Happy birthday, St. Ann!
GLTirebiter
JoinedPosts by GLTirebiter
-
10
Dad called on my birthday
by StAnn intoday is my birthday.
i'm beyond caring about birthdays (i'm 51) but my dad, who is a non-jw married to my crazy jw mother, usually doesn't acknowledge us kids on our birthdays so as not to piss off my mom.
actually, he has never acknowledged my birthday.
-
25
Banner seen at convention in Miami
by Indian Larry incomments?.
[img]http://i59.tinypic.com/dfx6y9.jpg[/img].
-
GLTirebiter
Is the "Jehovah's Kingdom" application spyware, or ransomware? Or maybe just phishing for credit card numbers?
-
GLTirebiter
You need help from a lawyer specializing in tax issues. Act ASAP, because interest will continue to accrue until your account is settled.
-
320
Richard Dawkins defends mild pedophilia, says it does not cause lasting harm
by chrisuk inhttp://www.salon.com/2013/09/10/richard_dawkins_defends_mild_pedophilia_says_it_does_not_cause_lasting_harm/.
-
GLTirebiter
The "touching" Dawkins described (in the OP's link) is an act of grooming, gradually crossing moral boundaries to test the intended victim's resistance and, if weakness is found, to break down that resistance. It is not innocent, it is not harmless, it is in no way excusable.
Fortunately, some people understand that it is appropriate to deal with molesters firmly (though in a way that "I don't think...did any lasting harm".)
Asked by the dispatcher if any weapons were involved, the father said “my foot and my fist.”
“I didn’t proceed to ask him any questions sir,” the father said. “He is nice and knocked out on the floor for you. I drug him out to the living room.”
The father was not charged in Frolander’s beating, police spokesman Jimmie Flynt said.
“Dad was acting like a dad. I don’t see anything we should charge the dad with,” Chitwood said. “You have an 18-year-old who has clearly picked his target, groomed his target and had sex with the victim multiple times.”
-
15
How many of you 'understand' american politics and vote? (this could be a key issue on getting WT looked at more closely)
by EndofMysteries inplease answer even if you don't know anything about it and don't care or don't participate.
being a born in, never allowed to participate, throughout school whatever i learned was in one ear and out the other.
i had forgotton almost everything.
-
GLTirebiter
No Congressperson or Senator can introduce legislation inconsistent with the First Amendment's freedom of religion or the Establishment Clause.
They certainly can "introduce" such legislation, but it is more likely to become a rhetorical statement than the law of the land. Getting such legislation out of committee, and through floor debate and attempted ammendments, and passed by both chambers, and signed into law, and upheld by the courts, and not having it repealed in a later session of Congress is another matter.
The US Constitution provides many opportunities for the government to correct its own foolishness. If that fails, we have regular elections to replace the fools responsible. Thank God (and Publius) for such safeguards!
-
21
Bicyclists
by poppers ini'm wondering what sort of biking shoes and pedals you are using.
i'm a road biker, so i enjoy speed and distance riding, and am upgrading my shoes and pedals.
anyone have experience with specialized road shoes with the boa stem?
-
GLTirebiter
Watching with interest. My decades-old Look road pedals and shoes are due for replacement. They ride well, but the shoes are getting worn and the old size Look cleats are getting hard to find. I'm considering Shimano SPD to get recessed, walkable cleats. They are a little out of place on a road bike, but are a practical choice for someone of my age!
-
9
From Amherst Maine, no that's Massachusetts, errors galore from platform, warning to Russians not to take Ukrainian's Bibles
by oppostate ini went to the whole three days of regional convention in amherst ma.
mostly i slept through the talks, and i did get a lot of exercise walking around the concourse area looking for a bathroom that didn't have an exesive wainint line to go pee, yes, at this convention even the men's rooms had waiting lines!!!
it seemed like a full third of the audience was perpetually walking around and socializing during the program.. there were so many errors, so many speakers tripping over their words from the manuscripts they were reading.
-
GLTirebiter
Take that, Putin!
Perhaps that is close to the truth: the organization may want to avoid the official attention a planeload of delegates coming through customs with shiny new NWTs would attract. [edit] Especially Ukrainian NWTs, with the present politcal tension.
-
10
BBC Report - Abuse Victim of JW Elder Speaks Out.
by Joe Grundy inhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-28151300.
.
headline: "jehovah's witnesses' criticised over handling of sex abuse".
-
GLTirebiter
Additional BBC-Wales coverage (short version, the interview with victim):
-
51
Why did Ray Franz leave the Organization? Your Opinion Matters!
by SanLuisObispoTruthSeeker inwhat would make a man throw away all his earthly riches to expose the cult?
what did ray franz have to gain by leaving in total poverty?
if ray franz had stayed in place, he could have lived like a god, why did he leave?
-
GLTirebiter
Ray Franz didn't leave voluntarily; he was pushed out. Their excuse was that he continued to meet and dine with a disassociated person (his employer).
"While Lyman Swingle stood up for Ray Franz and prevented him from being disfellowshipped at that time (Lyman knew all the facts about 1914), Franz was spied upon and later disfellowshipped for eating a meal with his boss, a former Witness (see Time Magazine of Feb. 22, 1982, p. 66)."
[Edit: added link and quotation, correct "disfellowshipped" to "disassociated"]
-
89
US Supreme Court: Hobby Lobby wins we lose
by designs inthe old guys sided with hobby lobby today in denying birth control coverage to its female employees based on the owners religious views.
intact- is viagra for the guys.
funny how the far right evangelical owners of hobby lobby didn't want to touch that one.... read judge ginburg's scathing counter argument and opinion.. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-354_olp1.pdf.
-
GLTirebiter
By this logic, a Jehovah's Witness employer could refuse to pay for blood transfusions. Another could claim their religions don't cover cancer treatment, as it goes against God's will. Whether true or not, they gain a competitive advantage, as that would bring down their insurance costs.
No, the court explicitly restricted the scope of this ruling to contraceptive coverage:
"This decision concerns only the contraceptive mandate and should not be understood to hold that all insurance-coverage mandates, e.g., for vaccinations or blood transfusions, must necessarily fall if they conflict with an employer’s religious beliefs. Nor does it provide a shield for employers who might cloak illegal discrimination as a religious practice ... Here, there is an alternate to the contraceptive mandate." [pp 5-6 of the ruling]
Is GM held to the same standard as Hobby Lobby?
The ruling addresses the issue of publicly traded vs. closely-held corporations:
Finally, HHS contends that Congress could not have wanted RFRA to apply to for-profit corporations because it is difficult as a practical matter to ascertain the sincere “beliefs” of a corporation. HHS goes so far as to raise the specter of “divisive, polarizing proxy battles over the religious identity of large, publicly traded corporations such as IBM or General Electric.” Brief for HHS in No. 13–356, at 30.
These cases, however, do not involve publicly traded corporations, and it seems unlikely that the sort of corporate giants to which HHS refers will often assert RFRA claims. HHS has not pointed to any example of a publicly traded corporation asserting RFRA rights, and numerous practical restraints would likely prevent that from occurring. For example, the idea that unrelated shareholders—including institutional investors with their own set of stakeholders—would agree to run a corporation under the same religious beliefs seems improbable. In any event, we have no occasion in these cases to consider RFRA’s applicability to such companies. The companies in the cases before us are closely held corporations, each owned and controlled by members of a single family, and no one has disputed the sincerity of their religious beliefs. [p. 29]