by hillary_step 71 Replies latest jw friends
hi lone wolf,
you sound a little mixed up to me, thanks for the illustration, it didn't make much sense to me, though.
i think i'll keep talking about how bad the jw cult is, and what happens to children and rape victims at the hands of a lot of elders.
i know it pissis you off, cause you seem to think that that's going overboard....... but i disagree.
Ok I'm confused.
I think Hillary's point was to not put all JWs in the same pile and she's right, there are rotten apples in that religion just like their are in humanity in general but we shouldn't qualify ALL of them as rotten.
They are just as much victims as we are and it's important to remember that.
We also need to be careful about spreading rumors or gossip, always keeping others people's feelings in mind.
Here is where I am confused: What should be considered as heresay or mud-slinging? Hillary specifically said, I quote:
From my own standpoint I frequently reach a ‘crisis of patience’ when I read the mud-slinging that is leveled against individual JW’s, elders, CO’s etc. You know the kind of thing. ‘I knew an elder who ripped me off in a used car sale" etc. etc.I cannot help feeling that this is missing a valuable point entirely.When I want to relate an experience many things have to be left out in order to protect my identity (for now anyway). When I want to share a personal experience I will need to be less specific and it will most likely sound this way "I knew an JW or elder that was a thief or whatever" with a few other details to the story but certainly not specifics such as congregation name etc. So am I to be labeled a mud slinger because of that? I am relating my story as best I can under the circumstances and it is the truth, whomever doesn't want to believe me has that prerogative but why should it be labeled as mud slinging or heresay?
