James Thomas Rook Jr.

1.)  Jesus was on a mission that required him to walk into a trap, and be executed. He willingly did this knowing he would die, in a manner most painfull, where agony is an understated word.
In the Military this is called a "suicide mission" ... a concept that EVEY civilization INCLUDING the armies of ancient Israel fully understood.
2.) Jehovah NEVER prohibited suicide, and was well aware that there were circumstances where it was the only option available, as in the circumstances of King Saul's last battle.
3.) Jehovah never even prohibited cannibalism, which was widely practiced in Jerusalem under siege by enemies.... it is a CULTURAL taboo, not a prohibition from God.
Same thing with suicide.
As Brother Splaine of the governing body said in a video awhile back, "we" once had opinions on ever imaginable subject, and they were presented as inspired directives and pronouncements from God. The example he gave was the hidden and profound meaning that it was downhill from one town to Jerusalem and that camels walking downhill had one symbolic meaning, and camels walking uphill had another symbolic meaning.
To be kind, this was some writer's opinion only ... but it was presented as profound insight from the Word of God.  What it really was was unmitigated crap.  I had a LOT of respect for Brother Splaine as being the only sane person in the bunch, until he came out with the "overlapping generations" chart, and tried to explain that nonsense as TRUTH.
I suppose he could be reassigned to the basement janitorial closet of Bethel laundry room if he did not obey the directive, and that is why he did it.  Of course, again, I am trying to be kind.
How many THOUSANDS of times can you be wrong about everything in everyday life and still have credibility? I would have to quote Circus Master P.T. Barnum.
Four years ago my Siberian Husky got cancer in her right eye, and after several thousand dollars we thought it was "fixed", but it spread, and she was being eaten up by cancer, and we took her to the Veterinarian and had her painlessly executed. It was with great anguish on my wife and my part to have to do that, but that is what love and compassion required of us.
LOVE NEVER FAILS ... remember that one?
FOLLOW JESUS  ... remember that one?
What EXAMPLE did he set for all time, in considering whether suicide is or is not ALLOWED by Jehovah God?
He committed suicide by deliberately walking into a known trap, for the EXPRESS purpose of being executed.
AND JEHOVAH RESURRECTED HIM !
When the Governing Body admitted for the first time, and only time, that they were NEITHER inspired of God, or infallible, in the February 2017 Watchtower, my reaction was ...
DUH!
 
 
 
"Quod est necessarium est licitum"
That which is necessary, is legal
Like, AS JESUS POINTED OUT, rescuing a lost sheep on the Sabbath, when doing work on the Sabbath is expressly forbidden.
How much more that principle can be applied when there is no prohibition whatsoever.
Playing with and manipulating words and phrases to conform to cultural taboos that you already believe, all the way to your bones ... DOES NOT COUNT!
I am saddened by knowing that when my time comes ... and it will all too soon .... there will be no one at all among Jehovah's Witnesses  to show me the same love and compassion that I showed my dog.

I don't know .... it changes so much I get a headache trying to keep up with "light" that is profoundly explained with hundreds of thousands of words, and a potload of scriptures, that backed it up ... all which turned out to be wrong!
I don't like headaches.

