Posts by Reborn2002

117

Letter from a friend in Iraq

by Yerusalyim in

ok, i won't give his name, but he is a major with an engineer unit in iraq.

here's what he has to say on iraq, i've highlighted a few interesting points.

it has been a while since i have written to my friends about what's really going on here in iraq.

Reborn2002

Yeru-

I am disappointed in you. In one fell swoop, you have entirely destroyed your credibility.

Yeru said in his original post:

but he is a Major with an Engineer unit in Iraq.

How convenient is it that Yeru's "friend" happens to be the very same rank of Major as Rydbom who was attributed as writing the letter on the website? How coincidental that he is also an engineer? You would have believe that a friend of yours sent you a letter which happens to be verbatim to one that is posted on the Internet and allegedly written by someone else there? On top of that, it is plagiarism of the highest form and any credible Army soldier would have given notice that it was something someone else wrote, and as a friend he wanted Yeru to read it.

Your busted Yeru. A shame that you would try to legitimize propaganda by insinuating that it came from a close friend of yours in the Army. Makes me laugh also that you are now able to contact Rydbom via an Army mail server, yet refused to give the name of your "friend" in the "initial" post.

How suspect.

I and others are very disappointed.

27

Florida Plastic Surgery Ruling

by Yerusalyim in

jw
friends

the florida supreme court has ruled that as long as they can pay for it, children as young as 12 can receive elective plastic surgery without parental consent.

sound far fetched?

not really, considering that the florida courts have indeed ruled that 12 year olds can get an abortion without parental consent.

Reborn2002

I live in Florida Yeru, and that is not the worst of it. If you listen to the radio here in Orlando, they have advertisements for "Kid's Night" at some of the local clubs where 13-20 year olds can get into the club and mingle with the over 21 crowd who drink.

Whose idea was it to let 13, 14, and 15 years old to have legal access to the clubs and to associate with 21+ people? They try to make it sound appropriate by giving the disclaimer in the commercial that you must be over 21 to drink. But still.

Then they wonder why kids get pregnant, raped, or the like. Knowingly allowing 13 year olds to get into the club is insanity, but the radio shows do it, and the government allows it.

45

Sept 1 2003 WT: Is There Only One 'True Church'?

by Mary in

jw
friends

the latest wt magazine starts out by quoting a catholic cardinal:

just as there is one christ, so there exists a single body of christ, a single bride of christ: 'a single catholic and apostolic church.

........although pope john paul ii insisted that the document dominus iesus contained "no arrogance towards, or disrespect for other religions", protestant church leaders reacted strongly to it.........in june 2001, one minister said that the document was the work of "a powerful faction in the roman catholic church....scared silly by the spirit of openness introduced by vatican ii".........it appears that the....catholic curia was disturbed by what has been called religious relativism........[which is] the emergence of a pluralist theology----saying basically that one religion is as good as another...... what then, is the right view?

Reborn2002

I can in no way agree that what the WT does is as bad as having a toungue cut off or eyes removed

That is a matter of personal opinion.

Others would argue that they would rather lose a limb or organ instead of being cut off from their family via WT doctrine or shunned and humiliated.

Or if a person considers the current policies and practices the WT instructs regarding blood transfusions and shielding pedophiles.... or past policies like organ transplants, the WT does kill people needlessly. The WT does make people suffer. The method is different, but just as bad as inflicted physical torture or harm.

51

How Long Were You "In Transition" Before You Left The Organization?

by minimus in

jw
friends

weeks, months, years??

?

Reborn2002

2 - 3 years.

32

Would you ever come back for someone you loved?

by micheal in

jw
friends

if there was someone you were crazy about who went back to associating with jw's again and they asked you to come back too, only because to live dividedly for the rest your life would be just too hard and awkward.

keep in mind your role would be very limited, few meetings a month, couple hrs service a month etc.. i know "if" this was before me i would feel that i would never ever want to come back.

i don't believe it is the truth, can't stand the control among other reasons.

Reborn2002

I love my mother, sister, and brother. I love my two nephews. I DID play the charade and go back for a while to have association with them despite the fact I knew JWism to be a fake charade.

You cannot live the lie for long.

Besides, you come to the realization that if you have to fake who you are for people to accept you, then they don't really care about you at all in the first place.

13

What would you call an Italian power company?

by Simon in

.

if you were a power company called "powergen" and you had a subsidiary that operated in italy, what would you call that company's website?.

http://www.powergenitalia.com/.

Reborn2002

HAHAHAHHAHHAHA

Intentional slip? Or are they that naive of English words?

That is hilarious.

18

Why would JW's take money from someone they shun?

by unbeliever in

jw
friends

this happened a long time ago but i have a friend (da'd) who is shunned by his family.

his sister asked if he could give her money every month so she could continue to pioneer.

he is very well off and could afford to give her the money.

Reborn2002

Would JW's take money from someone they shun? They have and they do.

Due to Jehovah's Witness teachings, my brother did not pursue a college education. His wife is a loyal Jehovah's Witness, and she also has nothing beyond a high school diploma. They now have two children and she pioneers and refuses to work, all the while they cannot financially support themselves without aid from my JW mother and sister. My father even got my brother a hookup at a local Ford Motor Company position in his area (my father has worked for Ford for almost 30 years) in which my brother would have been paid $70,000/yr. He did not fit the qualifications entirely (no degree) but they offered him the job because it was an inside reference. He instead turned it down because he would have been required to work 2 Saturdays and 2 Sundays a month, and he would not give up Field Service and the Watchtower Study, instead citing that Jehovah would provide. Since then I even recently heard from my brother in law that my brother and his wife had no money for hot water in their home. 2 children and no warm water. So much for Jehovah providing! Dumbasses! Anyway, my mother calls me and asks for money on an occasion as if something was terribly wrong. I did not and would not turn my mother down because I want to try to have a relationship with her (she has not been evil as of late, my brother shuns me entirely) and then I find that she took the money I gave her and gave it to my brother. He will not speak to me. He wants me to have nothing to do with my two nephews. He even looked me in the face one time and told me what a shame it would be when I was destroyed at Armaggedon, and how he would have to explain to my resurrected grandparents why I was not there. But the family would get over it. Yet I guess he does not mind taking my money. That was the last time I give any.

