Have we become like those we despise?

by boyzone 57 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  R.Crusoe

  I agree Wiz and when I'm feeling really lazy - or too low to search (which is more like it) - I sometimes will post an erroneous thought or argument hoping someone will pick me up and slam dunk me with it! That way I will more likely remember the correction - lol!

  It's an interesting border crossing dont you think? The above question?

  How far do you go into new territory before you get called for it?

  No matter how genuine, sincere, hard working or needy you and your family may be - if you get pulled you may have a fight on your hands!
• 

  UnConfused

  I just through that thread and your posts and can't see why you so quickly toss out the "just like witnesses" comment.
  
  But frankly it looked more to me that, (IF you want to go down this line), that you were using the ole JW "he/she is an apostate" line to discredit the points others were making.
  
  So anytime someone disagrees with you will you accuse them of JWism?
  
  JW's don't have any corner on the market by the way of defensive behavior.
• 

  AK - Jeff

  Ok - this thread was started with my moniker in the first line, so I suppose it makes fair game for my comments.

  First - I started my thread to honor a legendary film star, not to attack his politics or personal life. Though some may disagree with his pov on matters, that was clearly not the purpose of the thread. Here was your first post to an otherwise pleasant thread to that point:

  Saw Bowling for Colombine.

  Kinda put me off ole Charlie

  Good actor, bad at answering hard questions.

  Come to think of it, he'd have made a good JW.

  Fair enough - though it began an attack mode without cause. Then your second:

  Take off your rose-tinted glasses BrentR. Charlie was no saint.

  I don't believe he had altzeimers when bowling was made so stop making excuses for him. He was a great actor, I loved Ben Hur, but he showed little compassion for the 6 year old girl killed by a little boy because he found his uncle's handgun and took it to school one day.

  If he was able to stand up and rally a crowd of NRA members with long speeches and pithy punchlines, then he was able to handle a one to one interview. If he couldn't because of ill health why didn't his people tell him to refuse to do it? I'll tell you why. Because he thought Michael Moore was sympathetic to the NRA cause and that the interview would be a good PR exercise.

  When he realised MM wasn't as sympathetic as he thought, ole charlie left the building.

  Now which other group never wants to hear negative info about themselves and runs away from hard questions??? Hmmm let me think...........

  An Ad Hominen attack on BrentR for no reason. Then your third:

  isn't it unfortunate that instead of honoring a man for his life, what he stood for, and the good he accomplished, some feel a desire to fillet his intentions at the gravesite?

  To be honest Jeff, that sounds just like something a witness would say when confronted with some of the rubbish Rutherford came up with.

  'Nuff said. You just attack everything said. I tried more than once to get you on topic. You refuse - like a dog with a bone. You took a perfectly pleasant thread about the passing of a terrific actor, and turned it into a political argument. You did not give some of us a very good 'first impression' - and you know what they say? I defended the Bill of Rights, and still do. It is unfortunate that the memory thread of an actor had to turn so ugly. Guess who started it? Jeff
• 

  nomoreguilt

  AK-Jeff............A simple Bravo from the peanut gallery.Kind threads can turn ugly, can't they?

  NMG
• 

  Gopher

  Boyzone,

  Welcome to the board. When it comes to JW issues, you'll find little disagreement on this board -- they're a high-control, cultish group that ruins lives.

  When it comes to non-JW issues, there is a hugely diverse set of opinions here. If certain threads go against your grain, you can choose to go on to another topic. That's what I did with the Heston threads. There's little doubt he was a highly-accomplished actor, and he did march with Martin Luther King in the 60's. However, I very much disagree with what I view as his extremism in the gun-rights movement, I won't get into specifics here. So I just avoided the Heston-tribute threads, knowing that those who loved him would have enough to say and if I brought my political view into the situation nobody's minds would be changed anyhow.