1.)  Jesus was on a mission that required him to walk into a trap, and be executed. He willingly did this knowing he would die, in a manner most painfull, where agony is an understated word.
In the Military this is called a "suicide mission" ... a concept that EVEY civilization INCLUDING the armies of ancient Israel fully understood.
2.) Jehovah NEVER prohibited suicide, and was well aware that there were circumstances where it was the only option available, as in the circumstances of King Saul's last battle.
3.) Jehovah never even prohibited cannibalism, which was widely practiced in Jerusalem under siege by enemies.... it is a CULTURAL taboo, not a prohibition from God.
Same thing with suicide.
As Brother Splaine of the governing body said in a video awhile back, "we" once had opinions on ever imaginable subject, and they were presented as inspired directives and pronouncements from God. The example he gave was the hidden and profound meaning that it was downhill from one town to Jerusalem and that camels walking downhill had one symbolic meaning, and camels walking uphill had another symbolic meaning.
To be kind, this was some writer's opinion only ... but it was presented as profound insight from the Word of God.  What it really was was unmitigated crap.  I had a LOT of respect for Brother Splaine as being the only sane person in the bunch, until he came out with the "overlapping generations" chart, and tried to explain that nonsense as TRUTH.
I suppose he could be reassigned to the basement janitorial closet of Bethel laundry room if he did not obey the directive, and that is why he did it.  Of course, again, I am trying to be kind.
How many THOUSANDS of times can you be wrong about everything in everyday life and still have credibility? I would have to quote Circus Master P.T. Barnum.
Four years ago my Siberian Husky got cancer in her right eye, and after several thousand dollars we thought it was "fixed", but it spread, and she was being eaten up by cancer, and we took her to the Veterinarian and had her painlessly executed. It was with great anguish on my wife and my part to have to do that, but that is what love and compassion required of us.
LOVE NEVER FAILS ... remember that one?
FOLLOW JESUS  ... remember that one?
What EXAMPLE did he set for all time, in considering whether suicide is or is not ALLOWED by Jehovah God?
He committed suicide by deliberately walking into a known trap, for the EXPRESS purpose of being executed.
AND JEHOVAH RESURRECTED HIM !
When the Governing Body admitted for the first time, and only time, that they were NEITHER inspired of God, or infallible, in the February 2017 Watchtower, my reaction was ...
DUH!
 
 
 
"Quod est necessarium est licitum"
That which is necessary, is legal
Like, AS JESUS POINTED OUT, rescuing a lost sheep on the Sabbath, when doing work on the Sabbath is expressly forbidden.
How much more that principle can be applied when there is no prohibition whatsoever.
Playing with and manipulating words and phrases to conform to cultural taboos that you already believe, all the way to your bones ... DOES NOT COUNT!
I am saddened by knowing that when my time comes ... and it will all too soon .... there will be no one at all among Jehovah's Witnesses  to show me the same love and compassion that I showed my dog.

1.)  Jesus was on a mission that required him to walk into a trap, and be executed. He willingly did this knowing he would die, in a manner most painfull, where agony is an understated word.
In the Military this is called a "suicide mission" ... a concept that EVEY civilization INCLUDING the armies of ancient Israel fully understood.
2.) Jehovah NEVER prohibited suicide, and was well aware that there were circumstances where it was the only option available, as in the circumstances of King Saul's last battle.
3.) Jehovah never even prohibited cannibalism, which was widely practiced in Jerusalem under siege by enemies.... it is a CULTURAL taboo, not a prohibition from God.
Same thing with suicide.
As Brother Splaine of the governing body said in a video awhile back, "we" once had opinions on ever imaginable subject, and they were presented as inspired directives and pronouncements from God. The example he gave was the hidden and profound meaning that it was downhill from one town to Jerusalem and that camels walking downhill had one symbolic meaning, and camels walking uphill had another symbolic meaning.
To be kind, this was some writer's opinion only ... but it was presented as profound insight from the Word of God.  What it really was was unmitigated crap.  I had a LOT of respect for Brother Splaine as being the only sane person in the bunch, until he came out with the "overlapping generations" chart, and tried to explain that nonsense as TRUTH.
I suppose he could be reassigned to the basement janitorial closet of Bethel laundry room if he did not obey the directive, and that is why he did it.  Of course, again, I am trying to be kind.
How many THOUSANDS of times can you be wrong about everything in everyday life and still have credibility? I would have to quote Circus Master P.T. Barnum.
Four years ago my Siberian Husky got cancer in her right eye, and after several thousand dollars we thought it was "fixed", but it spread, and she was being eaten up by cancer, and we took her to the Veterinarian and had her painlessly executed. It was with great anguish on my wife and my part to have to do that, but that is what love and compassion required of us.
LOVE NEVER FAILS ... remember that one?
FOLLOW JESUS  ... remember that one?
What EXAMPLE did he set for all time, in considering whether suicide is or is not ALLOWED by Jehovah God?
He committed suicide by deliberately walking into a known trap, for the EXPRESS purpose of being executed.
AND JEHOVAH RESURRECTED HIM !
When the Governing Body admitted for the first time, and only time, that they were NEITHER inspired of God, or infallible, in the February 2017 Watchtower, my reaction was ...
DUH!
 
