Welcome to General Chat - GAW Community Area

Praying now Joan for you both...🙏🙌🤍

Father, We surrender our illness, fears and worries into Your Hands. We know Your Purpose For Our Life is Abundant Health. We Claim Your Complete and Total Healing for Joan's son in the Blood of Jesus! Open doors and break all barriers to his treatment. We trust You Father for all of our needs and ask these things in Your Precious Name. The Name Above ALL OTHERS! AMEN! 🙏🙌

He is healed. He is healed. Keep repeating it. In Jesus name, your son is healed, and believe it. Receive your blessings.

Prayers up.

Don't say it's the only hope, even if it's the only one you have today. Keep the hope alive always.

I think I mentioned it before to you in another thread, but all cancers are natural responses to metabolic conditions, and all can be treated holistically. It's primarily an electrical imbalance, treatable by increasing mineralized plasma and cutting off carbs --- and eating meat instead. It may sound wacky and too good to be true, but if you're interested in the protocol, respond and I'll link the guy I follow.

🙏 God, hear our prayers for this young man, and may he live long and vigorously proving your glory to all. 🙏

My prayers are with you, your son, and your family.

What happened to the 'right to try' new treatments, maybe there there other avenues to pursue besides insurance?

Shame you have to fight for something you know you're going to win! You both have come so far with your warrior spirit, may you continue to overcome and things be settled in a timely fashion.

I pray that Jesus lifts you off the sand during this arduous time in your journey.🙏🙏🙏🙏

https://mycancerstory.rocks/category/all-posts/

https://floridasharkman.org/

https://contrabandcures.com/

🙏🤍

Amen!

Great verse 🙏

I know a lot of atheists who covered there faces for almost 4 years (and some who still do) 🤣

Masks don't work.

Except as a cover-up.

I'm wondering what is the essence of your thinking/questioning here.

Is it the idea that its wrong for religions to promote or mandate facial coverings because of the reasons re: that the face is too important for 'more important' human activities and aspects of life, more important than the religious or spiritual imperative that the practice might be seen as an expression of?

Or, are you saying simply that, regardless of any connection or context from a person's religion, face coverings are just a bad idea in general, and should not be used?

I personally dislike the use of hijab in any form, but I also have a view of religious practice that considers most human religions (and their sects) as belonging to a very, very broad spectrum, from the more animistic to the highly theistic, from the simple to the sophisticated, and that they are best understood in the context of the culture and history from which they arise.

That last point is important, I think, because in a world with hyperfast global communication and an extremely developed sphere of scientific and technical (aka intellectual (often material-related)) thought, the entire context for religions - all religions - is in flux, and I get the impression that the perspective you are offering here is specifically grounded in the environment you see around you, which is more than likely NOT the context in which the particular religious behaviors or traditions that have inspired you to think about them (in this way) are naturally grounded.

In other words, there's a cultural context here.

Anyway, I guess, I'm wondering, what is your primary concern. Is it related to the religious practices, or simply to a non-religious context (in which, for example, the whole covidmask nonsense was grounded, although to be sure, it certainly bore the hallmarks of a pseudo-religion at the time)?

If its the religious practices, then I think I can understand that, from an Atheistic perspective, you (perhaps) think there is no real value or benefit to (certain or all) <religious practices>.

However, my own view of religion tends to try to appreciate the religious practice in a relative, contextual way (religious history being a history of (generally) progressive developments headed towards a culmination which we as a species or as a family have not yet witnessed, in which case, I can generally appreciate the value that someone finds in their religious practice even if I don't personally partake.

And, freedom of religion is key to human freedom in general (including the freedom to be an atheist or a theist, for example).

So I guess I'm saying on a personal level, I find some practices somewhat distasteful, and possibly less than optimal, but also that I can appreciate that the value that a particular person derives from their religious practice is not something that I can necessarily and fully object or deny simply based on my own preferences or for that matter, on some sort of objective or material standard.

But if your question is unrelated to the religious context, then why even mention it? Are you simply trying (thinking) to find what seems to you a rational and objective reason why certain religious practices should not be considered valid?

Just thinking out aloud here, btw.

good to know emergency tips. I lcarry a seat belt cutter too, and a mallet hammer.

I left my country at the ripe old age of 20. In those days, AC/DC was still a Melbourne band, and Split Enz were in the charts. I came back (roughly) 24 years later, and found that internationally, AC/DC was an uber mega Rock Band, and Crowded House was internationally acclaimed.

Again, sir, you once again confirm that you are certainly not 'light'. Great clip. (ty)