redvip2000

Joined

• started 19 topics
• posted 2,639 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by redvip2000

• 
  36

  Do you believe that this life is all there is

  by Fisherman in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the bible records resurrections and there is orher evidence besides that gives hope.

  what do you think, is there enough evidence to believe in another life?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  redvip2000

  The Bible records resurrections and there is other evidence

  Fairy tale accounts by middle eastern goat herders are not evidence. And there is no other evidence, so no, i don't believe it.
• 
  173

  Roe vs Wade Overturned by US Supreme Court!

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  i know there was a leak a few weeks back, but this really does seem to have come out of the blue.. the anomaly was the original decision.

  it clearly had no basis in law or the constitution, and was a flimsy, ridiculous ruling.

  plus the whole thing was based on a fraudulent case in the first place.. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61928898.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  redvip2000

  The “viability” argument isn’t viable. I can take a sampling of modern humans, drop them in the wilderness and they are no longer “viable.” That doesn’t mean their lives aren’t important.

  Sorry, but that's a really silly argument.

  In any case, this is not about viability. This is about trying to figure out the point where a piece of living tissue has developed enough features that we would normally associate it with calling someone an individual.
• 
  173

  Roe vs Wade Overturned by US Supreme Court!

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  i know there was a leak a few weeks back, but this really does seem to have come out of the blue.. the anomaly was the original decision.

  it clearly had no basis in law or the constitution, and was a flimsy, ridiculous ruling.

  plus the whole thing was based on a fraudulent case in the first place.. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61928898.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  redvip2000

  Btw, I just saw an add on TV where Newsom is saying that they will welcome people from all states in Cali where they can seek "reproductive care".

  "Reproductive care"? Notice the branding here. It almost seems women can't go to the doctor in that medicine area at all. It's infuriating how every issue under the sun has to be sanitized with some PC language. Nothing can be called what it really is anymore.

  Everybody has to pretend something is slightly better than what is it, as if there is shame in calling it abortion. If you pro abortion, then be proud and call it abortion.

  Calling it "pro-choice" is similar. Another attempt at sanitizing it. As if people are forced to have abortions at gun point, and not really choosing to have one in the first place.
• 
  173

  Roe vs Wade Overturned by US Supreme Court!

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  i know there was a leak a few weeks back, but this really does seem to have come out of the blue.. the anomaly was the original decision.

  it clearly had no basis in law or the constitution, and was a flimsy, ridiculous ruling.

  plus the whole thing was based on a fraudulent case in the first place.. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61928898.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  redvip2000

  If one is against all abortions no matter what.

  In my experience, the people who are against all forms of abortion are typically religious nuts and ideologues. These are the people that claim that a second after conception, some magical spirit enters the fertilized egg.

  Most rational people understand that there is a difference between living tissue and an individual. And most rational people understand that the line between going from living tissue to an individual is not perfect. Is it 15 weeks? 20? 25? it can be debated, but it certainly isn't 1 second after conception and it's not 1 second before birth.
  
  
• 
  173

  Roe vs Wade Overturned by US Supreme Court!

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  i know there was a leak a few weeks back, but this really does seem to have come out of the blue.. the anomaly was the original decision.

  it clearly had no basis in law or the constitution, and was a flimsy, ridiculous ruling.

  plus the whole thing was based on a fraudulent case in the first place.. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61928898.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  redvip2000

  Mostly hysteria.

  This is the right decision. Abortion is not a constitutional right, that's basically the decision. The decision is not about the merits of abortion itself.

  The supreme court doesn't and shouldn't write law, so now the decision goes back to the people, the way it should be.

  Most states will continue to allow abortions for the first 2 - 3 months which seems reasonable. Perhaps a few will ban it completely.

  In the state I live in, abortion will be allowed into the third trimester, which is absolutely ridiculous. Here, you really are killing a baby.
• 
  27

  "Somebody" needs to do "Something!"

  by Terry in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it's always unjustifiable for a country to attack another country without having first been attacked itself.. the nuremberg trials at the end of wwii made this clear.. more vividly too: following orders as a patriotic duty is never secondary to the pangs of your personal conscience.. .

  worst of all, hypocrisy destroys credibility when you.

  criticize other countries for doing what you have done.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  redvip2000

  The US used the same excuses for invading Iraq in 2003. They claimed Iraq was developing nuclear weapons just as Putin claimed Ukraine was developing nuclear weapons.

