silent lambs just sent me this.
i thought you all might like to read it.. http://www.silentlambs.org/newsletter/newsletteritem.cfm?sendoutid=157 .
i would love an opinion.. vicki
Watchtower ?compassion? is once again seen for what it really is, a greedy corporation that punishes and silences child abuse survivors that are victims of their policy on abuse.
I would have to say that pretty well sums it up!
I admire your strength and courage. You are an inspiration!
"... is terrorism" .
so says tony blair.. sheesh ... thanks for explaining that tony!
maybe mr bush has passed on the torch and next year we'll be able to buy books of "blairisms" instead of "bushisms" ?
Does Mr. Blair know who is buried in Grant's Tomb?
poor girl............. did she get caught 2
Does anyone know how to contact Rosie via email or snail mail? I've looked all over the internet, and everything I could find was associated with her now-defunct magazine.
I can't imagine why an outspoken lesbian activist would have a Watchtower in her hand, unless an overzealous JW fan handed it to her. God forbid she should go "Prince" on us!
I'd like to write and tell her about "A Common Bond", the support group for gay & lesbian exJWs. (http://www.gayxjw.org/)
i have a pretty interesting perspective on this.....especially since i once had all of my privledges removed because i had admitted to an elder that i was hungover..... the scriptures state that drunkards will not inherit gods' kingdom, nor will gluttons.... gluttony is the practice of over-eating, much the same is being a drunkard is one who is continuously drunk.
so, in my feeble mind, getting drunk "once-in-a-while" is not a sin, just the same as overeating at mcdonalds or at grandma's house is not a sin.. am i incorrect in my reasoning?.
thanks to all participants.
So, in my feeble mind, getting drunk "once-in-a-while" is not a sin, just the same as overeating at McDonalds or at Grandma's house is not a sin.
In the JW world, I think it's a judgement call on the part of each body of elders. I had a problem with alcohol the entire time I was a JW. I went to the elders repeatedly asking for guidance, and for forgiveness of my "sin". I was told by one elder "If you are truly repentant, Jehovah will forgive you. Just don't drink so much next time." I believe I was told this because my congregation's P.O. was a habitual drinker. If they enforced drunkenness with me, they would have to do the same with the P.O.. To avoid any embarrassment, they swept my problem under the rug and took no action.
The Bible is not clear what a "drunkard" is. It is open to interpretation, just as "glutton" is open to interpretation. I see many JWs go to eat at all-you-can-eat restaurants, stuffing themselves like pigs. Are they any less "guilty" than someone who drinks to excess? I would think not.
Just a thought....If you consider your drinking a problem, you might want to seek the help of A.A. or a counselor, rather than justifying it by comparing it to other's eating habits.
i don't want to piss anybody off with this post so please don't get offended.
my family always goes all out for thanksgiving and x-mas.
part of that going all out means lots of booze.
An aunt has asked the family not to serve alcohol because her son is fresh out of a rehab.
As a recovering alcoholic myself (sober over 16 years) let me try to address this.
First of all, it should be your aunt's son who makes decides himself whether he wants to go. I appreciate the fact that the aunt is concerned for her son, but he is the one who needs to work at his own recovery. Not that I'm saying that it's none of her business -- it's nice that she cares enough to ask -- but the final decision should be his. If he feels uncomfortable being around drinking, he should find something else to do (like perhaps opt to go to an A.A. meeting and be around other sober people, for example). If he feels confident in the fact that he won't drink, he should still ensure that he has a way to leave promptly (but politely) in case he finds himself overwhelmed by the urge to relapse. Make sure the car isn't blocked in by other vehicles in the driveway, for instance.
When I was newly recovering, I was invited to an anniversary party by some friends who I knew drank and used drugs. They were good friends, and I did not want to offend them, but was unsure what to do. I asked a friend who had been in recovery for many years, and he suggested that I go, but "make sure you have a way to bail out." I went, brought my own non-alcoholic beverages with me, and had a wonderful time.
If he is newly recovering, just out of rehab, remember that he has been in an artificial protective setting where no alcohol or drugs are present. He is back in the real world now. If he opts not to go, no one should condemn him for his decision. If he opts to go, I hope his recovery is important enough to him that he will remain vigilant and not be afraid to ask to leave if he feels uncomfortable.
The only other factor to keep in mind is, are any of the other attendees going to be drinking to the point of drunkenness, and if so, will they try to insist he drink? If so, best not to go just yet, until he has a little more sobriety under his belt.
Your aunt may also want to consider attending Al-Anon herself. They will give her excellent guidance as to how to deal with an alcoholic (recovering or not) in the family, and when intervention is necessary, or when not to meddle.
