sorry for such a depressing question, but i was moved by a picture i saw of the consequences.
( a woman carrying her child) and i realised:-.
a) it was a civillian population.. b) i don't see how a nuclear holocaust can ever be right.. c) they could have bombed tokyo where all the generals lived but chose hiroshima.. d) the irony after the bombing america conceeded to many of japans terms.. your opinion would be valued..
I have been to the Hiroshima Peace Museum - it is very moving. The killing and inflicting of radiation sickness on thousands of innocent people including children was morally repugnant.
BUT I do not agree with the concept that man is evil. Man is capable of both great cruelty and savagery and also great humanity, compassion and self-sacrifice. To say man is either basically evil or basically good is an oversimplification.
i'm a single hispanic guy in my mid 30s living by myself in suburban america.
i own a home in the kind of neighborhood where you have to get hoa permission to do just about anything, including chopping down a tree.
i'm a white collar worker and lead a pretty boring life.
I just bopught a house in suburban South East London (very ethnically mixed) and my neighbours introduced themselves immediately and we are on great terms. At our old place the lady next door was nice but my wife would not invite her over for afternoon tea despite my suggesting it on a number or of occasions (JW phobia of worldly people maybe). Also the neighbour across the street at the old place was very brusque when I knocked on the door with my son to say hello and avoided us the whole time - not sure what was going on there. Anyway that seemed to be an exception and in general neighbours in London seem friendly. I come from Australia and have always had good relatioships with the neighbours.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/26/us/arizona-girl-fatal-shooting-accident/index.html?hpt=hp_t2.
"a 9-year-old girl learning to fire a submachine gun accidentally killed her instructor at a shooting range when the weapon recoiled over her shoulder, according to arizona authorities.
another reason to go against those arguing that young children should be taught how to use guns.
Where are all the gun enthusiasts who previously showed photos of taking children to gun ranges and claimed this was necessary for self-defence. You can't drink alcohol until 21 in the US but you can shoot a machine gun at 5 - how does that make sense?
my alcoholic and aged jw mother is now extremely ill and is being cared for in every respect by my non-jw brother.
3 sisters visited him yesterday and were adamant.
that i (disassociated and shunned by her for nearly 3 years) was able to 'visit her any time' and that ' there was nothing to stop me seeing her' as long as i. didn't discuss spiritual things with her.
Your outrage is totally understandable - this great principled stance of shunning is actually totally flexible at the whim of the elders. The most outrageous things is that he doesn't see the hypocrisy of his stance.
want to know how a lie can turn into a compliment?
only in the jw mindset!!!.
we got called into the dreaded back room after meeting to find two elders wanting to discuss a 'serious' matter with us.
See my thread on the letter I drafted to protect my wife - you might like to adapt it deal with these a**holes. I am happy to help if you want. Fraz
for a long time i have accepted that when a theist inserts god into some as yet not understood scientific matter, it constitutes a god of the gaps argument.
as a theist myself, the problem with this for me, is that it implies an arbitrary limit on gods ingenuity.
for example, the idea that god created automatic processes to do certain things in nature, and yet with other things the need for a direct hand to either tweak or directly organise!
Seraphim23 - I agree with the sentiments you express in your last post. Fraz
for a long time i have accepted that when a theist inserts god into some as yet not understood scientific matter, it constitutes a god of the gaps argument.
as a theist myself, the problem with this for me, is that it implies an arbitrary limit on gods ingenuity.
for example, the idea that god created automatic processes to do certain things in nature, and yet with other things the need for a direct hand to either tweak or directly organise!
The mere existence of what seem to be valid questions that pierce the limits of science, is itself evidence against the science only view. A fundamental separation of nature and the supernatural seems in order to me.
That which is beyond the limits of science is uncertainty, that is things that cannot be understood more clearly by the use of objective experimentation - it is spurious to use this as a basis for a dichotomy between the natural and supernatural. There is no evidence in support of the supernatural.
hi guys, i don't really post on here much anymore, having been on here since 2001. this site helped me out in the early days and has been a great support system for all of my past jw issues.
like many others i was discouraged from an education so that i could window clean and pioneer in my youth during the 80's.
having spent many years post my jw exit in alcoholism and periods of drugs, i decided to clean myself up 7 years ago by attending aa, i was still a window cleaner ... at the time i wrote extensively on here about my issues.
Well done - inspirational story. Good luck with the PhD.
for discussion.... http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/08/12/twins-separated-at-birth-reveal-staggering-influence-genetics/?intcmp=obnetwork.
twins separated at birth reveal staggering influence of genetics .
by tanya lewis.
It is bizarre to think that genetics could determine which cigarette brand you smoke
this topic is of a theological nature.
if you have some scriptural insight, please share.
grievances are not welcome!.
What drivel! The WBTS stated with absolute certainty during the Cold War that the Soviet Union was the King of the North and the US was King of the South. This was all shoved under the carpet when the Cold War ended - until the recent Russia/Ukraine crisis when all of sudden it is getting wheeled out again but using Russia instead of the Soviet Union.
The suggestion in the OP that: "...rather it is in fact a description of a post, Cold war period of time spanning several decades..." is blatant grasping at straws. The language is so vague and ambiguous that it could encompass countless events in human history between countless different protagonists.
rhodesboy - my suggestion is that you get a university education in history to equip you with the critical thinking skills to interpret historical and current events so maybe you can stop using your phobia fired imagination instead. Or perhaps you will ignore me on the grounds that rubbishing your theory amounts to a grievance.
