the australian watchtower bible and tract society.

below are the highlights.

most incredible is that donations dropped by almost 50%, from 15 million dollars to only 10 million dollars.

cognizant dissident

Well, as per Almost Atheist's example, I am going to give them a DONTation of 5 gazillion dollars! Let's see what that does their to annual figures!

Cog

12

Who quit going to the meetings, came back later and now regretting it?

by RULES & REGULATIONS in

i regret ever coming back to the meetings.

i was baptized when i was 13 years old due to pressure and being told that anyone not baptized would be destroyed when ''the end'' was coming in 1975. i later quit attending and felt a relief when the end didn't come.

the lies,too many meetings,be pounded to preach more and all their rules and regulations finally convinced me that i didn't belong there.. around the early 80's,i started up again.

cognizant dissident

I was df'd when I was 18 (for not being a virgin, because...). I went back 3 years later because I missed my little sisters. I dropped my application for college cause the end was so near.

Now here I am 25 years later, no degree yet (working on it), crappy job, sick, and out of the org anyways. Can anyone say stupid?

stupid! Stupid! STUPID!!!

Cog (runs screaming from room pounding own head cause she is stupid!)

ps: Why are there no emoticons of crazy people running away screaming?

74

Should suicidal or self destructive people have free will?

by The Dragon in

been going through my head lately....if you try to prevent them from doing what they want...they see you as the enemy...but are you?.

if you take away their freedom to do so.....are they no longer free?

will they hate you...or thank you when they come to their senses?.

cognizant dissident

I still severely dislike The Dragon's choice of analogies. Those I love most in the world walk close to the line, and I live with the dread of losing them early. Hence, my intense interest in this thread. If you are using this analogy to justify that humankind as a whole must accept controls (by who?) because they are too ignorant to stop destructive behavior (to imminent "death"?), you have a much farther row to hoe before I'll plant corn in your patch.

Yes, Jnat, I agree with you on this. We cannot use pessimist reasonings such as, "the whole species, world, or planet, is doomed anyway", in some as yet unknown, imagined future, to justify doing nothing to intervene for the good of the people or world that exist in front of us right now, at this present moment in space and time, and whatever the "illness" is.

If Dragon was playing devil's advocate and actually arguing for the opposite, I say the answer is still the same. We cannot use those same pessimistic future reasonings to take away all control and free will from others in the service of some perceived future greater good. I think we have all seen and heard of the human rights abuses that result from that sort of reasoning. I'm thinking of, communism, fascism, (JW's ). All of these systems started out with good intentions of making a better world, but by using control tactics, they ended up causing more problems and harm than they ever solved. I would suggest that the end almost never justifies "any" means.

I do not think I am contradicting myself on the issue of "intervening" with the mentally ill by saying this. Intervening is not always taking away control or autonomy wholly. Sometimes we take it away temporarily, as with the mentally ill, but the goal is always to prevent immediate harm and to return it as soon as possible and restore the person to health and autonomy. The two are seen to be very closely related in health care overall, nowadays. There is still a need for many checks and balances in the system though, because it is recognized how easily taking away control can lead to abuses.

Cog.

ps (you can plant corn in my patch anytime!) That expression made me laugh out loud!

110

How many remember the 1969 8 day convention?

by seek2find in

anybody remember the 8 day 1969 international convention.

i was at the braves stadium in atlanta all 8 days with a sunburn and then wet clothes after the rain storms.

if you were there (not necessarily in atlanta) do you remember anything about it?

cognizant dissident

Well, it seems Mulan gets credit for knowing the most details about the Vancouver, BC assembly. Probably because she was pregnant and remembers every frickin looong minute of it! I don't tknow how you did it. Yeah, pregnant women sure didn't get any extra respect or consideration at those assemblies did they? I remember trying to nurse a baby at conventions was a bitch also.

Well, I was only 6yrs old at the 1969 convention so I can be forgiven for thinking it started at 9am. When you are six 1pm - 9pm feels like 12 hours straight! How the hell did they expect little kids to sit that long? Especially with an amusement park right next to the stadium? You could hear the rollercoaster every time it went up and down.

Mulan, do you remember the woman getting killed on the roller coaster tracks? Or is that a figment of our collective imagination?

