A View From Outside

Joe Grundy

I never was a JW, and in many ways my interest was academic. I have known, and know, some JWs and ex-IWs and know something of (but not personally) the effects that WTBTS has on people. The effects, IMHO, are not positive. (I am using polite British understatement here when what I want to say is that the effects, as far as I can see, are wholly negative).

I try to keep up with latest teachings as far as I can (here on JWN and elsewhere) and to me - as an outside observer - they just seem to get whackier and whackier, requiring more and more indoctrination for the faithful to accept and believe.

I am an atheist but have always tended to think hard before I offer any comments which may challenge 'faith'. Some people need 'faith' and have been happy to live their lives accordingly. Not my place, I thought, to cause them to question.

BUT - reading the latest teachings, I find it hard to hold my tongue, and I have come to the stage that I have a duty to respond to the 'religionist JWs' who are so happy and/or compelled to push their message.

For example - I read the recent thread re women 'covering their head'. I was aware of this but had forgotten it. I passed it on to a female friend who is an activist in 'womens' issues'. Rest assured, this will be followed up and information spread.

Some of the stories I read here on JWN from women and the problems of grounds for 'scriptural divorce' ... well, say no more.

I have reached a personal decision. No longer will I pay 'respect' to any religion just because it is a religion. Lies deserve to be challenged, regardless. I DO feel sorry for some of the dowdy, downbeaten, dumpy JW women who call at my door (you'd have thought they'd have learned by now) but I also have to think of the vulnerable people who may be just up the road who may get sucked in by all this crap.

I am in contact off-board with a poster here who commented that she had had a good time and felt no guilt. As human beans we are ALL entitled to have a good time and feel no guilt. That WTBTS would wish to condemn this (as it surely does) is an indication of its purpose.

We are born, we do the best we can, we die. If we can help make someone happy along the way, that's a bonus.

mouthy

Joe Grundy!!!!How dare you say DOWDY,DOWNBEATEN,DUMPY JW women that call.
Listen cock! I was a lovely redhead( dyed) lipstick, boobs,slim,smiling funny,inviting
JW that would have knocked at your door. REPENT!!!!!

Apognophos

Haha, and now I see how mouthy got her name

I appreciate your thoughts, Joe. I am still fading myself, so I can't yet speak against JWs to their face even if I want to, but I know I will have a hard time with that in the future because I'm a timid person and it's hard to hurt someone's feelings who is just being sincere. But I agree that, having the knowledge we do, it's something of a responsibility to speak against ignorance and oppression. It's actually a positive way to contribute to society. I do wonder, though, if it's effective to speak directly to JWs, or if the most effect we can have is speaking to ones who don't know them and might one day get hooked if they don't know better. To let people know about the end-times craziness and half-baked doctrines and what happens when they turn against one of their own.

Joe Grundy

Mouthy: Hi honey - I was excluding you, of course.

If a lovely redhead, slim, with boobs, smiling and funny woman called at my door I would do my best in so many ways to show her how she was wasting her time in the dubs. (I might even let her know in a subtle way that I knew what the dubs taught and thus what she might be missing!). Theological arguments could follow.

GRACE! I need very little encoragement to misbehave. Behave yourself!

xx

mouthy

I dont have to behave myself NOW!!!!I can do as I like!!!!!!

cofty

No longer will I pay 'respect' to any religion just because it is a religion. Lies deserve to be challenged, regardless.

Amen to that.

Prepare for the lecture from all the nice folks who think it's rude to criticise beliefs that are covered by the "religious" get-out-of-ridicule-free clause.

“ Religion ... has certain ideas at the heart of it which we call sacred or holy or whatever. What it means is, 'Here is an idea or a notion that you're not allowed to say anything bad about; you're just not. Why not? – because you're not. If someone votes for a party that you don't agree with, you're free to argue about it as much as you like; everybody will have an argument but nobody feels aggrieved by it. ... But on the other hand, if somebody says 'I mustn't move a light switch on a Saturday', you say 'I respect that.' ” - Douglas Adams

2+2=5

Probably not a great idea to ridicule peoples religious beliefs.

Lots of people ridiculed Noah when he was building the giant wooden box and look how that turned out for them. Or those kids that ridiculed that bald prophet and were ripped apart by the bear.

Just be careful, we don't want history to repeat.

adamah

Welcome aboard, Joe, as there's plenty to challenge (as they say in the military, the battlefield is a "target-rich environment"). You're absolutely right, as all it takes is for those who know the TRUTH to do nothing, excusing their inactivity in the name of "tolerance"; religions are given a "free pass" and that explains WHY they have thrived, esp here in the U.S.

It's great if everyone remembers to stick logical arguments, as no one responds to ad hominems; a few MIGHT respond to weaker arguments (eg "style over substance" fallacies, which are thinly-veiled ad hominems), but it's not like there's alot of ammo (facts) on our side to use.

Adam

Joe Grundy

"Probably not a great idea to ridicule peoples religious beliefs."

To 'challenge' (as I said) is not necessarily to 'ridicule' - although IMO many religious beliefs are ridiculous.

It's an interesting point, though. Given that all religions are equally whacky, how big do they have to be before you treat them as more than a minor nuisance (e.g. JWs - though not a minor nuisance to the poor souls affected)?

Joe Grundy

"I do wonder, though, if it's effective to speak directly to JWs,"

IME, the adage is true - it's a waste of time to discuss religion with the religious.

Over the years, I think I have come to the Christopher Hitchens point of view - i.e. these people ARE my enemies, it is not sufficient to sit on the sidelines respectfully. Even though I and mine are not personally affected, in a way, we ARE affected adversely by the pervasive influence that religion brings to bear on the world in so many different ways.

A View From Outside

Share this