What is the JW's take on pets?

by Dragonlady76 15 Replies latest jw friends

  • Dragonlady76
    Dragonlady76

    I have always loved animals and have had pets through out the years, so that got me thinking about my JW childhood, not to many dubs had pets, I remember only a small handful of dubs that had a dog. I wondered if there is a JW realted reason for this, so far the only thing that I can think of is that a pet "would take up valuable time that could be better spent on field service"

    Any one have some information on this?

  • changeling
    changeling

    I think for the most part this was left to the individual, but I do know some who had weird ideas.

    One pioneer family would not let their dog inside because they said the Isrealites considered them unclen. The same family refused to eat at the local Craker Barrel because they heard a rumor that the servers were lesbians.

    We had a circuit overseer once,who, in one of his talks, spoke about people who treated their pets as children: kissing them, pampering them and missing meetings when the were sick. He made it clear that these we no no's. His personal "pet pieve" I"m sure (no pun intended).

    changeling

  • minimus
    minimus

    Since pets do not qualify for a ressurection, JWs feel they just are another trick of Satan to keep us away from the more important things.

  • Wordly Andre
    Wordly Andre

    don't get too attached to them they will be killed in armageddon

  • WTWizard
    WTWizard

    This is another area where they cannot seem to make up their minds. At one time, they banned cats because they thought cats carried demons. Now, they generally have no policy except the universal excuse for banning anything fun: "There is nothing wrong with it in of itself. However, our time is for the misery and is reduced." They also caution against treating pets as human, since they are going to die. (Yea, and so is Ted Jaracz. And yet he doesn't caution us against worshiping himself!)

    Of course, this is subject to change. They could even now be working on a policy banning pets altogether, just so the people can have nothing enjoyable at all. You wouldn't want the people to get anything out of life apart from the boasting sessions and the field misery, now would you? Then again, Ted Jaracz could well join his buddy Albert Schroeder in hell before they have the chance to enact this policy (and I am using hell as a generic term for all punishment that is intended to last forever, including everlasting death with no one wanting them back as well as the hellfire--I am sure that, if we developed the technology to resurrect everyone, no one would want Albert Schroeder or Ted Jaracz back).

  • TopHat
    TopHat

    We had a circuit overseer once,who, in one of his talks, spoke about people who treated their pets as children: kissing them, pampering them and missing meetings when the were sick. He made it clear that these we no no's. His personal "pet pieve" I"m sure (no pun intended).

    changeling

    My pets always came before meetings....To hell with the CO!

  • Finally-Free
    Finally-Free
    We had a circuit overseer once,who, in one of his talks, spoke about people who treated their pets as children: kissing them, pampering them and missing meetings when the were sick. He made it clear that these we no no's. His personal "pet pieve" I"m sure (no pun intended).

    What he fails to realize is that his opinion and existence isn't worth even one of Rocco's warm, moist droppings.

    W

  • delilah
    delilah

    The only thing I ever recall hearing, about the subject of having pets, was that they were to be taken care of, not mistreated, or taken for rides to the country to dispose of them. My sister-in-law has done this on a couple of occasions, because she grew tired of the dogs....and a cat.

    I remember the brother saying that a person could be held accountable for mistreating one of God's creations.

    I made sure I told my s/i/l about the comment...she pissed me off!!

  • Dragonlady76
    Dragonlady76

    Yeah pets are like children and since they cannot torture them in meetings and field service there must be no point to having them.

    I have a big dog and I adore her; in my eyes she deserves ressurection more than the dubs do.

  • LongHairGal
    LongHairGal

    They claim the pets will not have a resurrection. I am in agreement with Dragonlady who says her pet deserves a resurrection more than some of the people there do. It makes me sad because they love you unconditionally. They are innocent and pure. They also have different personalities just like people do. They aren't robots.

    I think people should believe what they want because how can anybody really know the answer to this.

    LHG

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit