Thanks for your story, Cappytan. I feel I know you better for it.
What a roller coaster ride we all have had!
Frank
Hold Me-Thrill Me
JoinedPosts by Hold Me-Thrill Me
-
35
My Story of Waking Up - in retrospect
by cappytan inso, many of y'all know bits and pieces of my story of waking up, but i thought it might be nice to have it all in one place.. i was baptized at 11, auxiliary pioneered every summer, regular pioneer at 17, ministerial servant by 19, then went to bethel for a year.. i always had minor doubts from time to time, but nothing serious.
always dismissed doubts and decided to "just have faith.".
after leaving bethel, i was never really firing on all cylinders "spiritually speaking.
-
-
Hold Me-Thrill Me
-
182
The Case for Theism
by FusionTheism in"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.
" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.
atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.
-
-
Hold Me-Thrill Me
Thanks FusionTheism,
I appreciated your effort to add something to the discussion.
Verbally clubbing the religious to death is an avocation for some. Or perhaps you consider it jousting. ;) Either way, keep up your hard work. You have I'm sure been a comfort to some lurkers here who are likely being turned off by the vitriol expressed against God. No better way to make a JW run back to the Org. than to viciously degrade God as has been done on this forum.
I've visited forums where atheists and believers discuss their different views without verbal punches. It is possible but it seems not here.
Too bad really.
Frank
-
34
There is no right and wrong
by campaign of hate inso i am a little tangled up in this train of thought, as it can go quite deep.. as a jw, albeit fully awake, we are taught that there is right and a wrong.
smoking is wrong.
going on the ministry is right.
-
-
Hold Me-Thrill Me
Of course slavery is wrong but though Lincoln believed it wrong he did not think the abolition of slavery was more important than the Union. -
34
There is no right and wrong
by campaign of hate inso i am a little tangled up in this train of thought, as it can go quite deep.. as a jw, albeit fully awake, we are taught that there is right and a wrong.
smoking is wrong.
going on the ministry is right.
-
-
Hold Me-Thrill Me
Thanks for reply. -
34
There is no right and wrong
by campaign of hate inso i am a little tangled up in this train of thought, as it can go quite deep.. as a jw, albeit fully awake, we are taught that there is right and a wrong.
smoking is wrong.
going on the ministry is right.
-
-
Hold Me-Thrill Me
I believe Lincoln's letter speaks for itself. He was politically for the Union at all cost but personally against slavery. His personal belief did not change his political aim or belief.
Lincoln did not wage war to save the slaves. He waged war to save the Union. It was war we were discussing not moral personal beliefs. -
34
There is no right and wrong
by campaign of hate inso i am a little tangled up in this train of thought, as it can go quite deep.. as a jw, albeit fully awake, we are taught that there is right and a wrong.
smoking is wrong.
going on the ministry is right.
-
-
Hold Me-Thrill Me
Eleanor Roosevelt I believe spearheaded the writing of that declaration but connecting that declaration to her husband's declared war on Japan is hard to do. Yes, after the fact, the declaration was good but that was after the war. Human rights before the war were not at the forefront though. American Japanese citizens were denied their human rights, American black soldiers (according to white veterans my father knew) were treated at times less honorably than captured German soldiers.
Look, I'm not interested in criticizing governments. I'm just trying to point out that governments must act to preserve themselves. This is the way it is, the way it must be. How many Americans would support a war that might cost thousands of American lives just to give the people of a small African country potable water? But if that small African country has precious ore important to national security, or other political concerns, then let the war begin and give the people clean water as well.
Truly, there is nothing wrong with that because governments exist to maintain themselves and their people's interests.
Political=Government
-
34
There is no right and wrong
by campaign of hate inso i am a little tangled up in this train of thought, as it can go quite deep.. as a jw, albeit fully awake, we are taught that there is right and a wrong.
smoking is wrong.
going on the ministry is right.
-
-
Hold Me-Thrill Me
Jonathan Drake,
Lincoln's letter was the letter of a national leader, the President of the United States. As President his main concern was the preservation of the Union. Though he personally believed in freedom he nonetheless would have set none of the slaves free if it meant the Union would be preserved.
