The Mysterious Coronavirus Spreading Worldwide

[Shawnster]

31 minutes ago, Ludwika said:

For those among us who are tempted to make comments about political issues or politicians themselves... 

And this includes what you (or I) feel is a better solution to masks or lockdown than what the government is doing.  Whenever you give your opinion on a political topic, and mask /lockdown mandates are a political topic, then you cease to be neutral. 

 

In 7th grade I wrote a report in Social Studies class. I knew Jehovah's Witnesses were neutral, so I started my paper something like "As a Jehovah's Witness, I don't vote; but, if I did, I would vote for...". BZZZZ. Sorry little Shawn, but that wasn't neutral. 

 

We don't have an opinion on the laws and mandates of this country (or any other country, really). If we do, we keep it to ourselves.  Expressing opinions, especially contrary opinions, on government policies makes us non-neutral! 

 

 

[Margaret]

Voting makes us part of a democracy 

 

I prefer Jehovah’s Theocracy 

[Tia]

Sis Roseann,

I am going to use this as my screen saver!!!   Yep!!!

[Bob]

9 hours ago, Shawnster said:

And this includes what you (or I) feel is a better solution to masks or lockdown than what the government is doing.  Whenever you give your opinion on a political topic, and mask /lockdown mandates are a political topic, then you cease to be neutral. 

 

In 7th grade I wrote a report in Social Studies class. I knew Jehovah's Witnesses were neutral, so I started my paper something like "As a Jehovah's Witness, I don't vote; but, if I did, I would vote for...". BZZZZ. Sorry little Shawn, but that wasn't neutral. 

 

We don't have an opinion on the laws and mandates of this country (or any other country, really). If we do, we keep it to ourselves.  Expressing opinions, especially contrary opinions, on government policies makes us non-neutral! 

 

 

But I do overall agree here.

Edited October 8, 2020 by Bob

[Ms. Piffle]

8 hours ago, Margaret said:

Voting makes us part of a democracy 

 

I prefer Jehovah’s Theocracy 

          I'm not a republican, nor a democrat

                             - I am a theocratic!  😊

[Bob]

49 minutes ago, Snority said:

          I'm not a republican, nor a democrat

                             - I am a theocratic!  😊

I know this is a joke, but in normal parlance, a theocrat is one who favors State sponsored religion, their religion...

 

Whooo scary!!! 😁

 

 

[Tortuga]

1 hour ago, Snority said:

          I'm not a republican, nor a democrat

                             - I am a theocratic!  😊

So is the Pope! 🤣

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theocracy

[Ms. Piffle]

Well brothers, I'm not into politics so I'm not familiar with their jargon.   

But you all know the point I was trying to make, right?  

Edited October 8, 2020 by Snority

[Tortuga]

Just now, Snority said:

Well brothers, I'm not into politics so I'm not familiar with their jargon.   

You all know the point I was trying to make, right?  

Yes, we are just teasing you my sister..❤️

[Bob]

20 minutes ago, Mephibosheth said:

Yes, we are just teasing you my sister..❤️

Yea teasing.. that's all.

[Ms. Piffle]

2 hours ago, Mephibosheth said:

Yes, we are just teasing you my sister..❤️

 

1 hour ago, Bob said:

Yea teasing.. that's all.

Its all good brothers 🤪 🤣

[trottigy]

On 10/7/2020 at 5:15 PM, BenJepthah said:

I find that that actions speak loader than words. And if not the very first , the POTUS was one of the earliest world leaders to ban travel from China and soon after Europe to the United States ( for which action he was criticized) following the counsel of his Epidemiologist.  That says precisely that he took it seriously.  
           And that is all I care to say on that subject . Not comfortable defending the POTUS even with the truth of his actions. This conversation has once again become something off of neutrality. 

I heard this the other day too "the earliest world leaders to ban travel from China" - did he "ban travel from China"?

 

Weren't there over 25,000 Americans allowed to come back to the US from that area that weren't required to quarantine? Not to mention many others who were allowed to enter the US, but anyway ... At least there was a slow down of people from that area to enter the US. That slow down likely saved a lot of lives.

 

As all have noted - what we need is not quarantines, or health coverage, but good health h from the only source that can provide that, eh. (Isaiah 33:24)

Edited October 9, 2020 by trottigy

[Shawnster]

On 10/7/2020 at 5:43 PM, Bob said:

You may be thinking. States already have these in places. Yes, in general. But I would frequently, perhaps weekly, PUBLICY via a press conference tell people where we stand on each category in detail. I wouldn't just post these numbers on a website and trust that people would read it.  

That is how Ohio is doing things, actually. The governor has a press conference 2pm Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday.  It used to be every day. 

