I was speaking in jest, Nickolas -
ah, the limitations of text communication. My bad. You might be surprised, however, how many times over the years people have expressed the same sentiment not in jest.
lyndon johnson admitted conspiracy behind jfk assassination.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of4_7_emzy0.
bangalore.
I was speaking in jest, Nickolas -
ah, the limitations of text communication. My bad. You might be surprised, however, how many times over the years people have expressed the same sentiment not in jest.
lyndon johnson admitted conspiracy behind jfk assassination.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of4_7_emzy0.
bangalore.
But the conspirators got her too...
Or she killed herself when JFK made it clear to her that it was all just a fling. That seems to be the message put forward in the latest miniseries The Kennedys. This was the miniseries that was dropped like a hot potato by The History Channel after they were pressured by the Kennedy family and then none of the majors would touch it. It was picked up by the tiny ReelzChannel in the US and now has 10 Emmy nominations. If you have an interest in that part of US history the miniseries is worth watching, but have a grain of salt with you because there is some unsubstantiated content.
lyndon johnson admitted conspiracy behind jfk assassination.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of4_7_emzy0.
bangalore.
It doesn't seem like an admission so much as a suspicion being expressed, Bangalore. Lee Harvey Oswald had Soviet connections and the cold war was in full swing at the time of the interview with LBJ. Still, there are lots of alternative conspiracy theories. Kennedy made a lot of enemies getting to the oval office and while there, including the mob and J. Edgar Hoover. No connection has ever been proven.
just a few weeks back my wife and i attended the wedding ceremony of the child of a couple with which we associated in the past.
he and i worked together in the same industrial complex and shared a common interest in antique cars.
i liked the older british sports cars and he liked american steel.
My husband goes out of his way to understand me and I do the same for him although I have to admit we are intellectually and philosophically very different.
I might observe that the thing that makes it work for you, curtains, is your mutual effort to understand one another. You communicate. I was under the impression, however, that Jehovah's Witnesses are not allowed to discuss the Watchtower with their unbelieving mates.
http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/07/god-evidence-believe-world.
No, just saying you've been around a decade. While no indication that you are a senior citizen that's still a long time in JWN-land. Despite that you don't seem to suffer from hubris.
http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/07/god-evidence-believe-world.
Time flies when you're having fun, ballistic. You have seniority, at least. There's some legitimacy in that.
just a few weeks back my wife and i attended the wedding ceremony of the child of a couple with which we associated in the past.
he and i worked together in the same industrial complex and shared a common interest in antique cars.
i liked the older british sports cars and he liked american steel.
We've really been talking to each other
That is precisely what I do not have. Then again, you still believe in God, so you have something in common. The Watchtower, it seems, forbids baptised Jehovah's Witnesses, even if they are in a marriage relationship, to actually discuss the Watchtower with their mates, unbelieving or otherwise. Off limits. They automatically have a wall built between them and their lives are dedicated to accomodating it.
and very affectionate.
that we still have. It seems incompatible with not talking to one another about the thing that divides us most.
just a few weeks back my wife and i attended the wedding ceremony of the child of a couple with which we associated in the past.
he and i worked together in the same industrial complex and shared a common interest in antique cars.
i liked the older british sports cars and he liked american steel.
Just a few weeks back my wife and I attended the wedding ceremony of the child of a couple with which we associated in the past. He and I worked together in the same industrial complex and shared a common interest in antique cars. I liked the older British sports cars and he liked American steel. We go back almost 40 years but our lives have taken us in different geographical directions. His elder daugher and my elder son went through school together, but that was a relatively long time ago - they're both in their mid-30's. We haven't lived in the same area for 11 years. This, just to provide a little context.
At the wedding was another couple we associated with later on and with whom we've not had much contact in more than a decade. They are outwardly still a dedicated couple, but it turns out that he spends much of his time in the remote family cottage doing the things he likes to do (like hunting, fishing and boating) while she spends much of her time in the condo 400 miles away in the city doing the things she likes to do (like culture, theatre and art). Probably 75% of the time they're together, ostensibly doing things they both like to do. They'll be our guests this fall for a two-day tour of vineyards and wine tasting.
They seem happy enough, as they always have in the 30 years I've known them, but it is clear they have settled on a sort of marriage of convenience. They spend only 3/4 of their time together, the rest of the time doing what each other wants to do that doesn't happen to interest the other.
There are individuals in here, who shall remain nameless but who I might expect to join in this particular conversation, who have experienced an intellectual/philosophical separation from their mates, whether male or female. Specifically, they have detatched themselves from the Watchtower while their mates have not, yet they remain mates. Given the all-or-nothing of Watchtower doctrine it seems to me that these individuals have entered into a marriage of convenience. They stay together because they love their mates and their mates love them, but they are hopelessly (or perhaps hopefully) divided in what they perceive as reality. The question is, have they admitted the marriage of convenience to themselves and are they content to allow it to remain the way it is until the end of their lives?
this is a rather long yet fascinating documentary from a former ku student about his transformation from a true christian believer to an atheist.
if you have the time to watch it, i would love to hear your comments.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/why-i-am-no-longer-a-christian/.
Watched the first two segments with interest and will dedicate some time later to watching the rest. Thanks for the link.
http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2011/07/god-evidence-believe-world.
Thank you, behemot. There are some treasures there. I was particularly interested in Stephen Hawking's comment, within the context of the subject line:
I am not claiming there is no God. The scientific account is complete, but it does not predict human behaviour, because there are too many equations to solve. One therefore uses a different model, which can include free will and God.