UN Compact 2018

[Srecko Sostar]

10 hours ago, Arauna said:

We honor Jehovah's name but we do not put to death anyone who violates the name.  When Jesus came to the earth he set a new example for us - to teach other people the name of God.  If other people blaspheme the name of the God of the bible (which many are doing now) we do nothing to them because we are now under the law of Christ.  We are no longer under the law of Moses.... So we wait for God to bring judgment on them.  We do not stone any longer...... so the context of what you are reading is very important.  Jesus gave us Principals not laws - and we follow this today.  Romans 6:14 "For sin must not be master over you, SEEING THAT YOU ARE NOT UNDER LAW+ but under undeserved kindness.+" We are no longer under the stoning law.

So I urge you to study more to learn what the bible is really teaching......

Here we have little different situation. If i am ignorant about history of Islam, that is one thing. But after 40+  years in JW i am not so uninformed about JW, as you suggest. 

To Understand "What the Bible really teach" is very complicated task even for many/all Bible scholars inside WT who sitting with/on/beside books 8 hours a day. :)))

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

24 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

To Understand "What the Bible really teach" is very complicated task even for many/all Bible scholars inside WT who sitting with/on/beside books 8 hours a day. :)))

You would think they would be right, more often.

[TrueTomHarley]

8 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

It gets even worse, there are men who spend money to look like the male companion of the Barbie doll - Ken. Should you so speak of this man, you will only get a ton of swing and hate coming your way.

Romans 1:26-27 is not considered prophetic, but to me it is the most prophetic verse of all. Nobody but nobody of my time would have ever foreseen it. A small minority, yes, that has always been...but to go mainstream? Never. 

[JW Insider]

On 12/21/2018 at 12:55 AM, Arauna said:

Saw a clip yesterday where the professor is drawing attention to a school in Ireland which is now teaching their students that boys can have periods so they do not feel excluded.

It has nothing to do with boys not feeling excluded. It is so that any transgendered or non-binary students do not feel excluded. Usually these types of stories are presented all out of proportion so that conservative sites and organizations can raise more monetary contributions from a conservative audience. But this one has more basis to it than some of the other fund-raising/fear-mongering headlines.

Even the Telegraph (UK) when reporting on this, tried to get attention with a headline that said "boys can have periods, too." The truth, as usual is more nuanced. The report was apparently taken down from the government-run site, but the most relevant quotes from it were already publicized. The bullet points below were not in the original, just the start of new paragraphs:

• The advice to teachers was approved by Brighton & Hove City Council as they try to tackle stigma around menstruation.
• The new advice follows a council report which said: "Trans boys and men and non-binary people may have periods", adding that "menstruation must be inclusive of all genders".

I have feeling that the emphasis in the original was that teaching about menstruation "must be inclusive of all genders." That idea shows up in the next quote from the Telegraph:

• The report recommends that "language and learning about periods is inclusive of all genders, cultures, faiths and sexual orientations. For example; ‘girls and women and others who have periods'".
• Brighton & Hove City Council said in a statement: "By encouraging effective education on menstruation and puberty, we hope to reduce stigma and ensure no child or young person feels shame in asking for period products inside or outside of school if they need them.
• "We believe that it’s important for all genders to be able to learn and talk about menstruation together… Our approach recognises the fact that some people who have periods are trans or non-binary."

It's about much more than inclusive language, of course, but at least that part of the recommendation is a little more understandable. For example, even the New World Translation added a lot of gender-neutral language in the 2013 Revision where the previous NWT had always used male-specific language. See, for example, https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/w20151215/nwt-bible-2013/

But this recent report recommendation is an amazingly detailed accommodation to what should be only a rare occurrence among school-age students. There really are persons born with both male and female organs at the same time, or organs so deformed as to not be definable except by "choice." That choice, one expects, would be based on chromosomes, but even here, one might present as a young man before it is advisable to operate. Children should never be encouraged to participate in such a life-altering choice based on their feelings. Parents should never push a choice on them that is not completely based on biological/chromosomal reasons. So it is possible that both physical and non-physical re-orientations will take place among students at various ages, and they will likely feel out of place or even bullied if there is no sensitivity to such issues.

I hate the ideas put forward in this society to push "choices" on children, or to drastically alter their physical bodies to accommodate a supposed "feeling" that might have even been transitory, but will now be etched permanently. But, on the other hand, it has happened, and children will unfortunately continue to be bullied to the point of suicide and even be killed outright (as often happens) if something isn't done to prepare more sensitive procedures and accommodations in schools. Part of this was also in the report, and as stated below in the Telegraph article, might make sense for several reasons.