 
 
"Quod est necessarium est licitum"
That which is necessary, is legal
Like, AS JESUS POINTED OUT, rescuing a lost sheep on the Sabbath, when doing work on the Sabbath is expressly forbidden.
How much more that principle can be applied when there is no prohibition whatsoever.
Playing with and manipulating words and phrases to conform to cultural taboos that you already believe, all the way to your bones ... DOES NOT COUNT!
I am saddened by knowing that when my time comes ... and it will all too soon .... there will be no one at all among Jehovah's Witnesses  to show me the same love and compassion that I showed my dog.

I was in conversation with an elder last week (or maybe two weeks ago) and I don't quite know how we got onto the topic but we started talking about suicide. I was a bit surprised when he said "But don't commit suicide or you will not get a resurrection". 
I was wondering where exactly this information comes from. Having recovered from the shock, I have since emailed this elder and got no response. I have looked on JW Org and read a couple of older articles on there, but they seemed to say that it is or was not their place to judge, which i agree with. 
So, is there 'new light' on the subject of suicide ? If so where does this new light come from ? And what scriptures back up this 'new light' ?
I will willingly read any recent articles that are passed on to me, as this latest information, if it is true, i find disturbing. I know of many people that have committed suicide, both inside and outside of the Jehovah's Witnesses Organisation. 
 

I dunno ... I always vote for the hunchbacks,
If they have gossamer wings is NONE of my business!

I do not consider myself a god, or a sheep.
I consider myself a "Sheepdog", whose NATURAL instincts and "function in life" is to protect women, and children, and my family, and all innocent people, and if necessary, to engage in mortal combat with others who try to harm them.
...this even makes the sheep VERY nervous, but the reason many of them are sheep is not a desire to be peaceable with all men, as far as it depends upon them ... but because they are naturally stupid, and or cowards.
Andre: I have no idea what your last two posts mean in the real world.
Fine ideas from Scripture, but irrelevant to this post.
If I have missed something, please explain it to me in short words, short sentences, and short paragraphs, .... in your own words.
Otherwise, it is just "white noise". ... like a fan running while one is sleeping.
 

One of the revisions that will take place next year is that for meaningful jobs after returning to the secular world, when they are "downsized", is to print the diploma on the side of a panel from a corrugated cardboard box, so that you can flip it over and write in large black crayon or felt marker something meaningful and appropriate, and visible from a car window as you stand on the side of the road, looking for work.
It makes a better impression when you use official corrugated cardboard.
 

I do not consider myself a god, or a sheep.
I consider myself a "Sheepdog", whose NATURAL instincts and "function in life" is to protect women, and children, and my family, and all innocent people, and if necessary, to engage in mortal combat with others who try to harm them.
...this even makes the sheep VERY nervous, but the reason many of them are sheep is not a desire to be peaceable with all men, as far as it depends upon them ... but because they are naturally stupid, and or cowards.
Andre: I have no idea what your last two posts mean in the real world.
Fine ideas from Scripture, but irrelevant to this post.
If I have missed something, please explain it to me in short words, short sentences, and short paragraphs, .... in your own words.
Otherwise, it is just "white noise". ... like a fan running while one is sleeping.
 

In Nevada bankruptcies, and although it is a Federal provision, how it works varies from State to State ... casino bankruptcies sometimes involve waking up on a helicopter, flying over Lake Meade, with your feet set in a bucket of cement.
 

I have heavily invested in  a lesser precious metal... lead.
Oh wait ... I prepared for the Zombie Apocalypse..

Two Bits!!!
Oh wait, that's for a shave and a haircut.

@James Thomas Rook Jr.  until all of them learn to shoot bullets.... probably faster than you and they already outnumber you.
Resistance is futile. 

Yes.

TTH:  "There are actually two men whose name is a type of tree.  Both are pseudonyms, the specific trees are different, and one was chosen as a tribute for the other.  I think the two have been confused with one another here."
I had in mind the Redwood tree, which is related to the Cedar, and both are in the family of the Bald Cypress.  But...why must we speak in code anyway?  

