Jankyn

Joined

• started 27 topics
• posted 543 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Jankyn

• 
  63

  Mom says "You will die at Armageddon" - good replies?

  by serendipity in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my mother retired from her full-time job recently and has started attending meetings again.

  she also has plenty of time to think about her wayward children, including me.

  one night, we were talking and she asked me, again, why i wasn't going to meetings.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jankyn

  Cool .. might be more fun than dying in a nursing home.

  Best. Answer. Ever.

  Dude, I'm going to use that next time I get this crap from my mom! Great sense of humor.
• 
  15

  Reversal of Bush Conscience Clause

  by sammielee24 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  white house set to reverse health care conscience clauseendclickprintinclude google_ad_section_start content reap purge keep startclickprintincludestartclickprintexcludeendclickprintexcludeby saundra young .

  cnn endclickprintexcludestartclickprintexcludeendclickprintexcludewashington (cnn) -- the obama administration plans to reverse a regulation from late in the bush administration allowing health-care workers to refuse to provide services based on moral objections, an official said friday.. startclickprintexclude===========image=======================/image======================caption==========the rule protects the rights of health care providers who refuse to participate in certain procedures.===========/caption=========.

  endclickprintexcludethe provider refusal rule was proposed by the bush white house in august and enacted on january 20, the day president barack obama took office.. it expanded on a 30-year-old law establishing a "conscience clause" for "health-care professionals who don't want to perform abortions.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jankyn

  Removal of the "conscience" clause will also mean that JWs who don't want to give blood transfusions no longer have an out. If it's a legitimate part of the job's duties, you do it, or you find another job.

  Frankly, this seems like a no-brainer to me. If someone cannot in good conscience provide information or services that are a regular part of their profession, then they ought to find another profession.

  Think of it as the "Amish school bus driver rule." It's perfectly OK if an Amish person doesn't want to drive, but then they can't claim "discrimination" when they're turned down for a job driving a school bus. Oh, and Cold Red Rain, that would include a vegan who didn't want to dispense capsules made of gelatin. Same deal. Believe what you want, but if it means you can't do the job, I guess you'll be looking for work.
• 
  9

  Got an e-mail propaganda from "Knocking" director

  by Gerard in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  knocking update.

  february 2009. .

  in this issue:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jankyn

  My sense of it is that poor Engardio just wants to be loved. Sorry, ma, I'm gay---but look at the great movie I made about your religion! Will you love me now?

  Won't work, but I understand his impulse. It's a hard thing to come to grips with when your parents don't love you--or at least, love you less than they love a publishing company.
• 
  150

  Article: The Atheist's Dilemma

  by BurnTheShips in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  campos: the atheist's dilemmaby paul camposwhy is stanley fish so much smarter than richard dawkins?

  that question occurred to me last week, while attending a lecture at which fish, the well-known literary and legal theorist, did the thing he always does, which is to make the following point over and over again:.

  "no believer will find his faith shaken by evidence that is evidence only in the light of assumptions he does not share and considers flatly wrong.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jankyn

  Different magesteria.

  Scientific atheists like Dawkins are operating from a completely different (Cartesian) world view; it's evidence-based. Religion is, by definition, faith-based. It relies on personal experience, not quantifiable (and falsifiable) results.

  Same planet, different worlds. That's why the argument gets so heated; both sides use the same language, but words (like "evidence" and "theory") mean completely different things.
• 
  10

  The WT's favorite "reasoning" method - the false dilemma

  by sir82 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  as defined here: http://skepdic.com/falsedilemma.html.

  the false dilemma (or false dichotomy) is a fallacy of reasoning that omits consideration of all reasonable alternatives.

  sometimes called the either-or fallacy, one poses what looks like a true dilemma--i must pick one or the other--when, in fact, there are other viable alternatives.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jankyn

  "False dilemma" is also common in fundie political reasoning ("We've got to fight them over there so we won't have to fight them over here," with its assumption that "fighting" them is a given and that there are no other options). (And before you jump all over me, that was just the first example that came to mind--I'm sure there are just as many logical fallacies in fundie leftist political reasoning! The problem isn't the political bent; it's the lack of logic.)

  And just because some Bible passages contain logical fallacies doesn't make them perfectly OK (in fact, that reasoning represents a logical fallacy of a different kind!).

