Just a quick poll

jelly

Jehovah's Witnesses constitute a cancer on the body of humanity, on the human family. As such, it should be ripped out root and branch and destroyed.

I just read this post in another thread, and it made a question come up in my mind. Personally I believe we should never curtail someone’s freedom of speech, not Jewish people, not Nazis, not the clan, not Libertarians or Republicans. I think the only way to really fight the org. is through education and communication my question would be what is the best way to accomplish this.

So what I have here is a quick poll:

(1) What should ex-Jw do about the org?
a. Nothing
b. Educate and inform
c. Other (please expand)
(2) What’s the best way to accomplish this
a. Internet
b. Personal contact (what we used to call informal witnessing)
c. Other (please expand)
(3) Do you think the org will just fade away if left alone?
a. Yes
b. No
(4) Do you think the org will eventually re-invent itself to be more palatable to modern society?
a. Yes
b. No
(5) Do you think the org will become more inflexible and hard-line to appeal to its core members
a. Yes
b. No

Jelly

Farkel

The answers to your questions are simple. Don't confuse them with possible solutions, when the solutions are simple.

: (1) What should ex-Jw do about the org?

Stay out of it. The rest is up to them.

(2) What’s the best way to accomplish this

Staying out of it.

(3) Do you think the org will just fade away if left alone?

No. Some people need cults. It gives them something to hope for and more importantly, makes them feel special. This is especially true if they are special in no other ways.

(4) Do you think the org will eventually re-invent itself to be more palatable to modern society?

Yes. They must, or they will die. They have been doing so for years, BTW. They now consider themselves a "religion," and they are ever-so-slowly moving towards the attitude that others might possibly get saved at Harmon's Geddon besides themselves. More will come. Mormons faced the same dilemma. They now longer preach an imminent "end-time." Dubs will do the same. Or they will evaporate.

(5) Do you think the org will become more inflexible and hard-line to appeal to its core members

When Jaracz goes (and he WILL go, probably before he dies) I think they will become much less inflexible and much less hard-line.

Farkel

Skimmer

(1) What should ex-Jw do about the org?

Educate and inform, obviously. If we don't do it, who will? Wouldn't you have wanted someone to inform you about both sides of the "Truth" before you got into it?

(2) What’s the best way to accomplish this?

Whatever medium is most useful for the particular circumstances. And it should be done openly, honestly, and legally. We must demonstrate that we are the better men (and women); we cannot drop down to the level suggested by the WTBTS "theocratic war strategy".

(3) Do you think the org will just fade away if left alone?

No, but it will continue to mutate and evolve. Although it may take on more of the trappings of main stream religions, it will almost certainly always be set apart by its rejection of all other faiths as being run by Satan. Without this core belief, the WTBTS will not be able to wield its restrictions on free association and its dual punishments of disfellowshipping and falling into a pit when the Big "A" arrives Real Soon Now. Remember that this central part of the WTBTS doctrine was the invention of Joe Rutherford some eighty years ago; note how it is one of the very few WTBTS beliefs that has not changed since its institution.

(4) Do you think the org will eventually re-invent itself to be more palatable to modern society?

If they do this, it will not be the result of any long range plan. Rather, it will be in response to an ever decreasing amount of net literature income. People tend to note that the WTBTS numbers are dropping in more developed and open countries. Just as important is the fact that nearly all the growth is seen in areas that have little or no disposable income to "contribute'. Having a million salepersons working for free is no good if there are no paying customers.

(5) Do you think the org will become more inflexible and hard-line to appeal to its core members?

They cannot afford to do this due to their demographics. Any appeals made to the older, more conservative members will be offset by rejection from younger members and potential converts. Put it this way: they will have to retain five older members (each with a potential ten more years of literature placement) to offset the loss of a single younger member (with a potential of fifty years of literature placement).

dark clouds

1. i believe our primary concern should be healing ourselves first and dismissing the org. for the moment. . .
education.
this is the key to our own personal healing and mental well-being,
the more we educate ourselves the stronger we become, mentally and spiritually
we cannot get back lost time but we can control our future. . .
we spent too much time 'helping' others while losing ourselves.

it may sound selfish, but because our lives were torn for many years and because some of us are still under going the currents of what we once endured, the only way to be of any help to anyone, i believe is to help ourselves first, the rest WILL follow

2. i believe the internet is a very good place to start, for obvious reasons. . .