  Oh you mean the Iraq that had invaded a sovereign country without provocation year earlier? You are really going to defend an illegitimate government who brutalizes its people and terrorizes its region? Now, I was not in favor of the Iraq war, but again, this is false equivalency.
  

  How sweet no to invade your allies.

  If by allies you mean democratic countries, then..... yes I'm ok with that.
  
  
• 
  16

  Why do you call yourselves "apostates?"

  by Marbles in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  well let me clarify the question.

  i know you call yourselves apostates because the bible defines people who leave their previously held beliefs as apostates.

  my question means, if the bible is not true (and i don't think it is) then there is no such thing as an apostate.i have never been a jw, only a bible student with them.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  redvip2000

  Apostasy has no relationship with truth. Even if a religion is BS, you can still be an apostate.
• 
  27

  "Somebody" needs to do "Something!"

  by Terry in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it's always unjustifiable for a country to attack another country without having first been attacked itself.. the nuremberg trials at the end of wwii made this clear.. more vividly too: following orders as a patriotic duty is never secondary to the pangs of your personal conscience.. .

  worst of all, hypocrisy destroys credibility when you.

  criticize other countries for doing what you have done.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  redvip2000

  I understand the point, but this is a false equivalency. The USA has invaded sovereign countries yes, but in response to something. Now, you can debate the validity of that like you have, but it's true. Worth mentioning that those countries usually don't have legitimate governments anyway, but instead dictatorships.

  But the USA states does not go around invading democratic countries, unless my memory is failing me.

  But even when the Unites States engages in war, it does not do it in this brutal way. The US goes to great lengths to spare innocent lives, most of the time using technology to hit with pinpoint accuracy, often aborting strikes if there will be large collateral damage.

  Israel does the same. Israel goes to the extent of dropping a mock bomb in a building first, so that it is evacuated and then hitting it with a real bomb afterwards.

  Russia still wages war like in the 1950's, also due to outdated material. Apartment buildings, neighborhoods, anything is fair game. Russians don't think the same way, or have any of the ethical concerns that many countries in the West do, and why would they? It's not like they have those concerns even domestically.
• 
  33

  Peak Cancel Culture

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  we seemed to have reached peak cancel-culture.

  now, we get to try to cancel the citizens of an entire country for something their government chose to do.. really, we can't allow russian individuals to compete in sports?

  to live a life?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  redvip2000

  Really, we can't allow Russian individuals to compete in sports? To live a life?

  Certainly not in favor of blaming Russians, we should leave them alone. They probably hate Putin just as much.

  But I do favor banning them from sports. Yes of course if we were to ban any country that has transgressed on something, there would be no sports. But invading a country unprovoked in this manner is crossing a line. Same if China invades Taiwan.

  Russians cares about sports and this will increase the pressure on Putin.
  
  
• 
  12

  World War 3

  by Reservations in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i’m calling it folks, world war 3 looks like it’s a done deal.. belarus has entered ukraine, and nato is involved heavily, just not “boots on the ground”.. will there be a nuclear exchange?

  i would have said no 5 days ago, now i’m not so sure.. how will this effect wt?

  probably more of the same fear mongering..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  redvip2000

  However, I don't think WW3 will last very long. Our technology is such that even IF Putin was crazy enough to launch, drones plus a good nuclear defense shield would probably shoot down anything he sent up.

  Won't last very long, true, but there is nothing positive with a nuclear war. If you live in North America, or Europe including Russia, you are dead.

  Russia has the most nuclear warheads in the world. No country will ever launch only one nuclear missile on another nuclear power, that would be stupid. If Russia attacks the US or France, or UK, they will launch everything they have on those countries at once. All those nuclear warheads would obliterate those countries. The US would respond and obliterate Russia. I live in the NY area, so no chance of surviving, that would be one of the first targets.

  If you live in Asia, or South American, or Africa or Australia or some island out there, you would probably be fine, but life would drastically change.