One simple photo to sum up the heartless and hypocritical attitudes of many Jehovah's Witnesses

by nicolaou 94 Replies latest jw friends

  • Giles Gray
    Giles Gray

    @nicolaou

    You can't be incredulous at Smiddy3's alleged racist remark (or more correctly his alleged colour prejudice remark) when you have effectivly condemned the same group of Jehovah's Witnesses as 'heartless' and 'hypocritical'... an assumption/conclusion based on nothing more than a photo.

    While I agree that there are some Jehovah's Witnesses who lack compassion, by far the majority are caring and kind individuals who have been lead astray by their beliefs.

    Kramer's comment was very insightful. Claiming to know that part of London, he affirmed that the Jehovah's Witnesses who engage in the ministry where that photo was taken do in fact show kindness to homeless people, contrary to what the picture seems to insinuate.

    Kramer also explained that the reason why there would have been a homeless person in near proximity to the JW stand is because of the fact it was raining heavily, so much so that it made the news. Therefore both the JWs & the homeless would have been seeking shelter at the same location.

    The poor weather also explains why there are excessive Jehovah's Witnesses manning that stand.

    It's far too easy to see the prejudice and faults in other people while ignoring our own.

    We need to be careful of not being guilty of the things we condemn others of being, else we are no better than they are.

  • EverApostate
    EverApostate

    They wont bother, even if that man is their disfellowshipped father.

    Even if they had tried to help him they would have placed him a magazine. Thats what HELP means in the JW world.

  • JW GoneBad
    JW GoneBad

    Five JWs manning one cart location! If you think that's a bit much...I've heard of many Metropolitan JW cart witnessing spots with up to 8 JDubes.

  • redvip2000
    redvip2000
    Drearyweather: I agree that this picture could have been taken out of context and does not say much about the people in the picture. And yet, it does neatly represent the watchtower’s position: They do not participate in providing food, shelter and/or clothing to homeless people. Instead, they criticize other charities and boast that they focus on the preaching work (you may take a look at this JW watchtower

    I could not have said this better. This is not really about the picture. Logically, it would be silly to draw conclusions based on the picture alone. This is about the general disposition of the religion, and naturally its members, that it's well illustrated by what can be seen in the picture. We are all aware of this disposition -- the picture just adds a visual to it.

    Claiming that you are following Jesus, and yet doing jack-shit to help those in need is hypocritical.

    And btw, those JWs in the picture are real idiots for not seeing the bad optics of standing next to a person in need with their hands in their pockets while claiming religious superiority.

  • redvip2000
    redvip2000

    btw, I'm always amazed how anybody can sleep on a busy city street during the day. I'm such a light sleeper -- anything keeps me awake.

  • cofty
    cofty
    I'm always amazed how anybody can sleep on a busy city street during the day

    Alcohol and/or drugs perhaps?

    I agree the Watchtower sets a very poor example about caring for the physical needs of the destitute. However I don't think this picture is a fair comment.

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    I like street photography, but among many street photographers it’s frowned upon to photograph homeless people in particular without permission, because they are a particularly vulnerable group and don’t have access to private spaces as most others do. Plus they are a bit too easy a target for street photographers to photograph to create this or that effect or statement, often agendas bearing little relation to what is actually important in the life of the person being photographed.

  • nicolaou
    nicolaou

    You know what Slim, I hadn't thought of that and I should've. It's a good point and makes me feel quite awkward.

  • steve2
    steve2

    Good point SBF. Some publications or social media platforms will only feature photos taken of others going about their activities if the faces are blurred.

    In this regard, there is one Canadian exJW youtuber who routinely videos JWs at the carts up close - and he fixes the camera on them. A classic bullying move if ever there was one.

    In my view, whether or not JWs are in a public space does not mean they can be photographed or videod. Legally it may not be breaking the law - but ethically and morally it is highly dubious and represents a form of deliberate intimidation and harassment.

  • cofty
    cofty

    I disagree Steve. If you are going to promote a cult in a public place you are fair game to be photographed or filmed.

    I don't know the YouTube channel you are referring to but if he is bullying or intimidating in his manner then that is wrong.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit