haha Thanks for more phrases, Phizzy.
And it is really sad that so many people don't feel they can get married again in this organization. If a marriage falls apart, people shouldn't be expected to never love again. It's kind of tragic.
so i was talking to my boyfriend about the whole jw scriptural divorce idea.
i made the point initally that i think when jesus was talking about reasons to get divorced, he was more or less just trying to discourage divorce for frivilous reasons.
you have to admit that there are a lot of people out there who just don't put much effort into it and just give up.
haha Thanks for more phrases, Phizzy.
And it is really sad that so many people don't feel they can get married again in this organization. If a marriage falls apart, people shouldn't be expected to never love again. It's kind of tragic.
so i was talking to my boyfriend about the whole jw scriptural divorce idea.
i made the point initally that i think when jesus was talking about reasons to get divorced, he was more or less just trying to discourage divorce for frivilous reasons.
you have to admit that there are a lot of people out there who just don't put much effort into it and just give up.
haha I've never heard bean flicking before. And I've definitely heard flogging the bishop for dudes. I have way too many perverted male friends who talk about stuff like that a lot.
I guess guys just tend to talk about that sort of thing more than women do, so there are a lot more fun terms for guys doing that. I've heard probably 15 at least.
so i was talking to my boyfriend about the whole jw scriptural divorce idea.
i made the point initally that i think when jesus was talking about reasons to get divorced, he was more or less just trying to discourage divorce for frivilous reasons.
you have to admit that there are a lot of people out there who just don't put much effort into it and just give up.
Thanks for the answer! I had a question in regard to that. My boyfriend said he knew of someone in his congregation whose spouse was cheating on them, and the elders needed to do a stakeout outside of the alleged third party's house to completely believe this person. (Elder Turner and Hooch? ) Anyway, if the spouse could somehow convince the elders or some other person in the congregation to walk in on their husband/wife doing that, would that count?
haha I guess the trouble would be in convincing someone they wanted to see someone flogging the bishop or whatever term you use for ladies pleasuring themselves. (How come we don't have any fun phrases for that? The dudes get all the best ones. )
so i was talking to my boyfriend about the whole jw scriptural divorce idea.
i made the point initally that i think when jesus was talking about reasons to get divorced, he was more or less just trying to discourage divorce for frivilous reasons.
you have to admit that there are a lot of people out there who just don't put much effort into it and just give up.
So I was talking to my boyfriend about the whole JW scriptural divorce idea. I made the point initally that I think when Jesus was talking about reasons to get divorced, he was more or less just trying to discourage divorce for frivilous reasons. You have to admit that there are a lot of people out there who just don't put much effort into it and just give up. I feel like, in the context, he was trying to make people realize that marriage was a serious thing and a serious commitment.
Anyway, obviously being significantly different from a fundie, although a church goer who at least knows my new testament pretty well, I said that I think abuse, emotional neglect, and alcoholism are also really good reasons to get divorced. I think if you break the marriage vows or sort of "commit adultery against your relationship" (ie, showing it and your partner disrespect) that it's perfectly acceptable to get divorced. Obviously, he's got the JW mindset of you can leave for those things, but you can't get married again or it's "adultery."
All of this led to a question. Since Jesus said that looking on someone other than your spouse with lust is the same as adultery, would a porn problem constitute a scriptural reason for getting divorced? Technically speaking, the husband/wife who is doing that is committing adultery as per the definition that Jesus gave. I don't think we have any fundies here, really, and I'm certainly not one myself, but I was wondering: Do you think this reasoning would ever prevail in trying to dissolve a JW marriage? Or do you think it would be sound reasoning to a fundamentalist? (Obviously even most fundamental churches don't worry about divorce and remarriage as much as crazy sects do. They don't micromanage their members' lives, but I was just wondering about your thoughts.)
i'm on my own for a week while my wife is in utah.
i have some wild and crazy things planned but i need help with my movie selection.
last night i watched "in darknes" a very good move.
My boyfriend is at the same one! Since he was gone this weekend, I went and saw Seeking a Friend for the End of the World last night without him. If you can catch a matinee, it's definitely worth the price! I think it's the best movie I've seen in the past couple of years.
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-gb</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>x-none</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp /> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables /> <w:dontvertalignintxbx /> <w:word11kerningpairs /> <w:cachedcolbalance /> </w:compatibility> <w:browserlevel>microsoftinternetexplorer4</w:browserlevel> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"times new roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"times new roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} </style> <!