  You have plenty good to say, so go ahead and say those things and gently dip your toes in the water until you get more accustomed to it and you make a few more friends around here. We have not become like JW's here, we are people with emotions and freedom to express our true thoughts, which is quite different from what happened in Watchtower-land. (You should have seen the arguments and attacks when I first joined this board in 2001. Today's spats are like child's play in comparison.)
• 

  LouBelle

  The best thing is to accept that there are going to be differing opinions on just about everything that we can think of. Some people feel very strongly about their opinions and so be it. They are passionate about it. I haven't read where this disagreement took place but seriously, I doubt any of us really become like our former brothers - I don't think anyone here insists that theirs is the only right way of thinking/opinion....ah but that's just me.

  I think it's pointing it out like you have that is more JWised than anything. my opinion.
• 

  Peppermint

  AK-Jeff
  I do think you are being a little bit too sensitive about this. I don't see any personal attacks here.
• 

  trevor

  Boyzone

  Welcome! Your thread title asks - Have we become like those we despise?

  I am wondering who the 'we' is that despise Jehovah's Witnesses. Not everyone on this discussion board despises JWs. We see them as good people who have been been misled. They have not yet found a reason or perhaps the right time to leave the movement.

  Many of us were once in their shoes and I remember that many of those who left were still prepared to have a drink with me and explain why they could no longer be JWs.

  I was open minded enough to stay friends with them. Had they automatically despised me for still being a JWs, after they had left, their message would never have been put across.

  It takes understanding and compassion to move beyond bitterness and see JWs as decent people who are trying to do the right thing.
• 

  R.Crusoe

  I'm in a few trains of thoughts here

  First up : It's predominantly not the individual JW we hold to account - unnless they were playing the double agent and deliberately messing around with sincere souls in which case it is despicable!

  Second: It is the collective thought which we despise! And since no single person is accountable it falls upon those in authority within their ranks to take any criticisms - by default - and mainly those at the top claiming how god is the feeder of information they inflcit on peoples lives etc, etc,

  Thirdly : the realisation that the WT does indeed impose certain 'personality disorders' on its followers which leave many of them ill prepared for life in society in general! And the experience of many is one where their personality is even further demolished with time when outside the WT. Many are seriously hurt and it gets worse before it ever feels like being human is worth getting up for each day!

  So : who would not despise becoming such a crushed soul? Thanks to JW mindsurgery the inner self of each of us is in need of much love and repair which will likely never come along! So we go on but hate the idea of our certain knowledge the same will happen to ones now falling into their command!

  Fourthly: Our seemingly harsh criticisms of their organisation are unnatural to our inner being - we do not enjoy the thoughts of foisting negatives on others but seeing what continues to happen is what enables us to maybe speak in ways we ordinarily despise of!
• 

  dawg

  Welcome Boyzone.
  
  You also made a critical error in logic when you said. "Bearing arms may well be part of the bill of rights but just because you have the right to bear arms, doesn't make it a good idea. Just ask any one of the 1000's of Americans who have lost loved ones every year due to firearms, either accidentally or deliberately."
  
  I was laughing, I think at AKjeff, (sorry if I misquoted you Jeff correct me if this isn't right) who posted the US Constitution as a defense of the NRA... as if the Judicial Branch of our government hasn't the right to review what was intended-let's just look over this critical part of the constitution.
  
  Yesterday a Branch of FLDS was raided because of alleged child abuse... what if this abuse is part of their religion, should it be allowed according to the first amendment? No! People's rights stop when they infringe on other's personal rights and safety-what was the intent of the first amendment? Cases like these are why we have a Judicial Branch of our government.
  
  I studied pre-law classes in College, even when I disagree with a Supreme Court ruling, I can usually understand where they come from when they reach a decision. The Courts have ruled several times about the "intent" of the second amendment. Gun laws have been upheld several times. As for the DC laws, I think they went too far, and the courts will rule that way I suspect.
  
  Heston was as bad as politics as was Ronald Reagan. I find their reasoning myopic on several levels. I can see the comparisons between the JWs and those who support a cause, any cause.