Lincoln's "own wishes" did NOT override his desire to keep the Union intact. His letter is a fine example of pragmatism which at times must trump personal belief. He was not a priest he was a politician, a President. His priority was the United States of America and its interests. He fulfilled his commission as President, he held the nation together.
Frank
-
34
There is no right and wrong
by campaign of hate inso i am a little tangled up in this train of thought, as it can go quite deep.. as a jw, albeit fully awake, we are taught that there is right and a wrong.
smoking is wrong.
going on the ministry is right.
-
-
Hold Me-Thrill Me
The concern of World War II as another example was moral in nature, not politcal. Whole nations spent their money and other assets fighting Nazism, and did so expecting to gain nothing but the end of the oppression of Hitler and his regime.
This is a nice idea but it does not support the reality that the powers which primarily fought off the Nazis did not jump into the war at first blush when other weaker nations were falling. They jumped in when it became necessary to jump in.
Britain and the U.S. did a "good" thing in fighting off the Nazis but they did not do it for "moral" reasons. We knew about the persecution of the Jews but refused to accept Jewish refugees. This is not a condemnation on my part but the recognition that governments' first priority is to do what they believe will be of benefit to themselves as well as what they believe their citizens will tolerate or not tolerate.
I believe the United States is one of the best countries in history but I'm a little surprised by the historical rose colored glasses here.
Frank
-
34
There is no right and wrong
by campaign of hate inso i am a little tangled up in this train of thought, as it can go quite deep.. as a jw, albeit fully awake, we are taught that there is right and a wrong.
smoking is wrong.
going on the ministry is right.
-
-
Hold Me-Thrill Me
Campaign of hate,
War is at times necessary at other times a selfish pursuit. This is the way it is, the way it has always been, This is life.
Lincoln preserved the Union. This was beneficial to southerners and northerners and slaves. He fought a necessary war.
Campaign of hate: If politicians were more diplomatic in their approach and were willing to compromise more with the offending nations, being less selfish so to speak, there would be a lot less death.
What you describe is outside of human reality.
Frank
-
34
There is no right and wrong
by campaign of hate inso i am a little tangled up in this train of thought, as it can go quite deep.. as a jw, albeit fully awake, we are taught that there is right and a wrong.
smoking is wrong.
going on the ministry is right.
-
-
Hold Me-Thrill Me
Jonathan Drake: War is absolutely not a means to a political end in all instances.
Governments go to war or engage in conflict in order to serve or preserve their nation, their political ends, their political interests. At times that political end may be to preserve the nation itself. At other times to help their allies whose continued existence most definitely benefits a nation and therefore their political ends, political referring to their government. The main and first objective of any government is to maintain its existence. You gave the Civil War as an example that you believe proves my statement wrong.
Jonathan Drake: This was fought over slavery and the entire point of the war was morality.
The point of the war was the preservation of the Union. The southern states rebelled against the Union. The north would not have it. Yes, slavery sparked the southern states to rebel but the north did not send their young men to die simply to free the slaves. There was another more important issue at hand: the Union of States, the United States of America.
Read carefully Lincoln's letter below:
EXECUTIVE MANSiON,
WASHINGTON, Aug. 22, 1862.
Hon. Horace Greeley:
DEAR SIR: I have just read yours of the 19th, addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements or assumptions of fact which I may know to be erroneous, I do not now and here controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here argue against them. If there be perceptible in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.
As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing," as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.
I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time save Slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy Slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy Slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about Slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save this Union, and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views. I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty, and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men, everywhere, could be free. Yours,
A. LINCOLN.
_____________________
Lincoln's letter is the epitome of what national leaders must do. They must first preserve the nation, and its political interests, and do what is necessary to accomplish those ends. If that means war then it is war.
In Lincoln's time that political end was the preservation of the Union. He, imo, accomplished a worth while political end. He preserved the Union and the nation.
Frank