Knocking director is gay

by gcc2k 3 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  gcc2k

  I'm not sure where this belongs, but I found it to be an interesting article:
  
  http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2007/05/14/findrelig.DTL&hw=jehovah&sn=001&sc=1000
• 

  Confession

  Whoa... First, I didn't know this guy was from Saginaw, Michigan. I lived there for quite awhile; don't think I remember the last name. Second, in reading this article, I can't help but think his making this film might have been a way to build a kind of bridge back to his mother and former religion, considering he's gay and left the religion. Not that they'll fully accept him or his homosexuality, but that they'll at least appreciate the positive thing he did for "Jehovah's Organization."

  There is nothing bad with having conviction and standing by your conviction. And there is nothing bad about you passionately telling your neighbor about what you believe. That's just free speech. What's bad is when you go around and hurt people, because you are trying to force them down a certain path.

  If Joel can't see how this organization is 'hurting people by forcing them down a certain path,' he is either woefully misinformed (this doesn't seem to be the case) or is refusing to face the facts. Ask any of us who (unlike him) did get pressured into baptism what would happen if they didn't go down the WTS "path."

  And so we need to find some kind of common ground where we don't have to be threatened by each other, where our religion can be strong in its faith and not feel like it has to legislate its beliefs because it feels threatened. Likewise, others need to be able to let religions be without trying to tear them down. I look at Jehovah's Witnesses as a good example of how it could work.

  Mr. Engardio has zeal for people not "tearing down" religious authority structures. How does he feel about religious authority structures "tearing down" families? The interviewer himself can't seem to believe Engardio actually sees JWs as any sort of model of openness...

  A model?

  It's not a perfect model, but it is an example of how a religious group can retain its freedom to believe what it wants while allowing others outside the religion to take a different path.

  That's how America is supposed to work. A religion should be able to believe what it wants, but people who choose not to be of that religion should be able to live the way they feel is best. And both should be treated equally under the Constitution.

  Just what does he mean by 'allowing others to take a different path'? Well, in the case of those who won't become JWs, this "allowance" means preaching that they are condemned to everlasting death and as such are unfit for association. In the case of other religious organizations, this lovely, open-minded "allowance" means preaching that they are "fit for destruction" and "will be cut down and thrown into the fire." And, most importantly, in the families of JWs, this "allowance" means an unimaginable cutting off from families and entire communities if one decides to leave.

  And, yes, people should be "able to live the way they feel is best." As long as they know they'll be threatened, humiliated, disfellowshipped and shunned... How this guy can see them as any type of positive model in such an area is stupefying.
• 

  ZazuWitts

  I don't think any of us care in the least that Joel is gay. However, we do care that he is so devious and totally ignored the many pleas that were written to him when this "knocking" was first annouced on this forum. His approach to this documentary is totally biased and the fact that it is sanctioned by the WTBTS only shows how extreme (maybe desperate) the Society can be to promote their organisation. His sexual orientation also explains why Anderson Cooper (also gay) is a sponsor of this documentary. I also learned that Joel had a gay partner, a young Dr, named Mark Lim, who died of liver failure. Likely that is why he heard about 'Seth" the JW young man who received the liver transplant.
• 

  jgnat

  I'd caution all of us not to mix Mr. Engardio's sexual orientation with the issue of his producing a sympathetic documentary. If we are strident about his gay-ness, to the general public, it makes us look like the bigots. We all know how the WTS views homosexuals. Let the society stumble over their own feet.

  Can you envision a gay couple, after viewing the film, accepting an invitation to the local Kingdom Hall? That would be an interesting return visit.