Posts by Gentledawn

131

Woody Allen speaks out

by NewYork44M in

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

Gentledawn

Clearly you haven't read a damn thing. Or you have and your ability to make congitive, rational decisions is broken.

Gentle Dawn illustrates my point. Don't bother to do a bit of research, just make hysterical statements and accusations. An hour of research on this topic would or should have stopped most of these types of comments. Geesh. Enough already. Try not to enter any debate, team, unless you know what you are talking about. And if you don't know what you are talking about (i.e., The Rev), stay out of it. And when you do enter a debate, stick to one thing: the facts.

I wouldn't have done what he did. I believe child mostesters are horrific people and should be dealt with accordingly. But I would like the legal process to decide. Not jaundiced closed minded judgmental idiots.

Attacking other commenters in this thread does nothing to advance discussion (see: ad hominem fallacy - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem).

My points in the previous reply are valid, noted and researched. That whole stanford "prison guards, inmates" experiment all those decades ago backs up my premise: people in power will rule over the ones underneath them, and will abuse it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

It's a known FACT.

DJS, you're acting belligerent and verbally abusive. And quite frankly, I don't appreciate it at all.

131

Woody Allen speaks out

by NewYork44M in

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

Gentledawn

As someone who is married to a person who is nearly 20 frickin years older than myself: It is NOT about the age difference between Soon-Yi and Woody that is the issue.

As a parental unit IN HER HOME at the time, he could/would exercise ALL of the prerogatives at his disposal over her, including authoritarion and POWER.

That is why the relationship could never have been equal from the get-go.

- That is why prison guards cannot "date" (have sex with) prison inmates.

- or a school teacher with a student.

- That's why cops who are caught on camera boffing some hapless female on the hood of her car cannot claim it was consentual, when he just wrote off giving her a ticket for whatever it was he initially pulled her over for.

No matter what brush you try to use in regard to his relationship with Soon-Yi... he was her FATHER. Thus, it was non-equal and unbalanced from the get-go.

Woody Allen shows a piss-poor regard for boundaries, whether those be familial or respectful towards those who came to love him.

131

Woody Allen speaks out

by NewYork44M in

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

Gentledawn

Sorry, mixed up one nickname with another. Yes, Ronan not Moses.

"On father's day, Ronan tweeted: "Happy Father's day – or as they call it in my family, happy brother-in-law's day."

----

Was Frank Sinatra ever in a parental position/role to Mia Farrow? Ever ? No.

Apples to oranges.

Oh, and this:

Remember, Mia was in a May/August relationship with Frank Sinatra (she was 21 when Frank was 50), so the Hollywood set has no problem with such age differences....

The age difference isn't the real issue. The parental role/responsibility is.

He is/was Soon-Yi's dad.

131

Woody Allen speaks out

by NewYork44M in

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

Gentledawn

ad hominem attack:

Of course, Mia recently revealed in a Vanity Fair interview that her son Ronan is 'possibly' the result of an affair she was carrying on while married to Woody Allen with her ex-husband, Frank Sinatra

Quite frankly, Mose's parentage is not the discussion here.

Mia Farrow was never married to Woody Allen. They adopted children together, but never married each other.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woody_Allen#Marriages_and_romantic_relationships

The man was Soon-Yi's father. Period. Full stop. he had no business "falling in love" with his OWN DAUGHTER. Blood ties mean nothing to a child. Mom and dad are simply that, and those boundaries need to be held and respected.

It's not a matter of "loving a much younger" person. A father -- ANY father-- should never have sex with their own child.

137

3 years of study, Just found out!

by impala63rag in

jw
friends

hello friends, .

i would like some advice from those that are inpartial, and are familiar with the teachings of jw.

i studied with a wonderful jw couple weekly for 3 years.

Gentledawn

"Love bombed" can take many forms, including complimenting you on your intelligence/grasp of basic JW concepts.