Cog

110

How many remember the 1969 8 day convention?

by seek2find in

anybody remember the 8 day 1969 international convention.

i was at the braves stadium in atlanta all 8 days with a sunburn and then wet clothes after the rain storms.

if you were there (not necessarily in atlanta) do you remember anything about it?

cognizant dissident

Vancouver, BC - 1969

I'm pretty sure it was a six day convention like another poster said, not 8 day. I was only six but I definitely remember my parents talking about the woman who was killed by the roller coaster car. Although I think they said she fell out onto the tracks and then was hit by the next car. Cutting across the tracks sounds like a more likely scenario. The amusement park was right next to the Stadium on the same grounds. Playland! Every kid who grew up in Vancouver went to Playland every summer. If you had cool parents, they let you go on rides during lunch break at the assemblies. (Mine, weren't that cool)

About 16 years ago at the Coliseum on the same grounds, a little girl fell over the bleacher bars and onto the concrete below. It's a miracle she wasn't killed but they did rush her off in an ambulance. I think this happens fairly regularly at these large stadiums and Coliseums.

Ahh assemblies. The bittersweet memories.

Cog

74

Should suicidal or self destructive people have free will?

by The Dragon in

been going through my head lately....if you try to prevent them from doing what they want...they see you as the enemy...but are you?.

if you take away their freedom to do so.....are they no longer free?

will they hate you...or thank you when they come to their senses?.

cognizant dissident

I am depressed I am out of work right now...

But far from suicidal.....

I just think alot when i get bored.....and I don't think it is hopeless....just hopeless to rely upon humans to explain and figure out God

Yeah, I hear ya Dragon.

My present employment is petering down to nothing and I need to look for another job also. It is depressing to think about. It's so much more fun to ponder the great questions of the universe on JWD than it is to look for work, isn't it? Although, definitely not as financially lucrative. Now, if only we could get someone to pay us for all the wisdom we spout on this forum!

Cog (glad you are OK)

74

Should suicidal or self destructive people have free will?

by The Dragon in

been going through my head lately....if you try to prevent them from doing what they want...they see you as the enemy...but are you?.

if you take away their freedom to do so.....are they no longer free?

will they hate you...or thank you when they come to their senses?.

cognizant dissident

Dragon

Are you depressed? You seem a little hopeless and disjointed in your thinking? Are you asking all these questions because YOU cannot see the point of living?

Cog (starting to get worried about you)

110

How many remember the 1969 8 day convention?

by seek2find in

anybody remember the 8 day 1969 international convention.

i was at the braves stadium in atlanta all 8 days with a sunburn and then wet clothes after the rain storms.

if you were there (not necessarily in atlanta) do you remember anything about it?

cognizant dissident

Hey, Justitia, Sphere, and Outlaw!

I was at the Vancouver, BC convention too. I was 6 years old and could not sneak off to the amusement park next door. It was at the Empire Stadium and it is now torn down. The huge rollercoaster that was right next door is still there though, and a main attraction. I don't remember all 8 days or any of the talks, I just remember it was sooooo loooong. I remember the sunny, hot days, with every one frying and putting up sun umbrellas. And I remember the rainy days with everyone's books getting wet and putting up same (now rain) umbrellas. I remember sleeping on my mother's lap for most of it and constantly asking her when it was going to be over. Also the huge long food lines for full meals! That was the best part. Justitia, I think it went from 9am to 9pm! We did not have to travel though because we lived right in Vancouver a couple of miles away.

Unless there was an international convention, most years it was held at the Coliseum at the other end of the same park. There was a chairlift that went from the Coliseum to the Empire Stadium. When I was 10, my best friend and I each told our parents we were going to sit with each other's families. Then we caught the chair life over to the other side of the amusement park and I went on that huge rollercoaster for the first time! Scared the shit out of me! lol. But I have loved rollercoasters ever since. It is rated as one of the best old wooden rollercoaster in North America. There were lots of teens (and adults) who skipped out to go to the amusement park. The brothers finally caught on and made an announcement that all children and teens need to sit with their parents. Our fun was busted!

Cog

74

Should suicidal or self destructive people have free will?

by The Dragon in

been going through my head lately....if you try to prevent them from doing what they want...they see you as the enemy...but are you?.

if you take away their freedom to do so.....are they no longer free?

will they hate you...or thank you when they come to their senses?.

cognizant dissident

cognizent dissident: I think if people have really decided to end their life and are serious about it, they rarely tell anyone, they just do it.

I do see tragedies where people become too weak to end their own life. I've read seniors advice columns where the terminally ill are advised to stop eating and drinking if no-one is honoring their wishes to end their life. I think that in North America especially, there is a tendency in the medical community to try and save everyone, by every means possible. At some point there is no surgical answer, no pill, that will cure the patient. The incurable should be allowed to choose how they go, quickly or gradually. In the links above, they speak of those options discreetly. There are pain medications, if administered too liberally, shorten the life.