There are actually two men whose name is a type of tree. Both are pseudonyms, the specific trees are different, and one was chosen as a tribute for the other. I think the two have been confused with one another here.
Tree 1 has the hatred for the elders,  but not to my knowledge, any unpleasant family history. Tree 2, the one named in honor of Tree 1, is the one with the dysfunctional family history. I don’t quite remember the specifics, but I don’t think it was anything wildly shocking—perhaps an authoritarian father on his wife’s side, or step father—something like that.
Tree 1 is the one who banned me from his website. Never from Twitter, where I did answer him a few times, and he was without exception (once he discovered that his initial hope that I was about to jump ship was wrong) insulting, taunting, and ridiculing.
Tree 2 blocked me from the moment I first responded—not disrespectfully (though also not half-heartedly)—to his article that was published in a major magazine.
References to both are in “TrueTom vs the Apostates!”
Tree 1: https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/01/are-we-looking-at-encouragement-to-commit-insurance-fraud-part-2.html
Tree 2:  https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/04/he-has-blocked-me-i-think-that-says-it-all.html
I have a different type of a tree in my front yard—a ginkgo tree. It is one of the few (perhaps only) deciduous trees that come in male and female variety. The male tree is fine. The female stinks in the fall. 
“The sarcotesta [fallen ginko tree fruit] has a strong smell that most people find unpleasant.” - Wikipedia
We call ours a ****ball tree. People think that is crude, but then they stop by for a whiff and wonder what took us so long to name it.
Otherwise, it’s an outwardly beautiful tree.
Why it is MY tree and not one of THEIRS I’ll never know.
 

There are actually two men whose name is a type of tree. Both are pseudonyms, the specific trees are different, and one was chosen as a tribute for the other. I think the two have been confused with one another here.
Tree 1 has the hatred for the elders,  but not to my knowledge, any unpleasant family history. Tree 2, the one named in honor of Tree 1, is the one with the dysfunctional family history. I don’t quite remember the specifics, but I don’t think it was anything wildly shocking—perhaps an authoritarian father on his wife’s side, or step father—something like that.
Tree 1 is the one who banned me from his website. Never from Twitter, where I did answer him a few times, and he was without exception (once he discovered that his initial hope that I was about to jump ship was wrong) insulting, taunting, and ridiculing.
Tree 2 blocked me from the moment I first responded—not disrespectfully (though also not half-heartedly)—to his article that was published in a major magazine.
References to both are in “TrueTom vs the Apostates!”
Tree 1: https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/01/are-we-looking-at-encouragement-to-commit-insurance-fraud-part-2.html
Tree 2:  https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/04/he-has-blocked-me-i-think-that-says-it-all.html
I have a different type of a tree in my front yard—a ginkgo tree. It is one of the few (perhaps only) deciduous trees that come in male and female variety. The male tree is fine. The female stinks in the fall. 
“The sarcotesta [fallen ginko tree fruit] has a strong smell that most people find unpleasant.” - Wikipedia
We call ours a ****ball tree. People think that is crude, but then they stop by for a whiff and wonder what took us so long to name it.
Otherwise, it’s an outwardly beautiful tree.
Why it is MY tree and not one of THEIRS I’ll never know.
 

I would go back to fundamental reasons of that we talking about. No matter do we talking about revision, better understanding, new light, simplicity ......etc. point is this:
In what mental state has been all this individuals who made first, second, third, and so on with numbers, doctrine and then revision of that same doctrine?
Tom said previously how every person who are not in line with Jesus teachings (JW or not JW) is mentally ill. It seems how all authors and all who approved what was written in WT publications had mental issues and that is main reason for revision of doctrines. Just repeating Tom's idea with new wording :))) 