The process of "persuasive coersion" (aka : brainwashing, mind control) is a walk-in-slowly process. You'll be greeted, love bombed, possibly even given "advice" (slight scolding/shaming about how you're dressed if you're at the hall formally) about attire, hear the lingo, hear the lingo, hear the lingo.

- worldly

- end of this system of things

- satan, ruler of this world

- "opposers" (aka friends and family that are concerned about your direct contact/studying with cult members) trying to stop you from studying, obviously because they're all minions of Satan. Obviously.

Take note: ALL "public talks" given at the hall and assemblies/conventions are merely speeches designed to persuade:

Persuasive Speech:

- "Yes" set: get your listeners to agree with you/a concept (grass is green, sky is blue, etc). Can be easy peasy stuff. Doesn't matter. All that matters is that they can fall in line with it. Now they are invested in you and your concepts/ideas.

- Truisms: "facts" that could be debated critically, but audience doesn't stop to think for themselves, trusting you because of their prior "investment" by acquiesing via their initital "yes"/agreement

- Suggestion: Do what you, the speaker, want them to do. They are invested. They (the listeners) trust these people (you, and other stage dwellers). What is said from the podium is "trustworthy", because what you spoke of initially is something they agreed with.

131

Woody Allen speaks out

by NewYork44M in

woody allen wrote a very compelling article in the op-ed of the new york times.. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?ref=opinion&_r=0.

have you ever been accused of something you did not do?

if that happens, what do you do?.

Gentledawn

Being a father to anyone is a full-time, life long obligation. You don't just vacate that postion because you have popcorn happening to the corncob in your pants.

He directly violated that obligation with a previous daughter: Soon-Yi.

He took nude photos of her, which Mia Farrow found, which is precisely the time when good ol' Woody decided to fess up to being in "love" (note: not in "lust", eh?).

At best he's a prime example of a narcisist. He violated the trust of his entire family back then? Not his fault. He was "in love". Can't be helped. And his role as a father at that time? Out the window, obv.

He can't be both. Either he's a father to his children or he is their violator of their trust, by crossing over the boundaries. And that man has NO boundaries, as far as being a parent versus being a lover/molester is concerned (yeah, Soon-Yi was probably brainwashed/trying to please the only dad she ever knew).

91

NEW BOE LETTER - It just got exponentially harder to "fade"

by sir82 in

jw
friends

here is the text of the letter:.

february 2, 2014. .

your brothers,.

Gentledawn

All elders, particularly group overseers, must strive to maintain regular, if at all possible
weekly, contact with the publishers. (Prov. 27:23)

Talk about taking something out of context. That scripture was talking about literally taking care of sheep (and goats, for that matter), not HUMANS:

23 Be sure you know the condition of your flocks,
give careful attention to your herds;
24 for riches do not endure forever,
and a crown is not secure for all generations.
25 When the hay is removed and new growth appears
and the grass from the hills is gathered in,
26 the lambs will provide you with clothing,
and the goats with the price of a field.
27 You will have plenty of goats’ milk to feed your family
and to nourish your female servants

45

Governing Body Running Scarred and 12-13-14 "Might Be the End"?

by RottenRiley in

this went bad, i hit click before i could post my thoughts about the fear factor going through our crazy kingdom hall.

the title of this thread was aimed at asking why the governing body is becoming so afraid and demanding the elders and rank and file to put their trust in the dukes of the kingdom hall.

(pslams 146:3).. .

Gentledawn

(3) At that time, the lifesaving
direction that we receive from
Jehovah’s organization may not appear
practical from a human standpoint. All
of us must be ready to obey any instructions
we may receive, whether these appear
sound from a strategic or human
standpoint or not.

Can probably be explained by point number 4 in that same 17th paragraph:

(4) Now is the time
for any who may be putting their trust
in secular education, material things, or
human institutions to adjust their thinking.
The elders must stand ready to help
any who may now be wavering in their
faith.

Wonder if they'll start having people make out their wills, life insurance policies, homes, land properties, and other "material things", handing them over directly to the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society.

