gravedancer

Joined

• started 51 topics
• posted 575 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by gravedancer

• 
  16

  Destroy or Reform the WT?

  by ThiChi in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i ask this question: lets say for a moment the jw world does come crashing down (very unlikely).

  who would fill the void left by the jws?

  more moonies?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  gravedancer

  Here is a start... http://www.plusroot.com/dbook/frame.html
• 
  16

  Destroy or Reform the WT?

  by ThiChi in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i ask this question: lets say for a moment the jw world does come crashing down (very unlikely).

  who would fill the void left by the jws?

  more moonies?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  gravedancer

  Who would fill the void left by the Jws?

  Perhaps some schooling in what is known as "Rational Thinking" might be in order.
• 
  46

  Hi There Julie!

  by IslandWoman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i repeat, you have not lived as a jw.

  you have not raised your child as one, you have not had to sign a virtual death warrant for your child by refusing blood!!

  you have not had to die as many of us have had to die.. you have not walked as we have walked!!!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  gravedancer

  Zazu,

  lol...wow....you need to run a tighhter ship. How could you allow him to stay up so late?

  Please make him a nice cup of tea with some cookies when he wakes up...

  GD
• 
  46

  Hi There Julie!

  by IslandWoman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i repeat, you have not lived as a jw.

  you have not raised your child as one, you have not had to sign a virtual death warrant for your child by refusing blood!!

  you have not had to die as many of us have had to die.. you have not walked as we have walked!!!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  gravedancer

  Mr Larc,

  Thanks for the summary. To your points:

  1. I was addressing IW's premis, which I agree with.

  What exactly is the premise? More importantly, what is the conclusion of such premise?

  2. I never, ever tryed to shut up Julie, nor will I argue with her on the subject of her perception of Amazing versus my opinion, because it is pointless. I think she is biased, and I am sure that she thinks I am.

  Oh, I did try and shut up all the insults and stuff. When things on here get into personality attacks I would gladly fight to protect others from such...I would still defend Amazing if I felt he was being personally attacked (yeah go ahead and say it...."Amazing can defend himself" - I know.)

  3. New material: whether you defend Amazing or Julie, is of no concern to me. Not because of you personally. I think the whole dialogue between the two of them is boring, and I don't keep track of who defends who. On a side note: I think that both of them are behaving like children.

  Oh I totally agree. But they are obviously two intelligent people who need sparring partners...maybe we should find a way to introduce them in real life;)

  Larc, I have been quite vocal on the whole point of personality attacks on this board - as have you (I applaud you for it). Even in this thread, my outrage is directed at the concept of personality attacks rather than at Island Woman. I have never had any issues with Island Woman, still don't. I atually thought about staying out of this whole thread but decided to have a little fun with the logic of it all...

  Any point can be made to stand or not stand when taken to its logical conclusion. I think we have seen how this argument has been debunked - at no stage have I seen evidence or answers to my questions. Another way to test the validity of any point is to see how easily exceptions can be found which do not fit the model.

  You used an interesting (age-old) technique of immediately jumping to a "let me simplify it" or "in a nutshell" approach to avoid the direct questions I raised. While that is obviously your right (no one has to answer the questions of some fool on an internet discussion board - so I am perfectly fine with it) I do not consider such technique effective counter-argument.

  Mr Larc, please note I have not attacked you personally. I just feel like jousting today;)
• 
  46

  Hi There Julie!

  by IslandWoman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i repeat, you have not lived as a jw.

  you have not raised your child as one, you have not had to sign a virtual death warrant for your child by refusing blood!!

  you have not had to die as many of us have had to die.. you have not walked as we have walked!!!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  gravedancer

  IW,

  Obviously different folk had different depths of experience...so what?

  From the first post in this thread:
  

  I repeat, you have not lived as a JW. You have not raised your child as one, you have not had to sign a virtual death warrant for your child by refusing blood!! You have not had to die as many of us have had to die.

  You have not walked as we have walked!!!

  What was the intent? To make Julie shut up? To make her think her opinions count less? Please elaborate...and ask yourself as you do what the logical conclusion is to whatever you say.

  GD
• 
  46

  Hi There Julie!

  by IslandWoman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i repeat, you have not lived as a jw.

  you have not raised your child as one, you have not had to sign a virtual death warrant for your child by refusing blood!!

  you have not had to die as many of us have had to die.. you have not walked as we have walked!!!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  gravedancer

  Mr Larc,

  "Readers digest" response from me since you wish to keep it simple:

  1. Agreed
  2. Agreed
  3. Agreed
  4. Agreed
  5. Agreed

  So, then why try and silence Julie because she only studied for 18 months? You might not be trying to do so, but that was certainly appears to be the original intent of bringing this up.

