Tonight we are having a traditional Hungarian dish: Töltött káposzta (stuffed cabbage).
My wife is Hungarian. She moved here 21 years ago. I'm 4th generation Irish-American
my inlaws are polish, though my husband is a 3rd generation american, but the food traditions have stuck around.. we have christmas eve dinner starting with red beet soup with sour cream, pierogies filled with mashed potatoes or saurkraut, ham, polish sausage sliced and cooked with saurkraut, turkey (that part is american), krischickies (likely spelled wrong) which are crispy pastries dipped in powdered sugar, and apple pie (also american.).
there are goodnatured threats toward bad children who may need to get their dupa busted (butt spanked) and therefore santa will bring figismachen.
i also love golabkis (ground beef and rice wrapped in cabbage leaves), but these were not served this time.
Tonight we are having a traditional Hungarian dish: Töltött káposzta (stuffed cabbage).
My wife is Hungarian. She moved here 21 years ago. I'm 4th generation Irish-American
my inlaws are polish, though my husband is a 3rd generation american, but the food traditions have stuck around.. we have christmas eve dinner starting with red beet soup with sour cream, pierogies filled with mashed potatoes or saurkraut, ham, polish sausage sliced and cooked with saurkraut, turkey (that part is american), krischickies (likely spelled wrong) which are crispy pastries dipped in powdered sugar, and apple pie (also american.).
there are goodnatured threats toward bad children who may need to get their dupa busted (butt spanked) and therefore santa will bring figismachen.
i also love golabkis (ground beef and rice wrapped in cabbage leaves), but these were not served this time.
We just had bacon and eggs for breakfast!
(I'm on the west coast of the US-late breakfast)!
Your dinner sounds wonderful!
dzień dobry
request for research help: .
several recent threads have gotten me started on an essay and i need some research help.
does anyone have access to anything the wt has ever published on intersex people (they might have used the now-outdated term: hermaphrodite)?
Marcial, thanks. That's pretty old, but any published comments will be informative
Anyone have a copy?
it seems that hype is the only thing keeping jw.org alive and well these days (that and the money of suckers who continue to fall for it).. at meeting on monday, an elder announced "the faithful slave has seen it fit to change the format of our ministry in 2016, and more information will come".
i guess the desired reaction is to get jws preoccupied with what those changes could possibly be, and if it means that the end is nearer or some crap.. with that said, i've been suckered into wanting to know what these 'changes' will be.
does anyone know?
does anyone have a copy of the boe letter directing publishers to not go into apartment complexes and/or condominium complexes with no soliciting signs?
i ask because yesterday and buttheaded jw (that obviously had no idea who i am or my past) was knocking on doors in our condo complex.
he would have had to drive past a sign which clearly states "no solicitation or material distribution.".
Wifibandit, THAT'S what I had in mind. This is a bit different than the direction 10-ish years ago.
Thanks for the updated info!
does anyone have a copy of the boe letter directing publishers to not go into apartment complexes and/or condominium complexes with no soliciting signs?
i ask because yesterday and buttheaded jw (that obviously had no idea who i am or my past) was knocking on doors in our condo complex.
he would have had to drive past a sign which clearly states "no solicitation or material distribution.".
Thanks Rebel.
VI, that might work for an individual. I'm in an HOA that already has posted notices stating "No Solicitation."
if you were a jw and are now an atheist or agnostic, what was the tipping point that made you turn to it?.
the reason i ask is i have noticed that many who leave the jw's seem to turn to atheism, versus still having some form of a faith.
have many of you given up on god first or have you had atheistic views first and then found atheism to be true.
Cofty: There is an inherent problem in defining atheism. You have to start by agreeing on an approximate definition of god.
Those are really good points!
This is why I say: God of the Bible? No. And not just, "No," but "Hell no!"
But how about those that posit some distant, now uninvolved and unknowable "creator" type in the past (reads a lot like the "god of the gaps," doesn't it?) that made all things and then has been evidently completely absent from the human experience in any discernible way?
What can I say? Could be. I suppose it's possible, although there's no evidence for this hypothetical god which has been carefully defined in just such a way as to positively preclude definitely denying its existence.
Other than a mental exercise, this particular "god" has no benefit or use as, by definition, it is not involved in human affairs, or in any other aspect of the running of the universe in any detectable way.
if you were a jw and are now an atheist or agnostic, what was the tipping point that made you turn to it?.
the reason i ask is i have noticed that many who leave the jw's seem to turn to atheism, versus still having some form of a faith.
have many of you given up on god first or have you had atheistic views first and then found atheism to be true.
d4g: I can assure you I was not ignoring what you were saying
That's good to know, but of course there was no way for me to know that before as your previous comments were only about the Sagan quotes I used and completely ignored my comments, which--as I said earlier--his quotes are explanatory of MY statements and not the other way around.
if you were a jw and are now an atheist or agnostic, what was the tipping point that made you turn to it?.
the reason i ask is i have noticed that many who leave the jw's seem to turn to atheism, versus still having some form of a faith.
have many of you given up on god first or have you had atheistic views first and then found atheism to be true.
d4g: Sagan chooses to define modern atheism as something it is not, (as refusal to accept the possibility of a god or superior power), rather than simple non-belief.
Thank you for taking a minute to respond.
I disagree that Sagan was trying to define "atheism" as having only one meaning. In fact, I think the fact that he discussed the term in a variety of ways is evidence that he understood people do not always mean the same thing when they use it or related terms.
d4g: Sagan's statement that atheism is "certainty that god does not exist", is a misrepresentation of atheism as understood by modern definition.
According to whom?
In spite of the efforts of some individuals or groups to try and redefine what any particular word does or does not mean, it just doesn't work that way. The meaning of words are defined by popular usage. To put it simply, when it comes to defining the meaning of words: the lunatics are running the asylum and they are in control of the dictionaries.
I'll go with dictionaries that take a descriptivist (rather than a proscriptivist) view of word usage and their meaning(s). For example:
American Heritage Dictionary: Atheism - n. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
Merriam Webster's: Atheism - a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity
You'll note that both of these dictionaries recognize a range of meanings for "atheism," meanings which include your limited definition of the word, but also more than "simple non-belief."
Failure to acknowledge that this varied usage is how this term is actually used in common speech and popular discourse by average people is to deny reality. This is how I understand Sagan's comment and probably why he clarified what he meant.
This is also why I always clarify what I mean: I do not believe in any god at all, but I also think it is irrational to positively assert that no god exists and that this can be known with any certainty.
What other people think and/or believe is obviously all over the map. They should take the time to examine the evidence, think the issues through and learn to clearly articulate their beliefs without trying to simplify it into a single word, which essentially is its own kind of dogma. Propagandists of every ilk try to simplify complex issues into short, easy-to-remember slogans.
I'm sure you've noticed that I'm against that kind of thing.
d4g: A higher power could be many things.... They are merely possibilities that can be acknowledged.
Agreed.
does anyone have a copy of the boe letter directing publishers to not go into apartment complexes and/or condominium complexes with no soliciting signs?
i ask because yesterday and buttheaded jw (that obviously had no idea who i am or my past) was knocking on doors in our condo complex.
he would have had to drive past a sign which clearly states "no solicitation or material distribution.".