  Jankyn
• 
  44

  New HBO series on jws

  by rebel8 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  no, not really, you big silly.. if there was a fictional tv drama about jws, like big love, what would it be called?.

  and what would the plot contain?

  it would need to be entertaining to avoid cancellation..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jankyn

  Better Living People (based on a true story of a Witness leading a double life and becoming a sex addict)

  Minimus' suggestion is a pretty good one, although a scripted show would be better. That way you can really put some laughs in it, like what to do when you're busy with a worldly lover and your elder father shows up at the door with a "weak" publisher he's encouraging. It could be pretty funny. I'd watch it.
• 
  18

  Blondie's Comments You Will Not Hear at the 02-01-09 WT Study (OPPOSE DEVIL)

  by blondie in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  comments you will not hear at the 02-01-09 wt study (november 15, 2008, pages 27-31 )(oppose devil).

  review comments will be in red.

  wt material from today's wt will be in black.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jankyn

  Thanks again for your fine work, Blondie.

  What jumped out at me was early on:

  Notice how often the WTS uses brackets [ ] to "explain" the meaning of a scripture.

  Paragraph 1: "I shall put enmity between you and the woman [the heavenly part of Jehovah's organization] and between your seed and her seed. He [Jesus Christ] will bruise you in the head and you will bruise him in the heel." (Gen. 3:14, 15; Rev. 12:9)
  
  Paragraph 6: the prophet Daniel foretold: "In the days of those kings [existing in our day] the God of heaven will set up a kingdom [in heaven] that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms [now existing], and it itself will stand to times indefinite." (Dan. 2:44)
  
  Paragraph 7: "Salvation we owe to our God, who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb [Jesus Christ]." (Rev. 7:9-14)
  
  Paragraph 16: "If you, although being [imperfect and thus comparatively] wicked, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more so will the Father in heaven give holy spirit to those asking him!" (Luke 11:13) Let us continue praying to Jehovah for his holy spirit. With this most powerful force backing us up in our determination to oppose the Devil, we will be able to come off victorious. In addition to regular and fervent prayer, we need to put on the complete suit of spiritual armor from God in order 'to stand firm against the machinations, or crafty acts, of the
  Devil.--Eph. 6: 11-18.

  So why does the WTS feel it is necessary to insert their explanation in the scripture itself? I would wager that at least 50% of jws don't even have a clue that this is adding to the Bible

  I'd put the use of brackets ([]) right up there with the use of ellipses (...) as the most frequent and dishonest tools the WT uses to distort material for the rank-and-file. Those two items alone account for easily two-thirds of the misinformation that's passed on to Witnesses.

  What's worse is that JWs don't even know they're being hornswaggled, because to them, the use of brackets and ellipses appears to be normal. After all, the Governing Body would never be dishonest or deceptive, would they?
• 
  39

  Just got my 401k statement :S

  by Elsewhere in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  over the last 3 years i have lost 49% of the value of my savings.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jankyn

  Yep. Mine showed that I lost every freakin' penny I put in this year (including employer contributions, which they stopped effective Jan.1), and then some.

  I'd do better sticking money under a mattress.
• 
  25

  Don't become a scientist!

  by VM44 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  don't become a scientist!.

  jonathan i. katz.

  professor of physics.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jankyn

  although the salary levels are not as high in science as they should be.

  Particularly when compared to the salaries of, say, professional athletes.

  That said, my wife did two post-docs (she's a Ph.D. biologist) and then took a permanent position at double what he lists as a starting salary. In addition to academic jobs, which have prestige and permanence but not so much pay, there are jobs in government (less prestige, moderate pay and good bennies, lots of permanence and NO TEACHING), and in industy (less prestige, FANTASTIC pay and great bennies, less permanence and more perks).

  Science is always a good bet, career-wise, because the modes of thinking lend themselves to flexible career possibilities.
• 
  51

  Well this didn't take long.

  by BurnTheShips in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  washington: only five days into the obama presidency, members of the new administration and democratic leaders in congress are already dancing around one of the most politically delicate questions about the financial bailout: is the president prepared to nationalize a huge swath of the nation's banking system?.

  http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/26/business/26banks.php.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jankyn

  Apparently, you don't understand communism. If you did, you'd know that Nancy Pelosi is no communist. She's an old-fashioned, bleeding-heart liberal (which basically means she's a Republican-lite: all for making money as long as she doesn't have to feel guilty about not doing enough to help the poor).

  So-called "conservatives" who are spouting this nonsense wouldn't know a communist--or a socialist--if one bit 'em in the ass.

  Can we all agree that most people want to do the right thing---give workers a fair shake, allow property owners to maintain and use their property, and assist those who cannot care for themselves---but we might disagree on the best way to go about it? That might free us up from this obsession with words like "liberal," "conservative," etc.