No Apologies

Joined

• started 35 topics
• posted 959 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by No Apologies

• 
  122

  new watchtower mag arrangement

  by shadowofbathory in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the latest from brooklyn ( my mate in upper management ) i thought id share.. .

  the watchtower is remaining bi monthly.

  instead of both monthly offerings sharing same formats there is a change coming into action soon.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  No Apologies

  Does the WTBTS do any 'outside' printing? For other companies? Where they charge a 'fee'?

  (Okay... that was 3 questions...)

  Interesting questions, I don't think that they do, but I was having a similar thought: at what point will they decide to do some secular printing on the side? It would be a great way to generate $$$$ for them, they already have the presses, and all the slave labor they need. I think the only thing stopping them is figuring out how to pitch it to the r&f. That, and of course the ethical questions it raises- wait a minute, we are talking about the Watchtower here, ethics have nothing to do with it.

  No Apologies
• 
  92

  Need some education on THEOLOGY? Start here! Evolutionists take note!

  by LittleToe in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.monergism.com/systematic.html.

  http://www.rtrc.net/documents/wcf/hodge/wcftoc.htm.

  http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.htmlhttp://www.lgmarshall.org/reformed/berkhof_summary.html.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  No Apologies

  There must be one First Cause, but there is no evidence of more than one.

  There is just as much evidence for more than one than there is for one!!!

  Somewhere there is a quote, not sure of the exact words, but its how atheists and theists are not that much different, theists believe that all other gods besides the one they worship are false, the athiest believes the same, but they just include that one in with all the other ones.

  No Apologies
• 
  9

  No Joke: Prince to file paternity claim for Smith’s baby

  by Amnesty Vendor in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  .

  .

  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17117567/

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  No Apologies

  I wasn't going to bring it up, but I feel like you are all family, so I might as well let you all in on the news: I am the father of Anna Nicole's baby, and my lawyers and I will be filing the necessary papers very soon.

  I don't have a lot of financial resources, but I hope with the good wishes and support of everyone here, justice will prevail!!

  No Apologies

  p.s. can anyone tell me, is my baby a boy or a girl?
• 
  44

  AWESOME! New Article on Blood and Canadian Sextuplets

  by V in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  ethicist says b.c.

  blood feud may save children and jehovah's witness parents.

  published: thursday, february 1, 2007 | 8:46 pm et.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  No Apologies

  Scully,

  I missed one of your earlier posts, so I may not have replied to every point you made.

  do you think it is possible that they might one day be grateful that someone intervened and gave them a chance to live and choose for themselves whether the belief system is what they want to follow or not? What if it was you as an infant and your parents were going to let you die? Would you want someone to take YOUR side, when your parents were choosing to abide by the tenets of their religious beliefs?

  First of all, you are assuming that even with blood, they are going to live. Thats not necessarily true. What I as the child in that situation would want, years later after the fact, doesn't really make a whole lot of difference. We are talking about children too young to make any kind of decision like this. In that case, the parents are the ones are responsible. If they make the wrong decision, well then, they are going to live with that.

  I wouldn't want a child of mine to die or be injured because I was too stupid or brainwashed to realize the danger I was putting them in.

  No one would. But I think you're walking a very thin line when you start calling other people's choices stupid. Who are you to tell them that?

  I think its stupid that a woman would choose to end a perfectly viable pregnancy just because she doesn't want to be a parent. Maybe the government should step in and stop her from getting an abortion. After all, it would save a life, right? You keep insisting that's more important than any other consideration.

  No Apologies
• 
  44

  AWESOME! New Article on Blood and Canadian Sextuplets

  by V in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  ethicist says b.c.

  blood feud may save children and jehovah's witness parents.

  published: thursday, february 1, 2007 | 8:46 pm et.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  No Apologies

  Junction Guy,

  I ran into trouble trying to post here last night too. I gave up and went to bed.

  To reply to your question, I'm not defending the parent's religious rights. I mean I believe that every one should be free to believe or not believe whatever they want, as long as it doesn't harm someone else. In this case I think their religion is a money-hungry scam that does far more harm than good in the world. But if it makes them happy, good for them.

  The right I see being threatened here is the rights of parents to decide what is best for their children. And once again I see you give the example of parents who deliberately abuse their kids. That's not what we are talking about here. These parents I would imagine, wanted to have children very badly, if they actually pursued some type of fertilization process, which seems to be the case. They want children, and they want their children to have healthy and happy lives. But as you know, they have been persuaded to believe that most forms of blood transfusions are not allowed by God. Is this a stupid belief? You and I will say yes. Most people will say yes. But its not our kids. We are not responsible for them. The parents are.