  Go back and read the post with Amazing, its apparent I was defending Amazing - not Julie. I just do not believe it is right to "minimize" her opinions or experiences because we were baptized or in the truth for longer or had more gruesome experiences...don't you agree? If you do, then what is the issue?
• 
  46

  Hi There Julie!

  by IslandWoman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i repeat, you have not lived as a jw.

  you have not raised your child as one, you have not had to sign a virtual death warrant for your child by refusing blood!!

  you have not had to die as many of us have had to die.. you have not walked as we have walked!!!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  gravedancer

  IW,

  So what is being discussed? Those who have lost the most have the right to express opinions?

  I am just looking at the logic of the argument and seeing how flawed it is because there are so many exceptions...

  For instance, it has been pointed out that if one was baptised then they understand and have more validiity as an X-JW than one who has not. It's so easy to find exceptions to this isn't it? How man kids grow up as JW's (losing a lot of their childhood due to the Jw teachings) but never get baptized? then consider someone who as an adult is baptised and disfellowshipped three years later? I would say the child understands more than the adult as to the horrors of being a JW, wouldn't you?

  The point being is that if you guys want to draw the line as to who understands stuff and who doesn't is flat out wrong. Stereotyping/profiling in this manner doesn't work and every single individual understands more or less than some other individual. If Julie studied for 18 months I am pretty sure she understood things if she says she does.

  This is censorship based on "seniority". Someone who has just been DF'ed this week...are they an X-JW or not? Or does one have to be an X-JW for a long time before one can be respected as such? What if they were inactive before being DFed? What if they had serious doubts and just acted things out for family reasons?

  I guess since I am not DFed I have no right to speak as an X-JW? When applied in reverse - your logic dictates that this is the case, doesn't it?

  GD
• 
  46

  Hi There Julie!

  by IslandWoman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i repeat, you have not lived as a jw.

  you have not raised your child as one, you have not had to sign a virtual death warrant for your child by refusing blood!!

  you have not had to die as many of us have had to die.. you have not walked as we have walked!!!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  gravedancer

  Mr Larc,

  I understand the eagerness to "close the case"...but:

  We can all express our opinions on a number of subjects. That is not what is being said here. We are saying that it is not possible to truely understand what it is like to go through something we haven't experienced.

  and

  Julie has more understanding than most, because she hung around them for 18 months, but she never walked the walk, to coin a phrase.

  I see. So let me see if I understand this correctly. How many years does one have to be in the truth to "understand what it was like"? Ten? What about those that have been in for nine? They don't understand it?

  Does someone who has been in for 30 years as opposed to someone who has been in for 35 years "not truly understand it"? Does a sister not truly understand what it was like to be an elder? Does an elder not understand what it was like to be a sister? There were afterall social consequences to all these "ranks" and "tenures". All persons had different levels of understanding - does one level rank higher than another? Should we find someone with 70 years in the truth and give them the "ultimate" say?

  As many have seen I have not agreed with Julie on some of her views (in fact vehemently disagreed), but that does not give me the right to imply that she should "shut up" since she has not truly walked the walk does it? At the bottom of it all this is what this is all about.

  So when has one "walked the walk"? Does it depend on whether one was baptised? Or is it time dependent? I need to know what my ranking is...

  Respectfully,

  GD
• 
  46

  Hi There Julie!

  by IslandWoman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i repeat, you have not lived as a jw.

  you have not raised your child as one, you have not had to sign a virtual death warrant for your child by refusing blood!!

  you have not had to die as many of us have had to die.. you have not walked as we have walked!!!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  gravedancer

  This is such a stupid concept. Take it to its logical conclusion and see how absurd it is.

  I am male...never been a female so I don't understand women...so I have no right to express an opinion or my opinion on such will be less valid

  I am straight...never been gay so I don't understand gays...so I have no right to express an opinion or my opinion on such will be less valid

  I am caucasian...never been anything but caucasian so I don't understand non-caucasians...so I have no right to express an opinion or my opinion on such will be less valid

  I am healthy...always been healthy so I don't understand sickly people...so I have no right to express an opinion or my opinion on such will be less valid

  I don't speak most foreign languages...most of my life been been bi-lingual so I don't understand people of a different tongue...so I have no right to express an opinion or my opinion on such will be less valid

  Using this fucked up logic, pretty soon I will be left with just myself. Since I can hopefully know what i think there is no need for any expression as my opinions are all invalid or less important so I will just shut the fuck up.

  ...now see how stupid this is???
• 
  46

  Hi There Julie!

  by IslandWoman in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i repeat, you have not lived as a jw.

  you have not raised your child as one, you have not had to sign a virtual death warrant for your child by refusing blood!!

  you have not had to die as many of us have had to die.. you have not walked as we have walked!!!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  gravedancer

  Not another thread on this fucked up subject please!!!!!!!!!!!!