in an earlier thread, i mentioned that i wasn't a particularly doggy person but that my parents got a husky last year that i've come to regard as a kind of brother.. huskies superficially resemble wolves and for me it's been fun to compare and contrast husky and wolf behaviour.
huskies howl but rarely bark, and seem to have a strong prey drive and a strong pack instinct - a nod to their wild cousins.
this is why i love huskies, i think.. do you have a favourite dog breed and why?.
Havanese!
a coat of silky hair so soft you will.not.believe.it...feels like a dream..., perfect personality, no shedding, run and bounce like Pepe le Pew so you'll always be cracking up at their cuteness, always want to snuggle, absolute love-bugs, smart...the perfect dog! (as long as you keep the hair cut as in the pic. long hair on a havi is a pain.)
i start the journey towards getting a degree as a registered nurse on jan. 14th, 2013. wish me luck.. .
Congratulations!
i have been perusing through the many boe documents i have recently received and noticed something interesting.
regarding ones who disassociate themselves, there have been many discussions on this board where people tell others not write a letter as you are giving away any legal footing you may have against the society.
well, it appears that there are two routes you can take without officially getting da'd, according to the society's own documents.
Maverick: Excellent idea there. Could you do everyone a huge favor and copy the body of the letter (minus the personal stuff of course) into a posting, so we can get an idea what a valid Baptism Nullification letter looks like. You might just start a new trend there.
I don't see why one would want to go to this trouble when the result of this letter was the same as a regular DA letter or a DF: offical announcement and offical shunning. Unless it was just for the principle of thing...
There have been letters posted on this forum that did result in no announcement and no offical shunning (though some were still shunned by individuals despite there being no announcement 'so-and-so is no longer a JW')
recently someone asked me to define what core teachings have such a hold on jdubs that they have trouble breaking free.
trying to single out the driving force that keeps them in the borg, this is what popped into my head:.
obviously there are lots and lots of wacky things the jdubs teach/believe/pretend to believe.
What are the Core Teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses?
I've thought about this a lot and this is what I have come up with as their real core beliefs that cannot be changed:
1) They are God's one true religion
2) They are united (all believe the same thing, do the same thing, say the same thing -religiously speaking)
All other beliefs held by the JWs can, and do, change.
This is not a problem because changing beliefs about anything (like generation of 1914 etc) does not violate the two core beliefs.
Even when JWs believe different things (different levels of shunning for families, etc) they are all united in saying "it is a conscience matter!" No JW may openly have a different belief than the group on non-conscience matters.
i had originally thought that making the rules clear about what was and wasn't going to be allowed when discussing the michael brown verdict that we'd be able to avoid some of the unpleasantness that surrounded the subsequent trayvon martin trial discussions.. michael brown verdict discussion policy.
i had hoped that once the evidence came out there would not be as many people promoting opinions that contradicted it.
unfortunately, that appears to have been naive of me.
I am sorry for misreading that.
I should have said, "A person would have no reason to assume something like that other than that it fits with the imaginary me that a person would have built in their mind."
i had originally thought that making the rules clear about what was and wasn't going to be allowed when discussing the michael brown verdict that we'd be able to avoid some of the unpleasantness that surrounded the subsequent trayvon martin trial discussions.. michael brown verdict discussion policy.
i had hoped that once the evidence came out there would not be as many people promoting opinions that contradicted it.
unfortunately, that appears to have been naive of me.
"I work with kids the same age as them ... I can't imagine anyone of that age committingh such a horrendous crime"
You have no reason to assume that other than that it fits with the imaginary me you have built in you mind.
I work in a continuation school with all kinds of kids. Some of them have committed pretty terrible violent crimes. Not many, but some.
I also study child psychology and juvenile delinquency and am quite familiar with horrible crimes commited by juveniles.
i had originally thought that making the rules clear about what was and wasn't going to be allowed when discussing the michael brown verdict that we'd be able to avoid some of the unpleasantness that surrounded the subsequent trayvon martin trial discussions.. michael brown verdict discussion policy.
i had hoped that once the evidence came out there would not be as many people promoting opinions that contradicted it.
unfortunately, that appears to have been naive of me.
Thanks for your opinion.
There is hardly any info on this except the horrible crime and the ages of the killers.
What do I do for work? I work with 15 and 16 year old kids.
Think that might have had something to do with what as at the top of my mind?
I called them cold blooded killers. No excuses made.
If a person wants to engage me about my posts, I think the person should stick to what is in my post and not some imaginary version of me that lives in the person's head.
done. over and out.
i had originally thought that making the rules clear about what was and wasn't going to be allowed when discussing the michael brown verdict that we'd be able to avoid some of the unpleasantness that surrounded the subsequent trayvon martin trial discussions.. michael brown verdict discussion policy.
i had hoped that once the evidence came out there would not be as many people promoting opinions that contradicted it.
unfortunately, that appears to have been naive of me.
lisa - I see you're quick to mention ages as if this would save them from having to show any sort of responsibility, nice.
They were walking around carrying hammers - I think it's safe to assume they weren't offering to put a shelf up for anybody.
you think you can read my mind and can know my motives and what I think about this new case, a case I myself know hardly anything about.
You are talking to some imaginary person you think is me, not to me.
i had originally thought that making the rules clear about what was and wasn't going to be allowed when discussing the michael brown verdict that we'd be able to avoid some of the unpleasantness that surrounded the subsequent trayvon martin trial discussions.. michael brown verdict discussion policy.
i had hoped that once the evidence came out there would not be as many people promoting opinions that contradicted it.
unfortunately, that appears to have been naive of me.
lisaBObeesa - it seems the only racist people we know for sure re. Ferguson are the group of black 'protesters' who beat a white Bosnian immigrant to death using hammers. Please see EndofMystery's thread.
I saw some news storys about this...terrible! I didn't see anything about the 15 and 16 year old cold-blooded murderers being protesters or anything about race being the motive. I will the check the thread...
i had originally thought that making the rules clear about what was and wasn't going to be allowed when discussing the michael brown verdict that we'd be able to avoid some of the unpleasantness that surrounded the subsequent trayvon martin trial discussions.. michael brown verdict discussion policy.
i had hoped that once the evidence came out there would not be as many people promoting opinions that contradicted it.
unfortunately, that appears to have been naive of me.
Can I make a suggestion? I think you will get far less "wound up" in these discussions if you take a little longer to read and then re-read what I have actually said instead of seeing what I can only assume you want to imagine I have said.
back at ya.