All the generation(s) are aging rapidly. I was born in the 1960s, and am already heading into my golden years (if you wanna call 50s that). Fleecing the sheeple would be a pretty ballsy move, but wouldn't put it past this scam artist bOrginization. Bunch of con artist cultists at the helm of this ship, after all.

74

Billy's Comments You Won't Hear at the 01-19-2014 WT Study (7 Shepherds, 8 Dukes)

by Billy the Ex-Bethelite in

16-20. we shall also have to raise up against him seven shepherds, yes, eight dukes of mankind.mic.

what is the most important thing that you can do now to prepare for any future attack on gods people?.

all of us must be ready to obey any instructions we may receive, whether these appear sound from a strategic or human standpoint or not.. .

Gentledawn

Oh, about that whole "Jesus was never called Immanuel" crap from the WT leadership. It reminds me of a saying/quote from years gone by (don't know who originally said it, but it gets used as a punchline a lot it seems):

"Who are you gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes?"

- So, in essence, the WT leaders are saying what an ANGEL told Joseph was actually bupkiss and false..? And yet he took Mary home anyway AND abstained from having sex with her? For what? If being a virgin is neither here nor there in prophecy?

- Or are they yet again denegrating Mary? Like how she gets NO credit whatsoever for instructing Jesus during his entire childhood and magically knows how to answer the teachers at the temple at age 12yrs? (Also notice he wasn't forced to get baptised at that time, despite knowing the "truth"(tm).) Jesus didn't miraculously become a carpenter. No WT articles dispute that he was taught by Joseph. Funny stuff. My sister pointed all of this out to me after I left the JWs. Felt like a bucket of ice water got dumped on my head... how could I have been so blind?

74

Billy's Comments You Won't Hear at the 01-19-2014 WT Study (7 Shepherds, 8 Dukes)

by Billy the Ex-Bethelite in

16-20. we shall also have to raise up against him seven shepherds, yes, eight dukes of mankind.mic.

what is the most important thing that you can do now to prepare for any future attack on gods people?.

all of us must be ready to obey any instructions we may receive, whether these appear sound from a strategic or human standpoint or not.. .

Gentledawn

However, I could not close my eyes on yesterday's article after my elder friend raised a question on Par. 4 "no evidence that Jesus was addressed as Immanuel." We were just discussing things privately while the WT study was on going. He actually shared the same Q with our Service Overseer before the meetings but the latter said he would research the material further.My elder friend smilingly concluded there was something wrong with that sentence. For me, I thought it was unnecessary to insert it for there were cross references-verses that would just contradict the assertion.

Wow. Wish I could count how many times I heard that phrase : "lemme research that and get back to you" type-thing ... *time passes, only crickets chirping*. Nothing. Ask about it, and they either don't recall, change the subject, walk away, all of the above.

As far as the scripture in Matthew goes, Mary remained a virgin (a REAL, honest to goodness, hymen-in-place one, not a make believe Watchtower version) until after Jesus was born:

Matthew 1:20-25 (NIV)

20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”

22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).

24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25 But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

---

On the other hand, Isaiah WROTE that he had sexual intercourse with his wife, and she in turn bore him a son:

Isaiah 8:1-4 (Living Bible)

8 Again the Lord sent me a message: “Make a large signboard and write on it the birth announcement of the son I am going to give you. Use capital letters! His name will be Maher-shalal-hash-baz, which means ‘Your enemies will soon be destroyed.’” 2 I asked Uriah the priest and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah, both known as honest men, to watch me as I wrote so they could testify that I had written it before the child was even on the way. 3 Then I had sexual intercourse with my wife and she conceived and bore me a son. And the Lord said, “Call him Maher-shalal-hash-baz. 4 This name prophesies that within a couple of years, before this child is even old enough to say ‘Daddy’ or ‘Mommy,’ the king of Assyria will invade both Damascus and Samaria and carry away their riches.”