Mindfield notes:
Why can you say the pagan origins of the date December 25th is crucial in determining whether is should be celebrated or not and still accept marriage with its wedding ring, which also had pagan origins? Both marriage and the birth of Jesus have their importance... what makes you selectively take one but ignore the other? Isn't the fact that Christmas no longer has resemblances to its pagan roots makes it acceptable now?
These are excellent points, Mindfield. All the traditions surrounding modern weddings have pagan origins... the white dress and veil, the bridesmaids and groomsmen, the rings, the cake... and more and more Witnesses go for the flashy, extravagant engagement parties and weddings than ever before. The rationale is that the "origin" of marriage was in the Garden of Eden when God presented Eve to Adam, and TaaDaa.... they were married (ignoring the obvious 'fact' that there was literally nobody else there to get married to, much less witness or celebrate the occasion), and could shag about like the animals did and produce offspring. LOL Even the placing of the wedding ring on the finger during the ceremony is symbolic of the sexual act (though not exactly to scale <g>)... it was also a symbol of the man's "ownership" of his new wife (slavery was done away with in this part of the world over 100 years ago); so why putting up a Christmas tree (which according to WT lore, is a phallic symbol) is so wrong to the thinking of JWs is beyond me. It's just blatant hypocrisy to reject so-called pagan traditions related to the celebrating the birth of the Saviour, only to gobble up and perpetuate the pagan traditions related to wedding celebrations.
Love Scully
It is not persecution for an informed person to expose a certain religion as being false. - WT 11/15/63