Posts by Mary

164

Was justice served fairly in the Micheal Brown tragedy, whats your opinion ?

by Finkelstein in

the michael brown tragedy has garnered a lot of attention in the media recently highlighted.

by the recent county court decision to not indict the lone officer who did the shooting which caused the death of micheal brown.. .. now after more information of the event has been released openly to the public, we can evaluate upon are self.

in are own opinion toward was the law handed out in this particular event proportionately fair or to a professional standard ?.

Mary

here is an established protocol to wait for assistance upon coming into a situation when you come upon an individual or a group of individuals that is being extremely aggressive

The officer really didn't have the luxury of waiting for back-up. Michael Brown & his friend started running away. At that time, Officer Wilson was pretty sure that he was the one who had just robbed the store (he fit the description and had the cigars in his hand) and as a trained cop, he did what he was trained to do. Michael Brown appeared to be very aggressive (believable after seeing the video of him robbing the store and shoving aside the worker who tried to stop him) and if he realized that he was facing arrest, it's not too difficult to imagine his response. He was a very big guy too, 6'3" and nearly 300 lbs. He hardly needed a gun to be seen as dangerous, especially as he had already attacked Officer Wilson.

We all have 20/20 vision in hindsight. Officer Wilson wasn't give that luxury; he had to make a decision in probably less than 5 seconds. The tragedy is that none of this needed to happen. Had Michael & his friend not robbed the store, this wouldn't have happened. If he hadn't been acting like a smartass walking down the middle of the street, refusing to move when ordered to by Officer Wilson, this wouldn't have happened. His own actions, unfortunately, cost him his life that day and now his parents and family have to go the rest of their lives without their son. We can only hope that maybe this tragedy might be a lesson for other teenagers who might think they're above the law. It can cost them everything.

551

Officer Wilson not indicted in killing of Michael Brown

by Simon in

after a thorough investigation and weighing of the evidence the grand jury has decided not to indict the officer.. the reaction so far seems as predicted - people refuse to accept that the result represents justice despite claims that is what they wanted.. there is now violence and vandalism, including gunshots.

let's hope the police contain the troublemakers.. .

Mary

Up until last night, I had no idea that Officer had been physically attacked by Michael Brown. While I was surprised that the Grand Jury decided not to indict, what I found so ironic is that, prior to this, the protestors were pissed off that the National Guard were called in, in anticipation of the aftermath, because "it made us look like we're violent". So what happens? This morning, Ferguson is in flames, stores are being burned to the ground, and looting all over the place.

While I feel terrible for Michael Brown's family for their loss, this entire mess could have been avoided had Michael Brown just moved off the road as requested by law enforcement.

60

How Do You Answer Someone Who Says JWs Are Not False Prophets?

by minimus in

jw
friends

it used to bother me that people would say that about my well meaning religion.

how do you prove that witnesses are indeed, false prophets?.

Mary

Simon said: The onus is on them to prove that they are *not* false prophets which should be easy if they really have the genuine mojo: "Give us one conclusive clear prophecy that has been correct"

Have you not seen their newest claim: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJ6405yjZfo

65

Doctors and surgeons say no to blood transfusions

by Mr Negative in

my mum recently told me that even surgeons won't have blood transfusions, but the common people don't get told this.

i have also seen or heard others say that a bunch of doctors/health officials/surgeons were asked, at some point, if they would accept a blood transfusion and they all said no.

is this true?

Mary

They say politics makes strange bedfellows, but so does religion. I went to visit my mom's best friend recently. She's in the hospital with a malignant tumour in her bowel that's bleeding. Her blood count has dropped to 79. They want to go in asap to remove the tumour, but because her blood count is so low and because, as a JW, she won't take blood, then the risks of her dying are A LOT higher. Anyway, the doctor came in while we were there and he went through everything with her (she wanted us to stay) and told her that while he respected her religious beliefs, he had to tell her of the potential consequences. He asked if there was anything she would take, but because she didn't have her blood card with her, she had no idea at all as to what she could and couldn't take.

I stepped in and told the doctor that there are some things they can take, but none of these 'fractions' would be of any benefit to her in her condition. She needs packed red cells that carry the oxygen to the lungs and of course, this is on the 'do not pass go' list. I asked if there was any treatment, drugs or therapy that can replace the oxygen in the red cells, even though I was 99.99% of the answer even before he told me. Bottom line is: we won't have that technology for a few more decades at least.

After the doctor left, she said she was so happy we were there to help because she wouldn't remember anything that he said. I thought "well isn't this ironic: an apostate trying to help an elderly JW through a life and death decision.'

What was so sad and pathetic is that she started preaching to the doctor about how it was a 'conscience matter', etc. etc. I thought "oh god, this is the definition of insanity: preaching to the doctor who's trying to save your life, about how great the cult is that is, more or less, forcing you to possibly commit suicide.'

