Posts by Marvin Shilmer

305

McKinney Texas pool party?

by Marvin Shilmer in

so today i was asked my thoughts on the pool party incident in mcminney, texas.

my response: it shows a clash of expectations.

i saw police officers who expected citizens to listen to and follow instructions.

Marvin Shilmer

Because the general consensus appeared that he did nothing wrong and that everything he did was justified.

Because I think the officer at issue didn't do anything worth getting fired over does not mean I think he (and others) can't improve, and that's where I think emphasis should be. This incident is a learning moment.

But I'm still waiting for more investigatory information before I form a comprehensive conclusion about the matter. For instance, it would be helpful to know what other officers on the scene were running after, and why. Knowing the number of officers on the scene and their order of arrival should prove enlightening too. And that radio transmission made just prior to the bikini gal episode could be very helpful in understanding what was on the mind of the officer and why.

There could easily have been concealed firearms in that crowd, and probably there was given we're talking about an incident in Texas. Officers realized this. There was report of violence. The crowd was anxious and mouthy. Several individuals were failing to remove themselves from the chaos, which caused needless distraction. I'd have been as loud and as obnoxious as necessary to restore order so I could better focus on whatever presented the greatest danger, if any danger remained. I'm mostly glad that we're not talking about grieving parents.

80

Is RIDICULE acceptable in online debating?

by nicolaou in

this topic was inspired by one of fhn's comments on the 'warzone' thread, so i'll just restate my post there .

.. "i've been wondering for a while now if ridicule really is an unacceptable feature in debate - it certainly isn't a valid form of argumentation.

the thing is, some individuals really do come out with the most laughable nonsense and parade it as a serious proposition that merits attention.

Marvin Shilmer

Maybe some of what is being labelled ridicule only appears to be ridicule because this is not a face to face scenario. A number of the posts I read come across as being dogmatic or mean spirited when I am sure at times they were not.

In what is essentially a text-only environment it is common to misunderstand honest questioning, testing and devil's-advocacy with ridicule. Every participant should realize this and accordingly refrain from presuming about writing style, questioning, and similar. Instead, ask questions and wait for answers. Let a person explain themselves.

80

Is RIDICULE acceptable in online debating?

by nicolaou in

this topic was inspired by one of fhn's comments on the 'warzone' thread, so i'll just restate my post there .

.. "i've been wondering for a while now if ridicule really is an unacceptable feature in debate - it certainly isn't a valid form of argumentation.

the thing is, some individuals really do come out with the most laughable nonsense and parade it as a serious proposition that merits attention.

Marvin Shilmer

Intellectual people don't usually feel the need to ridicule either people or ideas.

Bad ideas--ideas that are unsound or, worse, false--deserve to be pointed out as bad ideas, and should be pointed out as bad ideas.

Reductiones ad absurdum often come across as ridicule. But this is an effective means of pointing out notions that should not be accepted because of unsoundness or falseness.

But here's the BUT: Ideas that are bad can and often do lead to good ideas, which is why ideas--both good and bad--deserve discussion, and why folks should not take it personally, as though ridicule, when one of their pet ideas gets thoroughly chewed up and spit out. Folks who want to move thought forward are glad to have their ideas chewed on. They embrace it.

80

Is RIDICULE acceptable in online debating?

by nicolaou in

this topic was inspired by one of fhn's comments on the 'warzone' thread, so i'll just restate my post there .

.. "i've been wondering for a while now if ridicule really is an unacceptable feature in debate - it certainly isn't a valid form of argumentation.

the thing is, some individuals really do come out with the most laughable nonsense and parade it as a serious proposition that merits attention.

Marvin Shilmer

I don't want you to think I'm preaching because I'm not. I could point out web sites where if you even hint that you believe in god they will rip you to shreds and spit out the bones. The language is vile. In fact, I can't believe they can get away with it, but they do. When you join, the first question they ask is 'do you do anal?'. I kid you not. They will treat you unmercilessly. The problem is that there's some serious intellectual heavyweights on the site too. They know BS when they hear it and treat it with complete and utter contempt. Those guys don't whistle Dixie. They are full on. There's a moderator who's very active on the site. He makes sure that the level of abuse is turned up to maximum. He considers freedom of speech to be above all things.

That's pretty much how the original H2O discussion forum was, and i liked it. Over the years I've participated in several different discussion forums, and those with nearly 100 percent freedom to say what you feel like needs saying have been my favorite. I love being able to discard political correctness and just say what needs saying. And, when I'm wrong it's my turn to be toasted. I'm fine with that too.

Sites like that offer a unique glimpse into what folks really think and why. Also, you always get to reply in full to whatever is said, if you want. You're never held back in the slightest (except for illegal acts). It's not an arena that works for the faint of heart or individuals who want to preach without soundness being their ultimate goal. Those who do best in an environment like that are those are want to know what's correct more than being correct.