If he's honest, he surely admits that he has caused people to view scripture differently than how Jesus taught it. Otherwise why would he give a talk in October 2014 where he said that a very well ingrained method of teaching the scriptures was about to change? And the basic reason for the change was because he said it didn't currently line up with the style that Jesus used when he taught. It was NOT the way of teaching that God approved.
Somewhere between 100 and 200 doctrines changed, based on that talk he gave in 2014. They were changing because, as his theme scripture stated, the Governing Body was to become more faithful and discreet and follow Luke 10:21 which was tied to "how Jesus taught" and which said: "Yes, O Father, because this is the way you approved."
Now if he was changing 100 doctrines to become aligned with the teaching method Jehovah approved, then he must have believed that he was previously NOT following the teaching method that Jesus used: the method that Jehovah approved.
If you don't believe this, then you might as well say that the change was made just so that things wouldn't seem stale.
Of course, based on our history, it's always quite possible that some teachings have been currently been added which cause us to view scriptures differently from the way it was taught in Scripture itself. What caused us, for example, to decide that the "higher powers" or "superior authorities" were God and Christ when Russell and nearly a thousand years of Christian commentary had it right. Surely, you admit that the teaching in 1961 was wrong, and this is the reason it was changed in 1962.
Up until a few weeks ago, we taught that the "locusts" of Joel 2 referred to Jehovah's Witnesses, and just now Brother Splane ( https://www.jw.org/en/news/jw/region/global/2019-Annual-Meeting-Summary/ ) has stated that the locusts refer to God's enemies, just as nearly 100 percent of Christendom's commentaries have been saying for hundreds of years. This teaching was already "clarified" in 1961. ( https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1961883 ) and is still on the website as current in the "Revelation . . . Grand Climax" book. ( https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101988022 ) Again, you might have guessed that Russell had already claimed that the locusts could not be God's people. D543 R362:3 R5527:1 Q23:7
So this is not really clarification at all. Russell teaches that the "superior authorities" are secular not God & Christ. Rutherford "clarifies" this (1929) to say they are God & Christ and not secular. Then in 1962, it is "clarified" again to say that it is secular and not God & Christ.
Same with the locusts. Russell teaches that they cannot be God's people. Then the Watchtower "clarifies" that these locusts are God's people. Then Brother Splane "clarifies" that these locusts are not God's people. So far, the website only says the following.
Brother David Splane clarified our understanding of the prophecy recorded in Joel chapter 2 describing a swarm of locusts. We look forward to studying this clarified understanding when it appears in The Watchtower.
I think it's easy to see that this will clarify that the teaching was wrong up until a few weeks ago. A wrong teaching is always misleading. But it does not necessarily follow that the person teaching it wrong is "mentally diseased" as you said would be true of any who taught something misleading.
Several would say that the overlapping generation teaching is wrong the way that Brother Splane explains it. You might say that anyone who teaches that this explanation is wrong is misleading by the teaching of Christ and God's words. But what if Brother Splane, next October, begins to agree that the way he explained it was wrong, and says that a new "clarified" teaching is now going to be taught? It seems like you would say that the persons who were right were misleading, and Brother Splane was not misleading when he was wrong.

No Allen....I mean Tom. Revision is a good thing. The problem is when we state something as fact one year, and then change it the next. One thing is building on an idea, pretty much the way technology and the medical field develop, but another is completely changing ones mind. The equivalent is maybe what psychologists do, they seem to change their minds, one time they say it's better to let a child do what it wants, and then when negative results are reaped, they say it's better to discipline a child. A kind of trial and error approach. Similarly, when what JW's teach does not work out, then we try the next "theory". Think generation.

Church ‘shuns‘ 15-year-old, then father – ends up in court
Posted by SDD Contributor on November 9, 2019 at 4:20 am  
The Supreme Court of Canada heard arguments Thursday in a lawsuit against a religious congregation’s “shunning” practice, but the congregation and several other groups contend the justices had no right to even take part in the case.
Randy Wall, a real estate agent, filed the suit against the Highwood congregation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization in Calgary, Alberta.
Wall was expelled from the congregation for getting drunk and not be properly repentant, court records said. He pursued an appeals process through the Jehovah’s Witnesses then went to court because he said the Witnesses’ “shunning” — the practice of not associating with him in any way — hurt his business.
He explained his two occasions of drunkenness related to “the previous expulsion by the congregation of his 15-year-old daughter.”
A lower court opinion said: “Even though the daughter was a dependent child living at home, it was a mandatory church edict that the entire family shun aspects of their relationship with her. The respondent said the edicts of the church pressured the family to evict their daughter from the family home. This led to … much distress in the family.”
The “distress” eventually resulted in his drunkenness, Wall said.
 