Jnat:

In the first instance I was thinking of severely depressed and suicidal people in particular. I agree with you that intervention is necessary in these instances as there is such a huge positive response to treatment for most depressed people who get help.

I also agree that there needs to be a clear distinction between those who suffer from depression and mental illness and those who suffer from a terminal illness. They are two completely different issues that cannot be lumped together. As an ex-nurse, I do understand the right to die with dignity issues and am a firm believer that the best way to protect oneself from unwanted interventions is a living will.

Yes, you are also correct that overmedicating pain could accidentally lead to accidental overdose and death in the terminally ill and pose ethical and legal concerns for doctors, nurses, and caregivers. However, there are instances where terminally patients are in agony and are undermedicated for pain because of fears of doctors of being accused of euthanasia. However, to the terminally ill patient and their family, comfort is a primary concern at the end and perhaps an accidental death due to overdose would not be considered the worst thing in such a case? It is a judgement call and what is the primary goal? What is the risk benefit analysis? The primary benefit is comfort and relief to the suffering, already dying patient and the risk is accidentally ending an agonizing existence a few days or weeks early. It is a judgement call to be made by the dying, I believe, or at least always with the benefit of the dying person concerned in mind and not the greater good of an abstract moral philosophy or someone else's moral agenda. I don't judge either way, but I know what I would want in such a case. I suspect we are of similiar mind here.

Dragon:

It appears to me also, that you are lumping together many different issues and looking for some sort of universal moral maxim that would apply to all. This is an over simplification of complex issues, I believe, and one JW's and ex JW's are very prone to. JW's and many who have left are still looking for that one size fits all magical solution to all the world's problems. It used to be Armageddon and Paradise and now, what is there to replace it?

In a previous post you seem to be saying that since the whole world seems to be bent on a course of self-annihalation and very few seem to be interested in intervening to stop it, then why should we intervene when the individual wants to kill himself/herself? What's the difference?

To answer, and try to tie the concepts together, I think that if it is in our power to intervene when an individual is suicidal, then we must do so for the benefit of them and for ourselves, and society as a whole. (I made an exception for the terminally ill, close to death, because the "benefit" could be seriously questionable?) For the same reason, if it is in our power to intervene and put a stop to problems of pollution and war on a global scale, then we should do what is in our power to do be part of the solution and not part of the problem. For many of us, our power is limited. The fact that the majority do not exercise this power and seem bent on greed and self-annihalation does not relieve us of our moral obligation to do what is right.

To get really philosophical, you asked earlier if we should be allowed the freedom to carry on in our current course of actions until we die? In reality, that is exactly what eveyone of us is going to do. Carry on in our current course of actions until we die. We could change our course of actions but we all as individuals are going to die eventually, regardless. We may save our species from extinction but we as individuals are all doomed to die sooner or later. This is why these are actually totally different questions. JW's try to find one solution. God will miraculously save us as individuals and the whole species in one grand gesture. The reality is not so easy, nor so comforting, I'm afraid.

Cog

16

Albert Einstein said:

by Sasha in

jw
friends

if the bees ever disappear, man will die in 4 years.

the bee's are disappearing..

cognizant dissident

Well, the earth is a finite space with finite resources, so population control does make sense to me. 500 million just seemed like an unrealistic number to me since we are already at approximately 7 billion. (Also, last time I checked, Gore didn't run the world) lol.

I think the principle of population control is sound. Maintaining current population could be as simple as each couple limiting their reproduction to two children maximum therefore replacing themselves but not expanding the population. However, in countries that are already overpopulated, such as China, the one child rule makes sense. The real problem is enforcing such a policy without incurring human rights abuses. China provides monetary incentives to couples to have one child, but their are also punitive measures taken to those who violate the policy as well as pressure to abort additonal children. China also does not have a good record of upholding human rights or of full disclosure. I don't know what the answer is although, education and full access to birth control in 3rd world countries is a good start and certainly can do no harm.

Large families were the norm in Western society also before the 60's and unlimited access to birthcontrol in the hands of women. Then the birth rate naturally fell to less than 2 children per family. It is not unrealistic to think that women in poor countries, if educated, and given choices, and access to reliable birth control, would also choose to limit their families to a size that does not keep them chained to a never-ending cycle of childbirth and poverty. Changing the cultural attitudes that motivate people to have large families is the most difficult part, I believe.

Cog