Nest of scheming bastards.

They even rationalize to themselves that they are waging theocratic warfare and getting the most they can out of Satan's wicked people to support themselves.

Then people wonder why I hate Jehovah's Witnesses.

163

Moral absolutes

by Aztec in

i keep saying i am going to start a thread on this topic so here goes.... what, if anything, is always morally wrong?

murder, rape, incest?

how much do you think your belief, or lack thereof, in a higher power influences your opinion?.

Reborn2002

peacefulpete made some very relevant points in his last post.

He said:

I just want to separate my comments from those of reborn2002. While contextural ethics may be justification for a wrong to be commited it does not negate the wrong or make it helpful or harmless. The end does not justify the means.

No, a girl was raped unwillingly, and that does not make it morally right. But morally absolute that it is not acceptable under any circumstances? No.

Would you kill 100 people if it meant saving a 1,000,000? This is one of the more meatier discussions I have seen on this board in a while. I am thankful for it. I was growing tired of the fluff.

163

Moral absolutes

by Aztec in

i keep saying i am going to start a thread on this topic so here goes.... what, if anything, is always morally wrong?

murder, rape, incest?

how much do you think your belief, or lack thereof, in a higher power influences your opinion?.

Reborn2002

teejay, I have always like you man.

Don't take this the wrong way. You and me are cool, right? But I hated your scenario and don't think it fits into this discussion. You win today's award for saying/posting the most disturbing thing I've read/heard today. Congrats.

I can understand why someone would hate that scenario. I never said I liked it. However, as I know you are aware (even if you or I do not wish to be) the world is a cruel place where evil things happen every day. The scenario I gave is very real.

I am curious though to know how you feel it does not fit into the discussion. The very terminology absolute in regard to morals would quantify that there are no exceptions under any circumstances for some courses of action. Laws given that are not to be doubted, ever (do not murder, do not rape, etc.). This is not logical. The scenario I gave, while grim, would justify a lesser evil for the sake of saving the lives of a number of people. Therefore contextual ethics dictate that a person must examine the unique situation presented in any incident and act for the greatest good of the largest amount of people.

Thanks for the award too. I take credit in knowing I said something disturbing for you. At least it made people think.

163

Moral absolutes

by Aztec in

i keep saying i am going to start a thread on this topic so here goes.... what, if anything, is always morally wrong?

murder, rape, incest?

how much do you think your belief, or lack thereof, in a higher power influences your opinion?.

Reborn2002

Hey BigTex. I for one have always found you to be a kind, thoughtful poster, and before I proceed further in this post I want to make it clear that I respect your opinion. However one cannot help but realize that you are biased (not necessarily a bad thing, so please do not think it an insult) due to your personal experiences. Everyone is biased to an extent when it comes to personal experiences.

Alas, you stated:

So as I see it, there are two moral absolutes: 1) sex with a prepubescent child and 2) unwanted sexual contact at any age. I've stated my reasons (long winded they are) for believing this. I don't think this position is a popular one, especially on this board, but that's how I feel. I'm open minded enough to listen to reason however if someone can talk me down.

Here is where our opinions differ. The very definition of absolute tells someone that it is ALWAYS WRONG, under ANY circumstances, period. This is incorrect. Now I personally believe that sex with a child or unwanted contact at any age is wrong, but it is NOT a moral absolute, and here is why. Under some circumstances it would be the lesser evil. Under some circumstances sex with a child or unwanted contact would be the right thing to do.

Allow me to illustrate to make it a bit clearer to understand:

A family of four lives in a home in a quiet residential neighborhood of Anywhere, USA. This is your average American family who pays taxes, goes to church, and lives life to be happy. To be fair and statistically unbiased, we will say this family consists of a father, mother, son, and daughter. Life is bliss for this family, or at least so it seems. One peaceful evening around 10 or 11 pm the family goes to sleep. This normalcy is disturbed when two drunken men break into their home with guns and subdue the parents, for how are a man and woman with only their hands to stop men with firearms? Furthermore, they do not want to see their kids hurt, so they do not initially resist. But these men have other plans. These sick predators love an audience. They beat the boy into a bloody pulp but leave him alive.. and the girl.. well the girl does not share the same fortunate fate. They strip her of her clothes, beat her, and force themselves upon her, ravaging her again and again. As the parents protest they make it painstakingly clear that if they continue to protest they will be killed. The children will die. The entire family will die. The parents sit in submission while this horrifying act is committed, and sure enough, as all sexual predators are, when they finish, they do leave, but not after beating everyone bloody again. Yet, all are still alive...

This is a scenario that could be all too real. It has happened before, and it will unfortunately happen somewhere sometime again. While I do not believe the rape was anything positive, it was done for the greatest good of all, because the parents and children survived. If they had continued to protest they may in all likelihood have been killed.

So tell me.. what was the better outcome? To unwillingly let the child be raped but allow all to live? Or to continually protest and fight despite it being morally wrong for a child to be violated, and cause the death of all involved?

As I said, contextual ethics. There are no moral absolutes. While it was reprehensible what was done.. what was done brought about the better outcome.