Please explain things to me in simple concrete terms versus abstract concepts and illustrations, doing so will help me understand faster.
I seem to remember Sam, aka Kate Wild, approaching debate in exactly the same way.
konceptual99
JoinedPosts by konceptual99
-
92
Does Morality Exist?
by Fisherman insome people believe that stealing, lying and killing, is not moral.
some people don't.. does morality exist?
if so, prove it..
-
-
konceptual99
-
28
October 2, 2017 BOE US Re: Contributions Received at the 2017 Annual Meeting
by wifibandit inoctober 2, 2017 to all bodies of elders in the united states branch territory re: contributions received at the 2017 annual meeting.
-
-
konceptual99
So a congregation has the "privilege" of hosting an event that has to be displayed on video screens yet has to stump up the readies if they need to hire some kit in.
Thanks for nothing Warwick.
-
146
Just woke up turn TV on to hear yet another nut case with a gun.
by Still Totally ADD infirst they said 20 dead with 100 injured.
now i just heard 50 dead and 200 injured.
whatever it is it just another nut case who was able to get a high power gun to kill people.
-
-
konceptual99
Whilst there are lots of grey areas around gun ownership there is a simple reality. Every year thousands of people die as a result of gun related incidents in the US, far more than per capita than most other countries, especially if you look at moderate democratic countries in Europe.
If nothing changes in the way America approaches gun ownership either legislatively or culturally then America will have to accept that incidents like Columbine, Sandy Hook, Orlando, Virgina Tech and Las Vegas etc are going to continue to happen. By accepting that the incidents will happen then by implication you are accepting that this is the price to be paid for maintaining the gun culture that exists.
I am not advocating changing laws for the sake of it, especially when the root problems for a specific crime may lie outside of what can be legislated (e.g. mental health or criminal activity for example). I understand that for those determined to do something then the law is no deterrent. I also understand that removing guns does not remove the threat of death through some other criminal and violent act.
What I don't understand is the apparent lack of will to formulate some kind of change. Those like the NRA simply throw the same arguments out that absolve anyone with a gun of any responsibility. Politicians can do nothing due to the gun lobby. Those representing the so called responsible gun owning citizens want to maintain a position where there is no restriction to the type, quantity and capability of weapon available.
Just because the problem is complex does not mean those with a vested interest cannot even try to work things out to have some positive effect on it. From what I can see, everytime something like Vegas happens the gun lobby put their hands over their ears and shout "lalalalalalala nothing to do with us". Change is formulated through discussion, compromise and a willingness to accept responsibility where responsibility is due. This seems totally lacking in how the gun lobby approach the problem.
As for the argument that citizens need assault rifles cos the bad guys have them.... that's what the police and army are for.
-
146
Just woke up turn TV on to hear yet another nut case with a gun.
by Still Totally ADD infirst they said 20 dead with 100 injured.
now i just heard 50 dead and 200 injured.
whatever it is it just another nut case who was able to get a high power gun to kill people.
-
-
konceptual99
Jeff,
I don't think knee jerk reactions would work and I am under no illusions that even if all guns were banned there would not be a significant time for the access to weapons to really decrease but I don't think that is an argument to do nothing and accept the status quo.
I do think that properly restricting access to assult rifles and automatic weapons would be a start. There really is no reason for your average citizen to own them.
What really needs to change however is the culture of gun ownership as a right over all other rights. Just because nutters can appropriate many everyday objects to kill and main does not mean that you do feck all about those devices designed to do that job.
Sometimes we have to accept that reducing the risk of harm to innocents by a very small minority of evil doers does mean that the large number of responsible people have to have their rights and opportunities constrained.
-
-
-
konceptual99
That's the good will gone then I see
-
23
BREAKING NEWS out of Canada
by Newly Enlightened injwvictims.org has another breaking news article out of canada: https://jwvictims.org/2017/10/02/breaking-news-66-million-class-action-suit-request-filed-against-jws-in-canada/.
-
-
konceptual99
Sad to say but I think this will go on for years and even if a verdict does come in the favour of the victims (after numerous appeals) then the numbers will probably not be anywhere near the $66m. Would I also be right in assuming that the plaintiffs would have to pay legal bills as well or would Canadian law put that responsibility on the WTS?
