TrueTomHarley

Word on the street is that the miscreants here planned to send some Moabite women your way to trip you up. So much for that idea.

Do you think that’s why they are taken in the first place, held without charges? So that they can be used as bargaining chips somewhere down the road should the need arise?

Please don’t tell me that 4Jah is now assuming the role of Jesus. He really has advanced since leaving the godly organization.

The Huffington Post is oblivious to this. It celebrates her BDSM as a triumph of the human spirit. From their point of view, there is nothing sordid about it at all. This article tells me more about the Post than it does about the Witnesses. The portion of the story quoted is only that which makes the Witnesses look bad, so it is reasonable to think that is the intent or whoever quoted it. But the article in its entirety celebrates humanism more than it seeks to put down religion. Her JW upbringing is just setting the stage for the main event. No, I don’t think she is blaming, either. The “context” is supplied by whoever quoted just the Witness portion of the article. She views her life as a triumph. So does the Post. Whatever ‘blame there is may be implied by detractors who hope to embarrass Witnesses by pointing to her “downward spiral” and what a fat reward THAT is for a JW upbringing. The Post is trying to have it both ways; impute shame over a “backwards” Witness upbringing while at the same time painting BDSM favorably. Given that they feel BDSM is a triumph, they might just as easily praise her JW upbringing for lining up the circumstances to lead her to it. Essentially, the parents are guilty of living their faith. They may or may not have had their personal quirks to heighten or lessen theocratic training. It isn’t easy to raise kids. All are different. This story is no more than “Demas has forsaken me because he loved the present system of things.” Do you think Demas thereafter reminisced of how balanced those early Christians were? Or did he paint them as narrow, repressive, even brainwashing? The Post is happy to discard faith. All its focus is on the here-and-now. Surely there is a tragedy in settling for a life of atheism, but the article conveys none of it. Rather, it conveys just the reverse. It’s a little like the guy who loses millions in the stock market. “Oh well, they were just paper gains anyway,” he says, as he celebrates the few thousands he has left. That is what’s “wrong” with the article. It celebrates the amoral short term, completely oblivious to the long term—the “real life” as Paul puts it.

This helped me to see the source of Alan’s enmity towards me. It is pure envy.

Whatever witnessing I will do in the rewrite of #DearMrPutinJehovahsWitnessesWriteRussia (to be under new cover and title) will be mostly in the form of anecdotes—essentially my own ministry experiences. Thus, it will be less “preachy” while also conveying the notion that the house to house ministry is a natural, unremarkable, and expected part of life—there is death, there is taxes, and there is Jehovah’s Witnesses. For it is basically an historical work, yet what is the point of doing it if I cannot convey the reasons Witnesses do what they do?

Sometimes that Babylon Bee knocks it out of the park. I like how at the atheist convention, musical entertainment is provided by Bad Religion. I suspect Alan was put in charge of that. “We will not be taken in! We don't need the crutch of spirituality too many rely on!" I have made before that the analogy is apt—religion is a crutch. The premise that we don’t need one is what is faulty. It is the fallacy of ad negatory substitutum. The premise that fits is of someone pulling himself through pig manure on all fours, too proud or too stupid to realize that a crutch would be useful.

That’s “mommy moron” to you.

HEY, WHO POSTED THAT EZEKIEL CREATURE WITH A HEAD OF @AlanF, A WARTHOG, A DONKEY, AND A SKUNK? THAT’S NOT FUNNY!! TAKE IT DOWN RIGHT NOW!!!

God’s will is that all sorts of men should be saved. This includes straw men. Who are you to judge? Done: https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/01/a-jungian-answer-to-job.html

Translation: “Shazam! I never thought of that.”