Wall submitted to the court arguments that about half his client base, members of various Jehovah’s Witnesses congregations, then refused to conduct business with him. He alleged the “disfellowship had an economic impact on the respondent.”
During high court arguments Thursday, the congregation asked the justices to rule that religious congregations are immune to such claims in the judicial system.
The lower courts had ruled that the courts could play a role in determining whether or not such circumstances rise to the level of violating civil rights or injuring a “disfellowshipped” party.
The rulings from the Court of Queen’s Bench and the Alberta Court of Appeals said Wall’s case was subject to secular court jurisdiction.
A multitude of religious and political organizations joined with the congregation in arguing that Canada’s courts should not be involved.
The Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms said in a filing: “The wish or desire of one person to associate with an unwilling person (or an unwilling group) is not a legal right of any kind. For a court, or the government, to support such a ‘right’ violates the right of self-determination of the unwilling parties.”
Previous case law has confirmed the right of religious or private voluntary groups to govern themselves and dictate who can be a member.
But previously rulings also reveal there is room for the court system to intervene when the question centers on property or civil rights.
The Association for Reformed Political Action described the case as having “profound implications for the separation of church and state.”
It contends the court should keep its hands off the argument.
“Secular judges have no authority and no expertise to review a church membership decision,” said a statement from Andre Schutten, a spokesman for the group. “Church discipline is a spiritual matter falling within spiritual jurisdiction, not a legal matter falling within the courts’ civil jurisdiction. The courts should not interfere.”
John Sikkema, staff lawyer for ARPA, said: “The issue in this appeal is jurisdiction. A state actor, including a court, must never go beyond its jurisdiction. The Supreme Court must consider what kind of authority the courts can or cannot legitimately claim. We argue that the civil government and churches each have limited and distinct spheres of authority. This basic distinction between civil and spiritual jurisdiction is a source of freedom and religious pluralism and a guard against civic totalism.”
He continued: “Should the judiciary have the authority to decide who gets to become or remain a church member? Does the judiciary have the authority to decide who does or does not get to participate in the sacraments? Church discipline is a spiritual matter falling within spiritual jurisdiction, not a legal matter falling within the courts’ civil jurisdiction. The courts should not interfere. Here we need separation of church and state.”
The Alberta Court of Appeal, however, suggested the case was about more than ecclesiastical rules.
“Because Jehovah’s Witnesses shun disfellowshipped members, his wife, other children and other Jehovah’s Witnesses were compelled to shun him,” that lower court decision said. “The respondent asked the appeal committee to consider the mental and emotional distress he and his family were under as a result of his duaghter’s disfellowship.”
The church committee concluded he was “not sufficiently repentant.”
The ruling said “the only basis for establishing jurisdiction over a decision of the church is when the complaint involves property and civil rights,” and that is what Wall alleged.
“Accordingly, a court has jurisdiction to review the decision of a religious organization when a breach of the rules of natural justice is alleged.”
 
               

A woman's husband had been slipping in and out of a coma for several months, yet she had stayed by his bedside every single day.

One day, when he came to, he motioned for her to come nearer.




As she sat by him, he whispered, eyes full of tears, 'You know what?  'You have been with me all through the bad times.  When I got fired, you were there to support me.  When my business failed, you were there.  When I got shot, you were by my side.

When we lost the house, you stayed right here.  When my health started failing, you were still by my side... You know what Martha?'

'What dear?' she gently asked, smiling as her heart began to fill with warmth.

'I'm beginning to think you're bad luck...

College Educations are NOT for the best and brightest, although they can be.
They are for the average Joe and Joanna who has to make a living ... and MUST have degree, or advanced degree to even get INTO their chosen field of endeavor, and out of grinding, soul killing, corrosive, abject poverty that never will end.
The choice for the average person is get a college degree, and LEARN what is necessary, and get a recognized document that PROVES they are proficient, or in most field that are not just low wage, slave labor, grunt work ... they cannot EVER get employed.
Most people on this planet are just average people, and that includes Jehovah's Witnesses, who make it a source of pride to be "humble".
No one EVER gets hired BECAUSE he is "humble".
They get hired because they have marketable skills.
AND CAN PROVE IT.
For those NOT highly motivated and have an aggressive attitude, say the top 15% of humanity ... the ability to get a job and keep a job  not limited to the expression " ..you want fries with that? ..." at subsistence wages or less depends on FORMAL, accredited, and documented education.
Consider the fact that if you are driving your car on a city street, and you have every skill necessary to be a good driver ... all the skills needed ... but you do NOT have a valid driver's license.
There is a word for that.
Pedestrian.
I HAVE BEEN BLIND, TWICE, AND YET WITH MANY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR EACH EYE, I HAVE 20/20 VISION CLOSE UP, AND FAR AWAY, AND IT MAKES LIFE A GREAT JOY.
ALL DAY!
EVERY DAY!
It is no shame to be poor, or on the ragged edge of poverty ... but it is NOTHING to brag about.
... and when someone asks me "you want fries with that ...", I usually reply "Yes, two LARGE orders"
Tankyou berry much.
Much is said about the desirability of a "Simplified Life" ....
Want a simplified life free from stress, fear and constantly scrabbling to survive?
It's EASIER for those fully competent ... and can prove it.
 