[endif]just read bublegum's post and was going to post there but realised it would be off topic.. it got me thinking - as did some of the other atheist threads - why are religious people scared or atheists?
I'm a believer, but I have no problem with/fear of atheists. Their viewpoint is obviously more rational than mine, and I readily admit it! I regularly discuss religion with my atheist and agnostic friends, and it seems like people who are afraid of such discussions really aren't all that strong in their faith anyway. The constant warnings of some churches to only hang out with believers is a sign of that, I believe. People haven't considered much else and would have serious questions about their faith after a while of being exposed to other beliefs/non-belief.
I will say one thing that annoys the crap out of me when it comes to a lot of other believers: The whole idea that believing in God somehow makes you more moral than people who don't. What the crap is that? That makes absolutely no sense to me. So people who have a hard time believing in something that isn't readily tangible and provable are bad people? Okay... dummies.
haha so i know the public watchtower from may 1st was probably discussed a while ago, but the logic contained in the article about religion and politics is so ridiculous.
my boyfriend had one lying around when we were hanging out the other day.
i swear, he leaves them around when he knows i'll be stopping by to see if it will interest me.
Thanks for the responses! I really don't get their whole idea on being completely separated from the government, especially if you accept assistance from welfare programs. (My boyfriend knows a lot of people in his congregation who do, even couples without kids who get hundreds of dollars in food stamps a month.) So get the benefits, but decry those who give them to you as evil/bad? Since Jesus was all about helping people, too, you'd think that voting for people who would do good things and being involved in government organizations that do good things (like the Peace Corps) would be considered moral!
If this article is any reflection of their reasoning behind their stance, it's kind of cuckoo. I especially like all of their "clearly's" and "logically's." I know the constant use of those words convinces me!
haha so i know the public watchtower from may 1st was probably discussed a while ago, but the logic contained in the article about religion and politics is so ridiculous.
my boyfriend had one lying around when we were hanging out the other day.
i swear, he leaves them around when he knows i'll be stopping by to see if it will interest me.
haha So I know the public Watchtower from May 1st was probably discussed a while ago, but the logic contained in the article about religion and politics is so ridiculous. My boyfriend had one lying around when we were hanging out the other day. I swear, he leaves them around when he knows I'll be stopping by to see if it will interest me. If I do read it, I mostly just laugh about the nonsense. We used to legitimately discuss it, but I can't get past the the logic that most eight year olds could combat. :P
Anyway, my favorites are:
"What then, will happen to manmade governments? The Bible answers that the governments "of the entire inhabited earth" will be destroyed. If an individual truly believes that God's Kingdom is about to remove all man-made political systems, he would logically refrain from supporting those political systems. After all, if he tried to prop up doomed, man made governments, he would, in effect, be taking a stand against God."
I also like how they talk about how Jesus not wanting to be anyone's king and how saying render unto Caesar what is Caesar's were "clear" proof that Jesus was not involved in politics at all. Then they said people were always trying to get him involved in the controversial issues of the day. Maybe I'm reading the wrong Bible; I guess I missed the bit about his constant refusal to appear on Roman CSPAN...
i am stunned by candace's huge court victory.
it is overdue.
i have been reading comments on jvn, huffington, san jose mercury, nbc, and other sources.
Obviously my boyfriend isn't exactly a hardcore JW, since he's dating a "worldly girl," but he says he hopes they own up to it and if they don't, he'll be really disappointed. He basically said that he's hoping they say something during meeting tomorrow or next week, and that whatever they say will have a big impact on what he thinks of them. I think between my incessant subliminal picking away at JW beliefs and this stuff, he just may leave before too long! Thanks Watchtower organization; you're doing all the work for me! Now excuse me while I adoringly admire my Sparlock poster.
i wonder when these penguins partook of the fruit, or did adam and eve force feed it to them?.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/09/sex-depravity-penguins-scott-antarctic?fb=native&cmp=fbcnettxt9038.
landmark polar research about the adelie penguin's sex life by captain scott's expedition, deemed too shocking for the public 100 years ago, is unearthed at the natural history museum.
I had a roommate one summer in college whose brother would have her babysit his dog when he'd gone out of town. The roommate had just gotten a puppy, and her brother's dog tried to have sex with the puppy constantly. They were both male. I'm not sure the puppy even knew what was going on. A lot of animals, especially dogs I think, are just horny bastards. If there weren't societal norms to observe, I think a lot of people might behave like this, too. :P Just think of the gem off of The White Album, Why Don't We Do it in the Road?