I actually had a conversation with a Witness about the blood recently on-line. They of course gave me the old: 'if the doctor told you to abstain from blood, would you inject it into your veins?' I said "if it was going to save my life? Absolutely'. I then said to him: 'If your doctor told to abstain from eating organ meat (which means no liver & onions or steak and kidney pie), and then 6 months down the road you were told you needed a kidney transplant, would you refuse on the grounds that "my doctor told me to abstain from eating organ meat"?

Never heard back from him.

142

Governing Body Member Gerrit Loesch Must Eventually Take The Witness Stand In Child Molestation Lawsuits

by frankiespeakin in

with many more cases in the offing the zalkin lawfirm will press the issue again and again and force gerrit loesch to testify.

what say you?.

.

Mary

He will take the 5th i'm guessing.

That's my feeling on it too. The GB knows full well that their neanderthal views of child molestation is wrong, but since they've never apologized for anything ever in 130+ years, I don't imagine they'll do that now. Funny how they love to hide behind the same Constitution that they love to bash.

105

Consider the "outcome" when elders apply the two-witness "rule"

by AndersonsInfo in

jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule is applied by elders when a witness member accuses another member of a sin, even if that sin is a criminal act.

if there arent two witnesses to the accusation, it goes nowhere, including not being reported to the authorities.

and in the case of an allegation of child abuse, the accused is free to molest again.. watchtower attorney, jim mccabe, recently stated this about jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule which he described as a bible-based belief :.

Mary

Utterly nauseating. Of course, JWs will simply say "...there's got to be more to it than this. We abhore child abuse!!"

This effing pig elder who did this needs to be thrown into general population and let nature take its course.

22

Honey who-who???

by sparrowdown in

i do apologize for my extreme ignorance, but i am curious.. who the hell are honey boo boo, sugar bear and mama june??.

and more to the point.. why the hell are some americans so obsessed with them?.

i just don't get it.. .

Mary

Who the hell are honey boo boo, sugar bear and mama june??

They're the Missing Link between humans and neanderthals.

37

$13.5 million to a San Diego man

by truthseekeriam in

jw
friends

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/135m-awarded-to-bible-teacher-gonzalo-campos-alleged-abuse-victim-jose-lopez-281031832.html#.

the national organization for jehovah's witnesses was ordered to pay $13.5 million to a san diego man who says he was abused as a child by his bible teacher.

nbc 7's rory devine reports on oct. 30, 2014.

Mary

“Jehovah’s Witnesses abhor child abuse and strive to protect children from such acts,” the organization said in a statement.

Ya riiiiight. Your '2 eye witness rule' really helps protect children from the pervs in the congregations. Don't worry Crooklyn, there's lots more judgements coming your way soon.

Sooner. than. you . think !!!

18

How to Bewilder a Witness!

by The Searcher in

ask a witness what seems like a simple bible question: "nine verses in the bible tell us that jesus is going to judge the living and the dead.

(john 5:28,29, acts 10:42, acts 17:31, romans 14:9, 2 cor.

5:10, 2 tim.

Mary

29

I AGREE WITH THE JWs: THE 'SOUL' DOESN'T EXIST

by NAVYTOWN in

jw
friends

i agree with the witnesses about almost nothing, but i do think they have the right idea when it concerns the 'soul'.

it is my belief that there is no such entity as a 'soul' that resides in a human being.

the idea originated in ancient, pre-scientific eras.

Mary

Cantleave, the evidence you've provided, while certainly worth consideration, does not give any sort of rational explanation as to why these NDEs are occurring. Much of what you've quoted are the writings of militant atheists, such as Dr. Gerry Woerlee (whom I have had several conversations on-line with) who have a much vested interest in going to any lengths to try and explain these experiences away as mere hallucinations. He insists that her experience was caused by anesthesia awareness and will go to any lengths to try and discredit the possibility that our consciousness can survive outside of the physical body. Pam's eyes were taped shut during the surgery, there were nodules placed in her ears that would go off every few seconds and this was used to record any possible brain activity. There's no way she could have possibly either seen what was going on or heard it.

When I compared the descriptions of NDEs with those who have had Anesthesia Awareness, it was pretty obvious that they are 2 completely different experiences. Diane Parr was unfortunate enough to experience AA during surgery and it bares no resemblance at all to those who experience NDEs. People who are blind from birth have been able to see visually for the first time during an NDE, but unfortunately, these experiences too are dismissed by fanatics like Worelee or Susan Blackmore who go to extraordinary lengths to try and discredit them as nothing more than fanciful hallucinations of the brain.

Skeptics (who really are not skeptical at all---they should be renamed: Militant Non-Believers) have long asked for verifiable evidence that something survives the physical death, probably assuming that nothing would ever surface. However, each year, there is more and more evidence that something incredible is going on and it seems to happen as one approaches death. Those who simply have no belief at all in anything but a materialist world will never concede that something might survive the physical death and I find it rather disturbing that so many ex-JWs have simply swapped on set of fanatical beliefs with another and will not admit even the possibility that their view might not be telling the whole story.

I think a good healthy dose of skepticism is something we should all have, but it shouldn't be so fanatical that we're not open to other possibilities. Just because something can't be replicated in a double-blind study under controlled conditions in a lab doesn't mean it's not real.