-
22
"The shootings in Las Vegas show how much we need God's Kingdom"
by Sour Grapes inmy jw wife, like all of us, was saddened by the senseless killings in nevada.
she said, "the shootings just shows how much we need god's kingdom.
" i replied, "yes if it was armageddon, jehovah wouldn't have left any survivors.
-
-
konceptual99
TBH STADD, in my experience Witnesses will be falling over themselves to say they knew her, know someone who knows her and putting posts onto social media in their droves.
[EDIT] or saying they once went to Las Vegas
-
146
Just woke up turn TV on to hear yet another nut case with a gun.
by Still Totally ADD infirst they said 20 dead with 100 injured.
now i just heard 50 dead and 200 injured.
whatever it is it just another nut case who was able to get a high power gun to kill people.
-
-
konceptual99
Everyone at the festival could have been armed and it would have made no difference since the shooter was not easily visible.
Whilst evil people will always find a way of creating havoc I fail to see why this should be used as an argument to do nothing. Some of the same people who are basically saying that restricting access to weapons is pointless and an infringement of their rights to arm themselves like they are their own personal army are the same people prepared to take what Sadiq Khan said about being cognisant of terrorism in modern cities and twist it to make him seem like an apologist for jihad. They are the same people who would happily demonise a whole population and restrict the rights of innocents for the supposed sake of the greater good.
What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. If fighting Islamist terrorism requires restrictions and actions that tread on some supposed rights to ensure that the rest of us can be safer in our towns and cities then why is the right of people to attend school, work or some event in safety trumped by the rights of those who have some need to walk around carrying a small arsenal just to go and buy some milk.
Just to be clear - I don't have an objection to people owning guns even simply for the pleasure of owning it. I am not under some illusion that people in the US can just go and buy any gun anywhere. I know that many gun owners are responsible people who don't have a pathological need to carry arms to make themselves seem hard.
I do, however, find it simply amazing that the US is so unwilling to try and make their streets safer, with the answer seemingly to be a constant proliferation of arms. The bad guys have guns so give the police bigger guns. The police and bad guys have bigger guns so the average citizen feels they need a bigger gun to be safe. This not to mention the local militias that exist where the government and local authorities seem happy to have self appointed armies with their own leadership wandering around pretending they are the police and army. I suppose even these guys have some credibility and structure when compared to those conspiracy theorists building shelters, making their own enclaves for when the government goes to pot.
The underbelly of latent violent potential in the US is frightening. The seeming unwillingness/inability to acknowledge and tackle this is even more so.
-
-
-
konceptual99
Does anyone have an update on an official reprint or PDF? The CP website has not had an update for over a year.
There was a lot of goodwill on here towards respecting the efforts of those who took on the copyright after the deaths of the Franzs. Does anyone keep in touch with them and know if anything is likely to happen on this front? If not then it's inevitable that the publication will continue to be distributed electronically without CP approval.
-
20
Why should WE be the bloodguilty ones??
by stuckinarut2 init struck me just how odd and weird it is that jws are told that if they do not preach, they are "bloodguilty" for failing to warn people of the upcoming destruction at armageddon.. hang on a minute now, hang on!.
why should a mere human be made to feel "bloodguilty" and "responsible" for "failing to warn someone" of gods wrath??.
these average people are not the ones who are about to unleash a genocidal massacre on 99% of humanity (including babies born to non-witnesses).
-
-
konceptual99
The whole argument around the necessity to preach due to bloodguilt, performing a lifesaving work and so on makes no sense whatsoever.
Of course, when I was in then it was completely logical however when you start to reason on the scale of the work, the implications for those not reached, the conflict between destroying the vast majority of people and divine justice, people being better off dying before Armageddon, what actually constitutes someone's "chance" and on and on and on then the arguments for preaching simply become ludicrous.
The only argument that has biblical backing and I don't have a strong counter argument for is that Jesus commanded his disciples to preach about the Kingdom and make disciples themselves.
If the WTS shut up about all the other arguments and simply said "we do it cos Jesus asked us to" then it would be a hell of a lot harder to deny the need to preach.