This is kind of like "ask the audience" . . .
So far you've got;
Don't do it . . . 42%
Tap and go . . . 10% (dissappointing I know)
All the way . . . 15%
Other . . . 33%
You may want to "phone a friend" on this one.
she has 4 kids.
the father of her kids sees them every two weeks.
i am not sure if it is a good idea for me to ask her out.
This is kind of like "ask the audience" . . .
So far you've got;
Don't do it . . . 42%
Tap and go . . . 10% (dissappointing I know)
All the way . . . 15%
Other . . . 33%
You may want to "phone a friend" on this one.
she has 4 kids.
the father of her kids sees them every two weeks.
i am not sure if it is a good idea for me to ask her out.
allcool . . . to hell with it . . . what james said. ^^
i was alerted to steven unthanks latest feature article on jwnews.net .
.. it was posted just a few days ago (11th) and explains a number of things some have puzzled over with regard to australian law, and why things unfolded as they did.. it includes a report compiled by an ex-jw who attended the hearings.. for those that took an interest in the case .
it might fill in some gaps for you.. it's on the home page and entitled .
Yeah good points . . . with the intolerable discomfort of hindsight, the defence of "kingdom interests" would have justified plenty in my mind at one time . . . why play fair with Satan?
Our dear brothers and sisters where the only ones deserving of the lofty Christian virtue of honesty . . . and even then there's plenty bullshit for everyone. Satans wicked system is simply below displaying moral virtue to . . . bullshit all you want.
but i guess i finaly had it at the office with religion.
(there are two dubs and everyone else just throws in comments).
i guess living the life of a dub for a number of years took a lot of the belief out of me.. i think what threw me the most is when i hear people saying that god is like a parent, a father watching over his children.
Human constructs are easy to identify . . . just spend a few days in the forest or on a deserted beach.
You won't find any religion.
You won't find any political ideology.
You won't find corporate commerce, or a GDP, or economic growth.
And . . . you won't find God.
All you'll find is the forest or the beach . . . because they're actually there.
The human constructs you will not find.
but i guess i finaly had it at the office with religion.
(there are two dubs and everyone else just throws in comments).
i guess living the life of a dub for a number of years took a lot of the belief out of me.. i think what threw me the most is when i hear people saying that god is like a parent, a father watching over his children.
Do you remember the days
We built these paper mountains
And sat and watched them burn
Religion is a mental firestorm. It throws everything out of place.
Coming here helps put out the fire . . . but it doesn't put things back in place again.
Not how we want it anyway.
this is an honest question on my part.
someone on this board asked me 'how do you know' a while ago and i really struggled with it.
in fact, it was a turning point for me.
this is an honest question on my part.
someone on this board asked me 'how do you know' a while ago and i really struggled with it.
in fact, it was a turning point for me.
I wasn't talking about that kind of bush . . . I may still find God in the other kind. I'm trying hard to find something.
this is an honest question on my part.
someone on this board asked me 'how do you know' a while ago and i really struggled with it.
in fact, it was a turning point for me.
Can we talk about the bush again?
From a young age I spent a lot of time alone in the bush . . . days, weeks, months. While I was still at school I'd be up at 4.30 to go and clear traps every morning in the hills above our house. I made a living culling possums and goats and rabbits for a while.
When I first went into the bush I felt very small and alone . . . now it's a place of comfort. Outside of my family, all my friends are in the bush. Everything good can be found there. I'd be happy to live . . . and die, in the bush when the day comes. I've not seen God there . . . just the bush.
the wts ban on the transfusion of whole blood or primary components is established on a number of "principles" which when taken in their entirety give rise to the doctrine.. one important one is the refusal to distinguish between the consumption of blood by eating .
and the consumption of blood by surgically implanting it (transfusion).
we've all heard the "alcohol" analogy.
I agree that lawsuits over damage caused by the blood doctrine is a long shot at best. The applicant would need to establish extreme duress. You end up going down the "mind control" and strict enforcement road, which is awfully messy. Instances where HLC's have imposed themselves, esp if they have dealt with medics directly might get some traction.
Nevertheless, a sudden discarding of the doctrine would have people queueing up to try anyway . . . the outrage would create a crisis for their precious image . . . and recruitment and retention would get hit hard . . . bad for business. Small steps over time is the strategy . . . they can almost claim "we've always maintained it to be a conscience matter for the individual" already. Time will only aid their strategy.
The incongruity between the blood and organ transplant doctrines is created by their own reasoning . . . and is pretty obvious really, if you know their history. I agree with Marvin et al . . . they've known about it for years, and the strategy has been in place since the early 90's.
The truth is . . . they've callously perpetrated the doctrine for totally selfish reasons, not believing it themselves, causing huge loss of life. It's still going on today. It's actions like that which make me question my abhorrence of the death penalty. It's pre-meditated mass-murder.
the wts ban on the transfusion of whole blood or primary components is established on a number of "principles" which when taken in their entirety give rise to the doctrine.. one important one is the refusal to distinguish between the consumption of blood by eating .
and the consumption of blood by surgically implanting it (transfusion).
we've all heard the "alcohol" analogy.
The WTS ban on the transfusion of whole blood or primary components is established on a number of "principles" which when taken in their entirety give rise to the doctrine.
One important one is the refusal to distinguish between the consumption of blood by eating . . . and the consumption of blood by surgically implanting it (transfusion). We've all heard the "alcohol" analogy. I know it's a logical fallacy to compare the two . . . but the WTS considers it a fair "principle" and continues to adhere to it "religiously".
OK . . . what about the consumption of human flesh? If "eating" is the same as "transfusing" blood by surgical implant . . . then an organ transplant is the same as eating it . . . right? It's the "consumption" of human flesh without the distinction between eating and surgically implanting it . . . as the WTS insists!
This principle, if applied consistently, renders the transplanting of human organs as being the same as eating them . . . ie; cannabalism. The WTS's (now discarded) ban on organ transplants is entirely consistent with their ban on blood.
The WTS needs to re-instate their ban on organ transplants . . . otherwise their stand on blood is 100% hypocritical, and they are merely sanctioning cannabalism.