3. this would take a long time, and that is the idealist in me speaking

4. it will be the only way for them to survive, all under the guise of new light

5. perhaps after the older generations pass on, the grip may loosen, taking with some of the rigid traditions they held, thus enabling reform, and causing them to have to modify some of the doctrines, as done in the past

TR

(1)c Nuke Brooklyn

(2)c same as above

(3)see 1c

(4)see 1c

(5)see 1c

Seriously, I like dark clouds comment:

. i believe our primary concern should be healing ourselves first and dismissing the org. for the moment. . .
education.
this is the key to our own personal healing and mental well-being,
the more we educate ourselves the stronger we become, mentally and spiritually
we cannot get back lost time but we can control our future. . .
we spent too much time 'helping' others while losing ourselves.

One's frustration left unchecked might lead to my "nuke comments".

TR

slipnslidemaster

Just for the record, don't forget Democrats.

1.) Education
2.) Internet. People coming into the chat rooms are already looking for help.

3.) No.

4.) Yes. They have to to survive and grow. They are already in the process of changing views on College, sports, etc. They have already started relaxing their stances on blood and shunning.

5.) No.

. o O (slipnslidemaster)

zev

(1) What should ex-Jw do about the org?
a. Nothing
-->b. Educate and inform
c. Other (please expand)
(2) What’s the best way to accomplish this
-->a. Internet
b. Personal contact (what we used to call informal witnessing)
c. Other (please expand)
(3) Do you think the org will just fade away if left alone?
a. Yes
-->b. No
(4) Do you think the org will eventually re-invent itself to be more palatable to modern society?
a. Yes
-->b. No
(5) Do you think the org will become more inflexible and hard-line to appeal to its core members
-->a. Yes
b. No

__
zev
Sitting on the Wrong Side of the Fence Class

Francois

Well, I'm the guy who penned that timless prose you quoted in the original post in this thread. To be honest, I have to grudgingly admit that under current interpretations of the first amendment, the JWs have every right to exist. However, I'd like to make a few additional expansions, some in the form of questions.

If the world had known where Hitler would take it, would it have allowed him to exist - even in this country?

If a person does not have a right to yell "FIRE" in a crowded theatre (as the Supreme Court has indeed ruled) because it would panic people and expose them to injury and perhaps death by trampling, then why is a religious cult allowed to yell "ARMAGEDDON" in a crowded society? Or to yell "NO BLOOD" or to engage in other activities that cause gullible people to hurt themselves or others psychologically and emotionally, or to otherwise masquerade as a religion hiding behind the first amendment?

No simple answers since to restrict the JWs would constitute a restriction of all of us. It's too bad, but it seems there is always someone who ruins freedom for all the rest. Remember the rowdy kid who caused all in his class to miss recess?

The best we can do is to work to expose the witnesses for exactly what they are: a dangerous, destructive, divisive cult. Ethically, I don't believe we can be silent. Once it was said to me, "you can't out-publish them." That's no longer true. They are being out-published each and every day on the internet. We can't let up. We must continue exposing them.

Alas, cults will always attract people of a certain psychological makeup. And there's nothing we are able to do about it but to keep informing (warning) the public about this lice on the body of humanity.

battman

hi Fran

"<you can't out-publish them." That's no longer true. They are being
out-published each and every day on the internet. We can't let up.
We must continue exposing them.>

I really appreciate all your thoughts on this last post but the most
significant is the above. Actually, i think that it will be more
like - helping them to expose themselves. The most impressive
arguements, for me at least, is using their own words in the defrocking.

battman
of the defrocker class '05

battman

Francoise,
not only out publish as to quantity, which
was first reaction due to their huge volumn,
but most importantly the quality, "truth",
and compassion.

i am in awe of the defrockers
who correspond here. Compassion, empathy,
desire to search for truth and of course
superb, world class humor. No boredom here.

battman
of the defrocker class '05?

Just a quick poll

Share this