College Educations are NOT for the best and brightest, although they can be.
They are for the average Joe and Joanna who has to make a living ... and MUST have degree, or advanced degree to even get INTO their chosen field of endeavor, and out of grinding, soul killing, corrosive, abject poverty that never will end.
The choice for the average person is get a college degree, and LEARN what is necessary, and get a recognized document that PROVES they are proficient, or in most field that are not just low wage, slave labor, grunt work ... they cannot EVER get employed.
Most people on this planet are just average people, and that includes Jehovah's Witnesses, who make it a source of pride to be "humble".
No one EVER gets hired BECAUSE he is "humble".
They get hired because they have marketable skills.
AND CAN PROVE IT.
For those NOT highly motivated and have an aggressive attitude, say the top 15% of humanity ... the ability to get a job and keep a job  not limited to the expression " ..you want fries with that? ..." at subsistence wages or less depends on FORMAL, accredited, and documented education.
Consider the fact that if you are driving your car on a city street, and you have every skill necessary to be a good driver ... all the skills needed ... but you do NOT have a valid driver's license.
There is a word for that.
Pedestrian.
I HAVE BEEN BLIND, TWICE, AND YET WITH MANY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR EACH EYE, I HAVE 20/20 VISION CLOSE UP, AND FAR AWAY, AND IT MAKES LIFE A GREAT JOY.
ALL DAY!
EVERY DAY!
It is no shame to be poor, or on the ragged edge of poverty ... but it is NOTHING to brag about.
... and when someone asks me "you want fries with that ...", I usually reply "Yes, two LARGE orders"
Tankyou berry much.
Much is said about the desirability of a "Simplified Life" ....
Want a simplified life free from stress, fear and constantly scrabbling to survive?
It's EASIER for those fully competent ... and can prove it.
 

College Educations are NOT for the best and brightest, although they can be.
They are for the average Joe and Joanna who has to make a living ... and MUST have degree, or advanced degree to even get INTO their chosen field of endeavor, and out of grinding, soul killing, corrosive, abject poverty that never will end.
The choice for the average person is get a college degree, and LEARN what is necessary, and get a recognized document that PROVES they are proficient, or in most field that are not just low wage, slave labor, grunt work ... they cannot EVER get employed.
Most people on this planet are just average people, and that includes Jehovah's Witnesses, who make it a source of pride to be "humble".
No one EVER gets hired BECAUSE he is "humble".
They get hired because they have marketable skills.
AND CAN PROVE IT.
For those NOT highly motivated and have an aggressive attitude, say the top 15% of humanity ... the ability to get a job and keep a job  not limited to the expression " ..you want fries with that? ..." at subsistence wages or less depends on FORMAL, accredited, and documented education.
Consider the fact that if you are driving your car on a city street, and you have every skill necessary to be a good driver ... all the skills needed ... but you do NOT have a valid driver's license.
There is a word for that.
Pedestrian.
I HAVE BEEN BLIND, TWICE, AND YET WITH MANY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR EACH EYE, I HAVE 20/20 VISION CLOSE UP, AND FAR AWAY, AND IT MAKES LIFE A GREAT JOY.
ALL DAY!
EVERY DAY!
It is no shame to be poor, or on the ragged edge of poverty ... but it is NOTHING to brag about.
... and when someone asks me "you want fries with that ...", I usually reply "Yes, two LARGE orders"
Tankyou berry much.
Much is said about the desirability of a "Simplified Life" ....
Want a simplified life free from stress, fear and constantly scrabbling to survive?
It's EASIER for those fully competent ... and can prove it.