Steve, did you miss this thread?
Slimboy, oh come on! Barbara is a gay or lesbian basher? Seriously, have you ever spoken to her?
Skeeter
AndersonsInfo
by minimus 189 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
skeeter1
I went back and read the posts under the blood update you did...guess who I found that made a post... Slimboy!
He states that the blood news didn't address doctrines. Perphaps that's because of a separation of church & state? Are courts allowed to say that a religious belief is right or wrong? No, but they can say that a religously motiviated ACTION (like misquoting or honor killing or polygamy) is wrong because it breaks a law or legal concept. Slimboy also dissed the Journal of Church and State because Jerry Bergman was published in it? Please, that's the best you can do? I'll top you one better...I beleive some noted Watch Tower attorneys were also published in it. Seriously, it is the JAMA equivalent of 1st amendment religious law and it's peer reviewed. It ain't no rag, Mr. Slim, no matter how much you hope it to be!
slimboyfat Re: Here's an update to what has happened since I used the words, "Big News," five years ago posted ~ a month ago (2/13/2011)
Afghanistan
Post 4359 of 4525
Since 11/24/2004I know a haemophiliac JW who has been taking blood components for the condition for decades. Maybe he contacted the Society directly and they told him it was okay.
The article in the Journal of Church and State made some interesting points. Where it fell down was in trying to undermine the historical basis for the JW blood doctrine. Surely religious groups are allowed to supply whatever reasons they wish for their doctrines that are not liable to scientific much less legal refutation.
As for the source, even Jerry Bergman managed to get published in the Journal of Church and State.
-
steve2
Thanks skeeter. Yes, I had noticed the thread earlier but at that time was in a work environment in which I could not reply. I actually appreciated the tone of the thread because it was much less given to hyperbolic statements than earlier ones and I'd say was a lot more measured in its comments about what it "meant" for the JWs. On the matter of Jerry Bergman, I am probably closer to slimboyfat's opinions on this psychologist than to your opinions, but then again, it's great to be on a forum where the exchange of opinions is welcomed and not scorned.
-
AndersonsInfo
slimboyfat: I did respond to Steve2's issue. I said I went back over all my topics for the past 5 years and only saw the one on the blood-ban Big News thread that was sort of sensational, but at the time I meant it to be because coming from where I had been, it was a first against the WT's blood ban that was significant and it still is significant. All my other topics were names of articles or books, announcements of events, or other misc. material. I didn't even announce or make a big deal about my appearance on NBC NIghtly News and someone else alerted people to this program I was on. When I looked at Steve2's topic titles, his were similar to mine. Why this silly argument that accuses me of doing something constantly, something I deny and which I shouldn't be commenting on as it is too dumb for words.
In addition, Steve2 took a strong stand against "The Submission," and it now appears that he was upset with me that I was once again sensationalizing something not worth the paper it was written on. He has a right to his opinion, but I won't stop putting news about the Watch Tower on this discussion board unless Simon tells me not to. Maybe I should PM you and Steve2 to ask about how I should title a thread or if I should post it at all; then maybe both of you will be happy.
And you took issue with how I introduced the Australian Submission topic? You agreed with another poster, who had exactly two posts to his name, the second one on the Australian thread, that I was "crazy." Come on now, it's pretty ridiculous what you did. In the subject title line, the words I used came from Steven Unthank's blog-site. They weren't my own words. In the introduction to the information, I used 55 words which didn't bother anybody but you in that I supposedly spoke in the third person voice, something I didn't even realize I was doing late at night when I was tired. Further, I explained in a post meant for you that the information posted came from Andersonsinfo as a reporter not as a person who was personally involved and had taken sides. You are making a mountain out of a molehill and enough is enough.
I have nothing against Steve2 that he is gay. You know nothing about me and how I feel about gays. I have a lovely, endearing friend, like a daughter to us, who is gay who we're here for in thick or thin times. Three people tried to tell you what is meant by what I said. I think you're in England and Steve2 is in New Zealand and seem not to understand what we are trying to say. Please accept that the expression, "drama queen" doesn't mean what you think it does, but you refuse to let this drop. What's going on here?
No more will I comment on this and I'm only doing it for the people who are reading this thread besides you and Steve2 so that they know what this is all about.
-
OUTLAW
Good Evening Barb..
Lets face it..Your well respected here..You have a lot of fans in our world..
If someone doesn`t like what you post..So what?..It doesn`t take away from all the good you have done..
Don`t waste your time..
..
SBF..
Barbs post has nothing to do with being Gay..
I call Drama Queens,Drama Queens..It has nothing to do with Sexual Orientation..
It has to do with,"Grow the F*ck -Up" and stop being a Cry Baby..
........................
...OUTLAW -
crazyblondeb
barb...
don't give him a second thought!!
-
steve2
For the record, I think it is actually no big deal being called a drama queen. Here in New Zealand, it is even used as a term of affection such as a local TV show I recently saw in which the woman said to her boyfriend something like, "Stop being such a big drama queen and come here and give me a hug".
-
life is to short
I am totally speechless about this attack on Barbara by slimboyfat and Steve 2.
Why? I just cannot understand why as it makes no sense why they went on the attack toward Barbara? Perhaps they are jealous and I too do think it is because she is a women. This is such a male driven religion and even after leaving those male dominate feelings do not leave. It seems Steve 2 and slimboyfat still have that need for control in them and to be the center of attention.
Barbara I hope you do not let this stop you from posting, please do not even pay them any attention. I do not know why they are decided to do this to you but we all love you and are so thankful to you for being here.
That blood thread of yours was great and I know for a fact it opened the eyes of a lot of the ones on this board about the truth of this religion.
Please do not stop you great work we need you so badly.
LITS
-
kurtbethel
Barbara is doing fine works. Everyone in this has their own style. There is no magic bullet, and what moves one person will fall flat with another.
I usually write in third person when describing a video that I am in. It is a certain style that I was trained to be proper.
-
lovelylil
Barbara hardly posts here. when she does it is very infomative information. Thanks barbara for this! There are so many posters on here, you are bound to run into a few who misunderstand you once in a while. Peace Lilly