150

Disfellowshipping Image

by naazira in

jw
friends

this photo can be found in the april 15 , study edition article titled:.

why disfellowshipping is a loving provision.

just by looking at this image we can see how quickly the barrier between the congregation and former member is put up, after the announcement that this sister is no longer one of jehovah's witneses.

Marvin Shilmer

Jews disfellowshipped men, women and children by stoning them to death. According to the biblical record, many Christians met their end by the hand of Jews disfellowshipping them with stones.

I can't imagine Christians disfellowshipping anyone by a method that amounts to stoning them to death.

Then we have Watchtower.

Watchtower disfellowships men, women and children with isolation. According to what Watchtower's published, isolation is one of the most potent killers, and Watchtower teaches its followers to use it.--(Awake, published by Watchtower, May 22, 1983, p. 15; See: Watchtower Shunning – Deadly by Design )

80

Parents under fire for failing to allow lifesaving blood transfusion to terminally ill son

by AndersonsInfo in

http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/06/11/19/06/parents-under-fire-for-failing-to-allow-lifesaving-blood-transfusion-to-terminally-ill-son.

there is a video that can be seen at the above link that is worth watching.. the andersons.

7:10pm june 11, 2015 parents under fire for failing to allow lifesaving blood transfusion to terminally ill son.

Marvin Shilmer

OUTLAW,

That image you posted is grotesque, and unfortunately just about spot on.

When will this madness end?

JWs and their children are waiting on JeWatchtower to end it.

PS: A parent who lets this happen, religiously brainwashed or not, has no priority in my mind compared to what's happening to their child here and now. A parent who's unwilling to lay down and die for their child (and, of course, depend on God's mercy for sins hoping for a resurrection!!!) is not worth worrying about.

305

McKinney Texas pool party?

by Marvin Shilmer in

so today i was asked my thoughts on the pool party incident in mcminney, texas.

my response: it shows a clash of expectations.

i saw police officers who expected citizens to listen to and follow instructions.

Marvin Shilmer

That's just anti-sock-racism right there.

Well, the socks are white!

305

McKinney Texas pool party?

by Marvin Shilmer in

so today i was asked my thoughts on the pool party incident in mcminney, texas.

my response: it shows a clash of expectations.

i saw police officers who expected citizens to listen to and follow instructions.

Marvin Shilmer

I can tell it was a mickey mouse police department because they let Casebolt wear white socks.

Alas! Every time I watch the video that item leaps off the screen at me. I didn't bring it up before because it's a sideshow. But now that you brought it up, I agree.

The right thing for the local Chief to have done was to form his opinions once the investigation was complete, and not before. Sharing an opinion prior to that is very unprofessional, and can be very harmful to the department's morale. You're right, though. It's political.

305

McKinney Texas pool party?

by Marvin Shilmer in

so today i was asked my thoughts on the pool party incident in mcminney, texas.

my response: it shows a clash of expectations.

i saw police officers who expected citizens to listen to and follow instructions.

Marvin Shilmer

Is there any evidence that the girl in question committed a crime?

If someone is interfering with an officer's ability to control chaos at a scene of reported crime then that person is subject to arrest for interfering with a police officer discharging their duty. Often what happens is the individual is neutralized and when things calm down they are released. Just because a person is cuffed does not mean they're going to be arrested for criminal interference, but it is a criminal offense nevertheless.

By "neutralize" I mean an action that essentially removes an individual from interfering. If too many people are meandering around causing needless distraction the neutralizing act might be an instruction sit down and stay in place. If the person complies then that person is no longer interfering. Alternately the same person might be asked to get out of the scene of investigation. Basically this means, 'Remove yourself from the chaos so I can watch for dangers yet unidentified.' If the person complies then any interference they were causing is likely to be neutralized. When someone is doing something that interferes with a police officer carrying out their duty and does not comply with instructions that would remove that interference, the individual will likely find themselves being physically restrained because the officer has other fish to fry and he or she needs to act for the individual who refuses to act responsibly for themselves, the police officers and everyone else's safety.

In the McKinney pool party incident my opinion is the bikini clad gal was interfering with police attempting to control chaos at a scene where violence had been reported.

305

McKinney Texas pool party?

by Marvin Shilmer in

so today i was asked my thoughts on the pool party incident in mcminney, texas.

my response: it shows a clash of expectations.

i saw police officers who expected citizens to listen to and follow instructions.

Marvin Shilmer

The original narrative is specifically a dual one; that there is an institutional problem with how police treat minorities as compared to others in the U.S., and has been for over a century, and, also how police treat citizens in general.

And I when it comes to policing, I don't see any mistreatment based on racial minority in the McKinney pool party incident and I don't see anything I'd fire a police officer over.