Are the experiences of unbaptised born-ins of less importance?

by mrsjones5 32 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  mrsjones5

  Are you saying that the experiences of unbaptised born-ins are of less importance than baptised born-ins and baptised walkins?

  yes thats what i'm saying.....oh boy

  Wow, well Tijkmo, I respect that youre brave for saying so and that's where that ends.

  OK let's do some family history. My great-grandmother joined the jws when my mother was 4, my mother is now 61 - do the math. I dont know when my mother was baptised but it was sometime before she married my father in 1962. My father later converted in 1965 around the time I was born. One of my father's sisters converted a litte before mom and dad were married and soon after several siblings followed. Let's see if I can count them off on my faher's side: Aunt Thersa (her husband Uncle Ed), Darlene (her husband Uncle Jonathan - an elder) , Annette, and Beverly, Uncle Johnny (his wife Emma Jo), and Uncle Jackie (his wife whose name escapes me - we're not close). My father's parents converted late went I was in my late teens and early 20's. On my mother's side: her Aunt Glynsmae and a few of her children.

  So you see, I didnt just walk off the street into a kingdom hall and stay a few minutes and then declare that I was somehow harmed by such a short exposure. I was born in, it was all I knew for my formative years and I'm really offended that just because I had the good sense not to take a dip in that heated pool (or non heated so I've heard) that somehow whatever experiences that I have had and are still having with my parents are not as important as yours. Being born in still affects me to this day and I feel that somehow you think that just because I didnt take that dip that I shouldnt be here and that my opinion on Cordelia's situation is worth (for want of a better word) a hill of beans. I come here because there are people (born in and unborn in) who I can relate to and who understand how it was to grow up in the bOrg. Where is your symphathy?

  You're heartless, self-righteous, and rude

  Josie

  I'm starting this here because I dont think it should be on Cordelia's topic

  So what's you opinion? Is Tijkmo right? Give me you take on it.

  Josie
• 

  under74

  well, I think they are a tad different... but one takes more personal responsibility than another. When you're not brought up with it... you at least have something to campare it against and YOU HAVE A CHOICE.
  I was born in. I knew nothing outside the org except from kids at school and the neighborhood.
  My mother wasn't born in and as far as I'm concerned she needs to fess up to joining...even though I know she won't right now.
• 

  nicolaou

  He's wrong, and this is why I say so . . . http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/21351/1.ashx
• 

  coffee_black

  MrsJones5,

  I agree with you....baptized or not, being born in and experiencing all the stuff jw kids go through in school makes your experience just as applicable as someone who was baptized. The pressure is the same...growing up in the borg is traumatic to any child, and it leaves scars for a lifetime.

  My grandparents began associating in 1910. I was baptized at 8 years old. I wish I had not been baptized...it took me until the age of 38 to realize what you realized when you were young.

  Coffee
• 

  under74

  I have a feeling I'm going to regret this but....
  
  "I agree with you....baptized or not, being born in and experiencing all the stuff jw kids go through in school makes your experience just as applicable as someone who was baptized."
  
  I think...honestly....it becomes much, MUCH more applicable. We had no choice.
  Sorry coffee...wasn't trying to single you or your post out.
• 

  mrsjones5

  I'm sorry if some think I was wrong to put Tijkmo's in my post even though it is in the thread I copied. I think is a valid issue and I have run up on this opinion before. I dont think anyone's experience with the jws should be downgraded (born in, walked in, married to, etc). All experiences are valid.

  I'm no shinking violet and if I have something to say I will.

  Josie
• 

  mrsjones5

  "I agree with you....baptized or not, being born in and experiencing all the stuff jw kids go through in school makes your experience just as applicable as someone who was baptized."

  That's what some dont get. We were jw kids because our parents were. We had to live by their rules. We did not have a choice. The teachers didnt know the difference between a baptised jw child and an unbaptised jw child because it was all the same. I was a jw kid, I just wasnt baptised.

  Josie
• 

  mrsjones5

  Wow Nicolaou, I've heard of that happening but not which such a sad outcome. So sorry for you and your brother.

  Josie
• 

  Jankyn

  
  Well, as an unbaptized born-in with a lengthy family history of involvement with the JWs, I don't think my experience is less relevant to any discussion of Jehovah's Witnesses.

  No, I didn't choose to be a JW. If anything, that gives me both an insider's view of the doctrines and practices I was raised with, and also a sceptic's view, since obviously I challenged those doctrines and practices.

  It also means that I had *NO* outside support when I refused to be baptized and eventually left. All my family were still JWs, and they put up a united front to show "Jehovah's loving discipline."

  As in Nicolau's story, I was shunned by many members of the congregation and some members of my family. Even though I was never baptized, because I'd participated and been "above the age of reason" (yep, I stayed in the ministry school to keep the heat off until I was 16), I've been viewed as apostate by many. And some in the congregation still believe that I was disfellowshipped, even though I was never baptized. You know how JWs are; once they're convinced, they won't be troubled by little things like facts.

  And it means that I had *NO* experience with what a normal life is like when I left. I had to learn all the basics on my own.

  It also means that, not only do I have a difficult time dealing with people who were never JWs or don't understand why it's such a big deal to me (and no, it's *NOT* the same thing as being a former Catholic!), and on top of that, I take crap from *some* other ex-JWs who think my experience is somehow less relevant because I was forced into a cult as a child.

  Jeez.

  Jankyn
• 

  LittleToe

  Cut'n'paste of my response on the other thread, highlighting that it's not meant as an affront to any particular ethnic group, as all that are contained herein are examples:

  MrsJones:

  Are you saying that the experiences of unbaptised born-ins are of less importance than baptised born-ins and baptised walkins?

  yes thats what i'm saying.....oh boy

  Your question kinda begged for full capitulation or antagonistic agreement. If you're gonna work the odds, sometimes they don't fall out in your favour I don't think the question was that fair, as it asked for a gross uber-generalisation in black or white terms, if answered without qualification. The experience of anyone who has been influenced by the WTS is of worth and there's little baseline by which to quantify the importance of that influence. Do we suggest that some one who was abused as a child and silenced by a body of Elders has an experience that is more important than someone who was DFed for smoking, for example? How do you quantify it?? I will say this, that whereas JWs might bend the rules concerning "necessary family business" if they really want to keep in contact with a DFed person, that the rules aren't so strict for someone who was never baptised. I will however qualify even that comment, however, by expressing that in my experience (I have no hard stats on it) black families were generally more hardline in their treatment of family members who rejected the WTS, regardless of whether they were baptised or not. I didn't see the same level of wholesale rejection in other ethnic groups. Given that Cordy lives in a generally white, working-class area of Britain, and one with which Tij and I are somewhat familiar, may I ask you:- who's experience might be more important? That's a rhetorical question because it's just as irrelevant as the one originally posited. Tij and I are male, whereas Cordy and yourself are female. The chances are that you'd understand certain aspects of the situation that we will not. What other ways can we parse the individual experiences? I think we can likely stuff being politically correct, given that different portions of the population of those affected by the WTS are going to have different responses. It's in the eye of the beholder to sift through it and see what she thinks flies with her own experience. Meanwhile there's little reason to be openly antagonistic towards one another, though if anyone wants to take that course I guess that it's also an option.... ... S P L A T