If she appeals it and it's not reversed, she'd have an excellent legal case against at least the congregation, possibly the WTS if the DFing was approved by Bethel.
Paralipomenon
JoinedPosts by Paralipomenon
-
20
Congratulations to my sister in Phoenix, she was DF'd last week!! AND. . .
by Pioneer Spit...oh, i mean Spirit in.ta daaaaaa.
.. she just found out yesterday.
there were no judicial meetings, no facing of accusers, no witnesses, did i mention no judicial meetings?
-
-
-
13
If not God, who or what is ultimately in control?
by Guest with Questions ini believe that we are all subject to either god or man but man is very limited.
as a christian i believe that god is in control.
he did give us free choice to an extent but he is control overall.
-
-
Paralipomenon
Why does someone/something have to be in control?
-
36
My Story
by 38 Years inhere's my story.
i tried to shorten it as much as possible.. my family belonged to a baptist church and i was baptized in that church when i was 8 years old.
i sincerely believed in jesus and the bible then and still do now.
-
-
Paralipomenon
Very enlightening!
Welcome! -
91
New Stupid Assembly Rules
by WTWizard ini have heard on this discussion board numerous rules that apply to upcoming a$$emblies.
some are designed to stop people from meeting the opposite sex; others, to make sure everyone is always ready to recruit new members into the scam.
i heard that some km inserts have been urging those whose congregation has cleaning assignments to sit in the section that they are assigned to clean.
-
-
Paralipomenon
managing 6.5 million individuals is a headache.
managing 6.5 million clones is much easier. -
27
Parthogenesis: How do creationists explain this?
by Crumpet ini read this article in the paper on the train to work this morning (helped to keep me eyes of ladies feet and ankles) and was amazed as i never knew this before.. http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=50123&in_page_id=34.
certain species can actually get pregnant and give birth without any make interaction.
if this doesnt support evolution as the most scientifically accountable theory of our existence what does?!.
-
-
Paralipomenon
My question would be, what was the sex of the baby?
Would the asexual reproduction ensure the birth of a male shark?
While incredible, can you imagine all the poor horny shark's disappointment if another female was born? -
-
-
Paralipomenon
And yet again, both Vinny and Perry ignore my points.
Ah well, time to speak into the wind once more.
Who pays the Piper?
Well, the question there, is what are morals? Very simply put, moral are a universal code of ethics for interaction with each other. Theists will argue that morals were given to us by God.
How do you determine if something is moral or not? It is very simple if you look at it in context of civilization. Do you have the right to any action if it negatively impacts another? We can all decide for ourselves whether we want to do something or not, but when our actions start to affect others, then we should evaluate the impact.
Essentially, all morals are, is a big truce. Humans are social creatures that are driven to dwell in groups. Being that we are in groups, we need to accept that each person has basic rights.
To really drive this point home, if there is a man that lives in the woods all alone all his life. Other than blasphemy, can he live an immoral life?
So if there was no God, he would have lived a perfect life.
Never meeting another human, he would not have had the opportunity to lie.
he would have never lusted after another.
he would have not stolen.
he would have not murdered.
he would not have coveted.
It is then that Perry's whole argument goes up in complete flames. Therefore he must be damned for not knowing God because otherwise there is no means to find fault in him. Without sin that means he is eligible for heaven, and doing so without the benefit of Jesus Sacrifice.
So we come back to morals. Anytime someone tries to disrupt the balance/truce/morality the balance must be restored otherwise mankind would destroy itself.
Some are influential and/or powerful and upset this balance. They lie, they kill, they rape, they steal. But people will always try to work against that person because the balance is upset. Most people that upset the balance are actively fought against. Sometimes the balance is only restored when that person dies, but balance is always restored.
Now I see morals as simply self preservation. Every person needs to give some and take some. When someone wants to take more than they give they run the risk of losing more.
What happens if someone finds that they are too powerful to be controlled by the masses. They can upset the balance without accountability? That is, absolutely no accountability. Well I'd suggest you read the story of the Ring of Gyges. It's an ancient Greek myth. It just goes to show that as long as we are mortal, we are bound by the same moral code. If anyone found themselves unaffected by force of others, then they would no longer be bound by any morals.
I feel I have sufficiently now answered the "who pays the piper" and the "red corvette" questions that both of you claim cannot be answered.
I'd simply like you to address my question now of the Creation Lottery here:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/132394/1.ashx
Thanks,
Para -
-
-
Paralipomenon
(Apologies to Joan Jett)
Tomorrow I'm getting dunked at the assemblee.
I figured that this cult was made for me
Cause now they're 6 million strong.
so the end can't be too long.
So now I'm at the hall,
almost every day, yeah, day. Singin'
"I love mind control
Put some more time in service baby,
I love mind control
So come join the cult and serve with me!" -
25
anyone else sick of stroking certain apologists egos?
by theinfamousone ini am quite sure most of you have noticed some anti-atheist threads... some may have noticed the backlash of pro-atheist threads... it's kinda funny to me, seems these threads are being posted by the same people, even though they are not... the problem lies here, these topics reach discussion board infamy by being 15 or more pages long... why?
because there are one or two apologists, who instead of discussing it like the mature adults they are not, they ridicule and mock... they make their beliefs into fact and make fun of manyone who points out the fact that what they say is not substancial evidence but is only belief... you may even know who in particular i am talking about, but that does not matter... at this point, i am sick of allowing these men to mentally masturbate all over this discussion board.... maybe its time to ignore them since they are only trying to evoke reactions from us????.
the infamous one.
-
-
Paralipomenon
Check out the third post on the "Isn't God Awesome?" thread for my feelings on the matter. :)
Can I call it or what? -
-
-
Paralipomenon
You and others "wish that there was more openness on this board toward belief in God."
But at the same time deny the openness to the possibility that there may be no God. Isn't it more that you and others wish that people would just see things your way?
These are discussion boards, though more often it appears that people from both camps use them as pulpits.
I still hold out hope that one of these days you will actually answer one of my posts. You're starting to make me feel like I have a good point here. -
29
Agnostics demand ambiguity!
by Paralipomenon inwhy let the theists and atheists have all the fun?
agnostics, let your voice be heard!
uncertainty for the masses!
-
-
Paralipomenon
"I suspect many agnostics are simply "mid-way" between the final acceptance of a godless universe, but still cling to some emotional "scrap" of belief because of the warm-fuzzy sense of existential comfort the idea of an afterlife gives them."
Personally, I went from atheist to agnostic. I can't disprove a spirit realm, but I really don't think I'll be part of it when I die. I'm perfectly content to turn to dust when my time is up. I see the pursuit of the meaning of life to be an intellectual challenge. The second you rule out anything because it doesn't fit your preconceived ideas, you have failed to be objective.
Are you looking for evidence to support your belief, or are you looking at the evidence and deciding based on that?