  And I'm not even a parent. I can't imagine how someone who is, would ever accept the idea that some stranger could come in and dictate life or death decisions for their child. What gives them the right??? Scully, are you a mom? Would you ever let someone take your child away?

  No Apologies
• 
  44

  AWESOME! New Article on Blood and Canadian Sextuplets

  by V in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  ethicist says b.c.

  blood feud may save children and jehovah's witness parents.

  published: thursday, february 1, 2007 | 8:46 pm et.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  No Apologies

  Well somehow my reply to Scully got lost somewhere in the Internets tubes. I'll try again.

  Scully, comparing this to Jonestown is a stretch. There's a big difference between knowingly feeding your child poison and trying to do what you believe(rightly or wrongly) is the best for your child. The first is definitely wrong, the second one gets a little more fuzzy.

  And if this is so important, then hey, lets not even give patients the option of choosing. Let's just say that once you are there, the doctor will make the decision, and thats that. Is that really what you want?

  Junction Guy, I understand that you are not flaming, I respect your opinion. I'm not saying what happened is wrong, I just think its one of those slippery slope kind of issues. You can justify a lot of things once you say "its for the children."

  And to your other question, I'm mostly atheist these days. And even if there is a god, I don't think s/he's a churchgoer either.

  No Apologies
• 
  44

  AWESOME! New Article on Blood and Canadian Sextuplets

  by V in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  ethicist says b.c.

  blood feud may save children and jehovah's witness parents.

  published: thursday, february 1, 2007 | 8:46 pm et.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  No Apologies

  Scully,

  How does what happened in Jonestown have anything to do with the question of who should decide what is in a child's best interest? You're totally grasping at straws with that analogy.

  What if it was you in the NICU and your parents were refusing treatment for you? Would you want someone to say "Hey, wait a minute... what if the kid doesn't want to die?"

  Why do we give patients and parents the right to refuse treatment in the first place? By your logic, then, the patients should all be forced to take whatever treatment a doctor orders. He's the doctor, he must know best, right?

  No Apologies
• 
  44

  AWESOME! New Article on Blood and Canadian Sextuplets

  by V in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  ethicist says b.c.

  blood feud may save children and jehovah's witness parents.

  published: thursday, february 1, 2007 | 8:46 pm et.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  No Apologies

  Orby,

  I'm not surprised by your reaction, I'm totally expecting for someone to come along and flame away at me for daring to question what happened in this case. "What about the children??? They are children!!!!"

  Have you even bothered to check out the link I posted, of another instance where the government thought they knew best?

  No Apologies
• 
  44

  AWESOME! New Article on Blood and Canadian Sextuplets

  by V in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  ethicist says b.c.

  blood feud may save children and jehovah's witness parents.

  published: thursday, february 1, 2007 | 8:46 pm et.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  No Apologies

  Besides the Canadian government "seized" legal control over the babies, thus permitting the doctors to perform tranfusions if needed. The babies were not whisked away in a physical sense.

  You're splitting hairs here. The fact is the government in this case decided they knew better than the parents how to care for their children.

  Maybe we should all turn over our children at birth to the government. They could set up facilities where children could all be raised in totally controlled conditions. Then no one would have to worry about them.

  I think the real issue is, does the parents refusal of a medical process that they find abhorrent and that they feel could jeopardize their child's eternal welfare, is that abuse? And who should make that call? you? me? some judge?

  No Apologies
• 
  44

  AWESOME! New Article on Blood and Canadian Sextuplets

  by V in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  ethicist says b.c.

  blood feud may save children and jehovah's witness parents.

  published: thursday, february 1, 2007 | 8:46 pm et.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  No Apologies

  Alright, I have been reading some of the posts about this case. Not all of them, because frankly, I think the topic has had waay more posts devoted to it than it warrants. I'm sorry, but babies are born every day, and thousands are born in critical medical circumstances. This is sad, but it is not news. The only part of this that is unusual, is that it happened to be sextuplets, and the JW angle.

  And I am I the only person that finds the idea of the government seizing someone's children, just a little disturbing? Yes, I understand that there are some bad parents out there, and in some cases, it may get to the point that the government may need to step in. But I think in general, the idea that the government is more entitled to make these decisions than the parents is questionable. Here's an example, also from Canada: Dionne quintuplets.

  No Apologies