[Bob]

1 minute ago, Shawnster said:

That is how Ohio is doing things, actually. The governor has a press conference 2pm Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday.  It used to be every day. 

I actually always liked him to be honest.

[blacc]

Here we go again....

Edited October 9, 2020 by blacc

[Ludwika]

22 hours ago, Bob said:

I actually always liked him to be honest.

Isn't a governor a political figure? 

[Old]

22 hours ago, Bob said:

I actually always liked him to be honest.

'Liked' is past tense. Is he no longer honest?  Who are we talking about?  

[Shawnster]

6 minutes ago, Ludwika said:

Isn't a governor a political figure? 

I like him to, too.  He makes it difficult to remain neutral in the opposite way from Trump. 

[BLEmom]

https://apple.news/A1iAFc0W6NqqSHBv_FK9jYw
Here’s the pope’s prescription for resetting the global economy in response to COVID-19
 

He’s stepping into many waters....wasn’t sure which long thread to post this in. 😂 

 

 

[Bob]

4 hours ago, Ludwika said:

Isn't a governor a political figure? 

I think we are getting just slightly out of hand thinking that since a person is a politician, we have to suspend our humanity and ignore positive or likeable characteristics or traits about him or her. After all, they are human as well.

 

Liking a person who happens to be a politician isn't a violation of our neutrality. Taking sides, is a violation of it. Remember, they're humans first, politicians second. 

 

After all, what if we have to preach to them one day? Are we to not find things we like about them?

Edited October 10, 2020 by Bob

[BLEmom]

Latest from WHO.  Cases and deaths are on the rise. 

350,766new cases

36,361,054confirmed cases

1,056,186deaths

Globally, as of 3:36pm CEST, 9 October 2020, there have been36,361,054 confirmed cases of COVID-19, including 1,056,186deaths, reported to WHO.

[M.J.]

59 minutes ago, Bob said:

Remember, they're humans first, politicians second.

Actually, (though in Jehovah's eyes they are humans first) in most people's mind they are politicians first. Which is exactly why we have to choose our words carefully.

As an example: Conversely, if a JW were to do something "wrong" that appears on the front page, you can be quite sure that people will point and say, "Look! A JW!" They are not going to think, oh just a human. So likewise, if you or I make a comment about a politician, it could easily be interpreted as a political bias. Especially with how politically sensitive people are today.
 

1 hour ago, Bob said:

Liking a person who happens to be a politician isn't a violation of our neutrality.

Actually, if I"m in service and I say something "nice" about a politician, what if the householder belongs to the opposite political party? It might rub them the wrong way and irritate them. So why even discuss politicians at all? And regarding this forum, maybe some here struggle with neutrality. If you say something "nice" about a politician, might they be tempted to point out something negative?  which just leads to a political conversation? Because of the politically charged climate, wouldn't it be better to just not discuss politicians at all? As Jehovah's servants, our focus on world events is about how it affects our lives as Christians, our ability to preach, etc. If it doesn't relate to this, then why bring it up?

[BLEmom]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/10/09/politics/chris-christie-coronavirus-trump/index.html
Hes going on week two in the hospital. 

[M.J.]

2 minutes ago, BLEmom said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/10/09/politics/chris-christie-coronavirus-trump/index.html
Hes going on week two in the hospital. 

When people are suffering, their thoughts sometimes turn to God and why there is so much suffering. They may have spiritual questions they never had before. What a great opportunity to give a witness.

[Bob]

45 minutes ago, M.J. said:

Actually, (though in Jehovah's eyes they are humans first) in most people's mind they are politicians first. Which is exactly why we have to choose our words carefully.

As an example: Conversely, if a JW were to do something "wrong" that appears on the front page, you can be quite sure that people will point and say, "Look! A JW!" They are not going to think, oh just a human. So likewise, if you or I make a comment about a politician, it could easily be interpreted as a political bias. Especially with how politically sensitive people are today.

 

Well, how people interpret that is on them. We have NO control over that.

 

 

45 minutes ago, M.J. said:

Actually, if I"m in service and I say something "nice" about a politician, what if the householder belongs to the opposite political party? It might rub them the wrong way and irritate them. So why even discuss politicians at all? And regarding this forum, maybe some here struggle with neutrality. If you say something "nice" about a politician, might they be tempted to point out something negative?  which just leads to a political conversation? Because of the politically charged climate, wouldn't it be better to just not discuss politicians at all? As Jehovah's servants, our focus on world events is about how it affects our lives as Christians, our ability to preach, etc. If it doesn't relate to this, then why bring it up?

You're dealing in hypotheticals. No one said discuss politicians. It just seems we are becoming judgmental of those who views are different from our own.