• It asks teachers to be respectful and inclusive of children who are questioning their gender, and tells them that purposefully not referring to children by their preferred pronoun or name can constitute harassment.
• The toolkit also recommends schools adopt a non-gendered uniform so all children feel included, and to reduce bullying.

[TrueTomHarley]

4 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

it has become apparent with the new QUEEN JAMES BIBLE.

It is a witticism I have not heard and long ago I might have run with it. These days I hold back. If one succumbs to be “born that way” mantra...and given its new universality...how could one not?...it’s a jab that seems unfair.

For ones of such leanings in the Christian congregation, they must be prepared to swim, not into the shore, nor away from it, but parallel to it, likely for a long long time in hopes that their orientation will readjust. It is a test of faith...denying the very real testimony of their own bodies...that few are called upon to face.

[TrueTomHarley]

6 hours ago, JW Insider said:

But, on the other hand, it has happened, and children will unfortunately continue to be

Evidence is accumulating that much havoc in children’s development is wrought by chemical contamination. I suspect it is a great factor with gender-bending, as well, and maybe also with homosexuality taking the world by storm.

https://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/2179189/study-links-early-puberty-girls-chemicals-shampoo-toothpaste-and-soap

[JW Insider]

25 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Evidence is accumulating that much havoc in children’s development is wrought by chemical contamination. I suspect it is a great factor with gender-bending, as well, and maybe also with homosexuality taking the world by storm.

Could be. And some of these problems have been known since ancient times, but I can only suspect you are right about the great increase in gender-bending. Of course, Greece was famous for homosexuality, mostly as a form of child sexual abuse, not so much "men" who lay with "men" although that was clearly well known, too. (And women with women, as Paul references.) The supposed fluidity of sexuality has also been argued from the behavior of celibates who are closet non-celibates (e.g., priests), and even the most anti-homosexual prisoners who have been known to participate voluntarily within days of incarceration.

But I was hoping to stick with the topic from the perspective of Christian love and understanding of various sexual problems that even some Witnesses have been born with, or from decisions they made before becoming Witnesses. There have been some very effeminate-acting Bethelites, and I'm not talking about your Percy Chapman types or Leo Greenlees types who apparently would "gush" over each other even in public. I'm talking about brothers (more than one) who managed to get and keep jobs with varying levels of responsibility at Bethel, even though they were sometimes "called to the Couch" when someone complained perhaps based more on their own level of discomfort near them  ("called to the Couch" was a Bethel expression referring to Bro. George Couch, Bethel personnel dept). 

In the world, we can expect that our children and grandchildren will go to school with persons who have been known to have the highest rates of suicide and depression, and (related) who have also suffered the highest levels of peer persecution and bullying. Our children need to learn sensitivity and empathy to persons with any psychological, social, or even sexual problem. Schools won't have the answer to the underlying problem, although they can make stupid decisions that make matters worse. But when our children are in such schools who are trying to do the right thing, we should probably realize that we may have to accept even some of Caesar's stupider laws when those laws themselves do not directly conflict with God's laws. Of course, we could also become politically active and claim that bad laws encourage the breaking of God's laws, at least indirectly -- but that's probably not going to be our solution. Some of us can decide on home-schooling which has its own problems, usually related to the education levels of parents. 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

11 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

What is the test without ripping out an obstacle? 

If you have dyslexia when reading that sentence, it can be VERY painful.

[Srecko Sostar]

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

various sexual problems

1) Zoologists are discovering that homosexual and bisexual activity is not unknown within the animal kingdom. - https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2004/07/homosexual-animals-debate/

2) On other hand WT explaining this: "The soul, then, is the entire creature, ....."https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/what-is-a-soul/

The use of this one Hebrew word (Hebrew word neʹphesh and the Greek word psy·kheʹ) in many different contexts helps us to ascertain the basic idea inherent in the word as the Bible writers used it, namely, that it is a person, an individual, or a lower creature; https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1001060088

3) Bible say this: And God went on to say: “Let the earth+ put forth living souls according to their kinds, domestic+ animal*and moving+ animal and wild beast*+ of the earth according to its kind.” 

 

It is understandable and visible (not always, huh) how brain of human and animal are not the same. And how some moral questions about sexuality come up in human society.  BUT, on other hand Bible reveals statement how Soul (and WT say how that means ENTIRE, WHOLE, animal or human individual/creature, aka brain, emotions, needs, wishes.....etc. If we produce some conclusions from this quotes, perhaps we can say how basic, primitive mechanism is similar, or it is almost the SAME in both bodies. So, we see very basic instincts in both Organism - with same/similar sort of  behaviors.