You have triggered one of these silly fallacies Michael Shermer carries on about, dressed up in Latin verbiage to make clear that whoever uses it is educated. In English, it means, “just because I don’t have the answer to something, that does not mean that your answer is correct. (“Fallacy of negation,” I think it is. My bad—no Latin) It is a fallacy to be employed when you are criticizing a evolutionist position. It MAY NOT be employed for the opposite position, criticizing one who thinks creation. Therefore I will let the question stand, with the caveat that it doesn’t mean anything, as it wouldn’t were it used to criticize evolution. This is very much like when @AlanFcarries on about no poop being found in the Sinai desert and thinks he has struck logical pay dirt. Yet when you cite something contradictory in his evolution mantra, he will wag his head and cry “fallacy of negation.” @Araunais right. It is almost like the priesthood of a religion—abounding in so many ‘heads I win/tails you lose’ scenarios.

Yes. A turd is a turd is a turd. No way is it a diamond. Down with Mommy Macro.

It could be off by plus or minus 8

1 in 87975475759743070457957297455720475475904747362684672096775579457390253949573490969696739874328509598435095453459345. Happy?

Be precise. With what toppings?

Maybe there will be a short squeeze come into play.

When I was a boy I had a comedy pal that I would invent routines with. One was of the fictional baseball team, the Shiners, who were going to win the pennant this year. “Yeah, and if they don’t win it, they’ll steal it,” was the rejoinder. It was a joke. It wasn’t supposed to find its counterpart in the real world, let alone that of journalism.

Whoa! It’s like hearing that the king of the north is now Bolivia!

This is a little too lengthy for me, as I am involved in something else, but I’ll leave it for @Araunaor even Alan to bat around if they like. https://bombthrower.com/articles/get-used-to-living-under-subsidiarity-after-the-great-reset/?fbclid=IwAR3Krh9t2IyaMbIDayhfpMz8nTuRJyF2f1aOixEiXUm_PEYo4s3EAOrSnsk

Okay, I wrote this up in a post. Let’s see where this goes: https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2021/01/challenging-the-alternative-service-law-it-makes-no-sense.html

This doesn’t entirely make sense. If it is true, then the JW mentioned is an atypical outlier. The suit would certainly not have Branch support. The Witnesses overall consider alternative service laws a very good bargain and are appreciate of them. Typical of their responses is this: https://www.jw.org/en/news/legal/by-region/taiwan/successful-alternative-service-conscientious-objectors/ As to individuals, I have never heard anyone speak against such laws. Instead, every instance I know of is people likewise appreciative of them and glad to cooperate. Like this Russian brother in the Heart and Soul broadcast: (It is one remark in a 30 minute program, probably not worth the time to search it out, but the program is worth streaming on its own merits.) https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3ct1659 The wording is odd: “The petitioner has been known as a believer of Jehovah's Witnesses, who was recognized by the Supreme Court as a conscientious objector last year.” Why the past tense? Probably he is ex-JW KickFace himself.

Two nights ago a CBS News Special interrupted a perfectly fine program that I wanted to see. “Must be important,” I told myself. Instead, it was House politicians carrying the impeachment over to the Senate for their consideration, with much pomp and ceremony of being an ‘historical first,’ even though everyone knew it didn’t stand a chance of going anywhere. And it didn’t. They’re having wet dreams over there at CBS. Rand Paul said Did anyone charge Bernie Sanders for inciting the shooting of that Congressman at the softball game? Did anyone charge Maxine Waters with inciting violence when she literally advised persons to confront Trump supporters? That was enough for an entirely predictable outcome to take place, leaving Alan de Fool shaking his head in dismay.

Gasp!! You don;t suppose Alan was that alien, do you? That would account for mankind’s inability to live together with civility on the planet. Beats the pants off any evolution theory, methinks.

Whoa, you are quick to claim allies. I would not be so quick. I gave you the benefit of the doubt on this one, that is all. How gullible and starved for validation you are. I haven’t seen Expelled and so can offer no opinion on it. I can’t answer to its “quote mining.” But I wrote a post about quote-mining charges against the WT. I came away with the impression that they were pretty lame. https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2011/01/darwins-eye.html