A lot of people do not understand the nature of alcoholism. It is a disease, not a moral deficiency. It is much more difficult to conquer than many outsiders might imagine. The alcoholic should not have to spend the rest of their life running from people with a bottle in their hand for fear they may "slip" themselves. On the other hand, they should not needlessly put themselves into situations unnecessarily where alcohol is flowing freely. The final decision should be his. Does he go to A.A.? If so, does he have a sponsor? It may be a good idea for him to call his A.A. sponsor and discuss the matter with them. Does he still attend after-care with a counselor from the rehab? Maybe he should call them to help him decide.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3281017.stm
massachusetts backs gay marriage the us state of massachusetts has ruled in favour of gay marriage.
the state's supreme judicial court ruled that that barring same-sex couples from the benefits of civil marriage was "unconstitutional.
If I'm wrong someone tell me why those who want more than one marriage partner at the same time...or those who want to marry a close family member couldn't use the same arguements to endorse these marriages?
Yeru, in many Middle Eastern and African cultures, polygamy is an accepted legally recognized practice. That having been said, part of the reason why polygamy is not being considered in current marriage statutes is because of the far-reaching legal ramifications such unions would create. two prime examples of this would be tax and immigration laws. If polygamy were to become legalized, an entirely new set of tax laws would have to be written. Multiple-partner relationships would, under current tax laws, get a much larger deduction than monogomous couples, gay or straight. As regards immigration, the legalization of polygamy could create a new cottage industry of bringing multiple partners into this country for the sole purpose of immigration. The laws surrounding polygamy would be complex, unlike gay marriage, which is simply allowing a single partner who happens to be of the same sex to marry.
As regards marriage to close family members, there is too much incontrivertible scientific evidence to show that such unions can be genetically dangerous to potential offspring. No such danger exists in a mating between a union of two people of the same gender.
Will legal acceptance of gay marriage open the door to proponents of polygamous or incestual unions? Perhaps, but in the final analysis, the issues and legal ramifications are very different. Proponents of polygamy or incest would have a hard time piggybacking their arguments on the gay marriage issue.
armageddon comes...ressurection.
what 'age' do the perfect humans, better put, what age will everyone look like in the perfect world?
it would be kinda weird to see your great great great great great great grandma the same age as you, u know?
Are there any explanations regarding perfect humans in an ageless state on 'paridise earth'?
I remember an overseer giving a talk on this in 1975, when we were all so sure Armageddon and the resurrection were right on top of us. He said that everyone would be resurrected at their "optimum" age, which he interpreted as late-twenties to mid-thirties. He said it would be cruel of Jehovah to resurrect elderly people in their dying state and have their aging process slowly reverse.
Of course, this is material from over 25 years ago, so they could have gotten "new light" since then. I'm not sure if any such speculation was ever put in print by the WTBTS or not.
It would depend upon your physical appearance and the way you acted, too. I don't think that body odor would be sufficient reason to eject you. I knew some "brothers" at my hall who had horrible, offensive breath. One worked the literature counter, and I dreaded whenever it came time to buy literature.
If the odor were accompanied by a less-than-theocratic appearance, depending on the congregation, they may ask you to clean yourself up before returning, because it might "stumble" the neighbors if you were seen entering the hall in a poorly-groomed, smelly manner.
In my hall, I had two Bible studies - one with a homeless man, and one with a mental patient from a local mental hospital. I was told by the elders in my congregation to stop bringing these people to the hall. Apparently, they didn't fit the criteria for eternal life. Neither of them had B.O., by the way.....
questions rise over imprisoning sex offenders past their terms
1 hour, 36 minutes ago
add top stories - the new york times to my yahoo!
Whereas the molestation of children, who are not sexually developed, is based on some kind of need that is deeply rooted and simply not able to be cured or modified at this point in our history.
If I'm not mistaken, I remember hearing some years ago that a research study was held in prisons in the U.K. where convicted predatory sex offenders were given some sort of drug to diminish their sex drives. If memory serves correctly, the experiment was a resounding failure. Czar is absolutely correct -- the stalking and molestation of prepubescents is all about power, not sex.
so sad..........arrest warrants were just executed against him for multiple counts of child molestation.
as a mom i am deeply appalled, as an ex witness i am saddened at his lack of power over his own life and ability to move forward, beyond the scarring of an abusive upbringing.
I really think he is guilty and I also believe he was abused as a child. Not that it excuses his actions. If he is guilty he should be punished by jail and fines.They should lock him up and throw away the key forever.
If he is found guilty, I think it would be a travesty of justice to allow him to keep his multimillion dollar empire. His assets should be liquidated and split 50/50 between:
(a) A fund for the treatment of children who are victims of sex crimes,
~ and ~
(b) A grant to the scientific community to find a treatment and cure for pedophilia.
