Let’s start with this comment of yours:-
“We are not “falling prey” to discrimination as you say.”
I beg to differ. Considering what you have written, I think the evidence proves otherwise. It’s evident even in your latest post, which I will go on to reveal later.
So… to your first comment I wish to address:-
“I don’t have hatred individually towards JW’s. I have anger and resentment, righteous indignation at the lack of justice within the JW organization, and I’d be remiss to not state a travesty of justice when I see it.”
I’ve only ever known you to be principled and reasonable. Admittedly, I only know of you from reading your posts on a computer, but you have posted prolifically enough over the years for one to get a reasonable flavour of the person behind the screen. This is why it was so surprising to read your scathing remarks about those random JWs in the photograph.
You continue, making this accusation about my personal stance:-
“You state that the picture of JW’s standing there ignoring a homeless man within a few feet of them is no big deal. I strongly disagree!”
Where…? Where have I ‘stated’ that in any of my comments on this thread?
I don’t believe (at this point) that you would deliberately use a ‘straw man’ fallacious argument, but you’ve made up that alleged statement yourself. I said nothing of the sort.
“It’s an evidence of the JW and WT mantra that whatever THEY are doing ( in this case the preaching work ) is MUCH more important than assisting this homeless man.”
It is an indisputable fact that Jehovah’s Witnesses prioritise the preaching work.
However, this fact doesn’t indicate in the least that those Jehovah’s Witnesses in that picture DON’T ALSO assist homeless people. In fact, the anecdotal evidence on page 5 of this thread suggests that there’s the likelihood they DO “regularly” assist the homeless where this picture was taken.
Now to address your question. You asked me to answer:-
“If any of these JW’s standing there had half a conscience, or just a shred of humanity, don’t you think they’d either (A) Help this man to his feet, offer him coffee, assist him to walk to get a warm meal in a diner or (B) Leave his personal space or area to allow him to sleep and carry on with whatever HE wants to do.”
My answer to your question is…. Yes! If the Jehovah’s Witnesses in that photo had any decency at all they would offer that poor fellow something to eat and something to drink, and they should be considerate of his personal space because that would be the right thing to do.
That is my direct and candid answer to your question.
However, I take issue with your question because not only is the argument you put forward a BLACK AND WHITE FALLACY, it is also a LOADED QUESTION.
It unjustly takes for granted the supposition that the Jehovah’s Witnesses in that picture are at fault and are guilty of misdemeanours. It also omits to consider the possibility of alternative scenarios that would have a huge bearing on the interpretation of that photo . Not only is your question (and argument) a logical fallacy, in the scenario at hand it is also a sure indication of a prejudiced and biased disposition.
And it is that prejudiced and biased attitude that is so wrong & offensive.
Therefore, I have a few questions that I would like to ask you in return, with the hope that you will also respond as candidly and honest as I have been with yours. I will number my questions so that you can specifically answer them individually.
The following questions are the alternative perspectives that I believe have not been considered from your line of reasoning:-
Question 1: Considering that photograph, how do you know that the Jehovah’s Witnesses have not already given (or will go on to give) the homeless person something to eat or to drink or offer to take him to a café?
Question 2: How do you know that the homeless person was lying there asleep in that place BEFORE the Jehovah’s Witnesses set up their stand?
Question 3: How do you reconcile kramer’s comment (on page 5 of this thread) with your assertion that these Jehovah’s Witnesses are “insensitive louts”, considering that kramer states that “the homeless people (in that part of London) do get talked to regularly and get bought food and drinks by the people on trolleys”?
Question 4: If we assume for a moment that kramer’s anecdotal evidence is true and is applicable to the 5 JWs in that photograph, what would we make of the accusations against those JWs?
This is how I would answer those questions:-
My answer to question 1 is:- from looking at that picture, I have no clue if the Jehovah’s Witnesses have assisted the homeless person or not. I can neither condemn the Jehovah’s Witnesses for their alleged inaction or commend them for their alleged altruism.
My answer to question 2:- from looking at that picture, I have no idea whether or not the Jehovah’s Witnesses encroached on the homeless person’s space or if the homeless person decided to sleep next to the Jehovah’s Witnesses after they had already set up their stand. So I wouldn’t know whether to accuse the JWs of being thoughtless or accuse the homeless person of making the Jehovah’s Witnesses look bad (according to some).
My answer to question 3:- I have no idea if kramer’s anecdotal evidence is true or not. However, I have no reason to doubt him, although it would require further verification before I could even think about passing judgement on the Jehovah’s Witnesses in that photograph.
My answer to question 4:- If we assume kramer’s claims are true, it would mean that the photograph in the opening post of this thread doesn’t reveal the full story and any accusations against those Jehovah’s Witnesses are completely unjustifiable.
The ambiguous nature of that photograph only leads to the obvious conclusion that it would be wrong to make any judgement of the subjects therein. An unbiased perspective would by necessity, not promote any conclusion on the matter either way.
However, any firm conclusion drawn from that picture would automatically be due to a biased and prejudice opinion, due to the undeniable fact that there is no way of confirming, one way or the other, what those Jehovah’s Witnesses did or didn’t do.
I look forward to hearing your answers to the above questions.