And as some other "inspired" human wrote: For the fates of both men and beasts are the same: As one dies, so dies the other— they all have the same breath. Man has no advantage over the animals, since everything is futile. -- A human being is no better off than an animal, because life has no meaning for either.

Just for one more  ANGLE of looking :))

[The Librarian]

18 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Are you suggesting that animals have the same comprehension as humans?

Ok... I am beginning to believe that modern people are no longer able to understand the concept of a topic.

Has social media caused this? 

Have native apps with one long scrollable feed with zero context (easy) made this happen?

I am wondering if I should just design a whole new website where people are supposed to just post random stuff with zero context and where nothing is linked to anything else because Google will link everything for us. Oh wait... that is Facebook and Instagram. (And Twitter... although at least they have hashtags)

Your thoughts.

 

Oh... I now love tacos.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

1 hour ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Are you suggesting that animals have the same comprehension as humans?

Holy Hand Grenade!

Humans don't even have comprehension of what each other think,

1 hour ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Obviously, if you and JWinsider’s attempt, is to force your idea of grammar on others. Keep in mind your own failures in grammar. Everyone has their own style, deal with it. Now if you can't understand scripture, that's a different story. I can understand that handicap that many here have. Matthew 5:29

I think a complete lack of a sense of humor ..... PLUS a limited stockpile of frames of reference .... PLUS a deep seated paranoia is the cause.

I submit as an example a JOKE ... which thankfully, (whew!) JWI thought was funny!

Johnny Carson had 16 writers, and half his material bombed, so I save a LOT of money by doing my own jokes, or stealing others, and filing off the serial numbers.

 

 

[JW Insider]

58 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I submit as an example a JOKE ... which thankfully, (whew!) JWI thought was funny!

I have to admit that I thought the joke was funny immediately, but I hesitated to respond with the "laugh" emoticon. In fact, I canceled my initial response because, well, I already knew that what just happened could easily happen because it had happened a few times in the past. And sure enough, it just happened again.

Let me explain:

You probably know that I equate BillyTheKid with AllenSmith and at least a dozen other monikers that I believe are used by the same person. You probably also remember that AllenSmith(s) went on a campaign for about two years on this forum trying to claim that I had made fun of his grammar (also claiming that you and Ann had made fun of his grammar). I knew I hadn't and I knew, therefore, that he also had no evidence for this false claim. But that didn't stop him from repeating the claim every few months. 

What made your joke, above, just as dangerous is that --even though your joke was not about him-- it could have been taken as a joke made at his expense. And even worse, it included the word "dyslexia."

I'll just pick up a few phrases from the search tools, and you will probably remember some of these conversations, usually involving the three of us. [I won't mention the topic, because I don't want to divert too far from this topic of the UN Compact. 😎

• [From February 2018] "I told a joke and maybe you thought I was making fun of you."

Here's one that's more to the point from September 2017:

On 9/24/2017 at 1:40 PM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

On 9/23/2017 at 6:41 PM, AllenSmith said:

Comment Deleted!!!!!!!!

Self-Deletion in fear of having an “OUTRAGES” response from JTR as he has done in the past with my dyslexia without consequences from Queen Ester or the Librarian. It was seen as humorous, by many here. I just remembered!!!

If you have dyslexia, how is it that you do not type in reverse?

Seriously ... I never EVER made fun of your dyslexia ... I never knew you had it until you whined and undressed yourself in public .. . . .

Even TTH has been involved in a couple of these occurrences:

 

On 1/16/2018 at 5:53 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

On 1/16/2018 at 5:00 PM, AllenSmith said:

I would suggest you HOLD everyone accountable, to your [RESTRICTIONS] LIBRARIAN,

Allen, let me suggest that you use the ground rules here to improve your communicating skills. . . .  You have alluded to dyslexia. Maybe it is but the tip of the iceberg. Maybe there are other factors that affect your emotional control, for you do launch some zingers sometimes.

This was right after Allen Smith had complained that you (JTR) had made fun of his condition, saying:

• "When JTR (Someone calling himself a witness) insulted my condition . . ."

At any rate, I could go on and on here, but won't, even though Google and other search tools tend to "keep account of the injury." I just wanted to say that I realized the joke was not about BillyTheKid at all, so I put back my "laugh" up-vote. But the rest of this was completely expected and predictable, because it's evidently a kind of goal for him to find evidence that I somehow made fun of his grammar.