by Larry 9 Replies latest jw friends
Hey folks - What's the newest 'light' on attending babdy showers when the couple isn't married and having a baby out of wedlock? I know, years ago, most J Dubs wouldn't go or support the event.
I ask b/c my brother's mate is having a baby shower and he told me that my mother and sisters (all Dubs) are coming. I was surprise b/c I know in the pass they/we wouldn't support someone breaking Jah's laws.
Thanks - Larry
I think it depends on the status of the person who is expecting. If they have been a JW from infancy (baptized or not) they usually are not given a baby shower if they are not married to the baby's father. If the pregnant lady is studying - especially if they have started going to meetings - having a baby shower becomes part of the "love bombing" process to get them hooked even more deeply in the JWs.
Love, Scully
I prefer the regular type of shower. I would think that babies falling from the sky would be at least a little bit messy.
I have to agree with Scully. When I had my son (out of wedlock) a few sisters asked the elder's if it would be appropriate to throw me a shower. It was nixed of course but, I did get a few presents from some of the kinder people. If I hadn't been a dub for life up to that point but a newly interested person, I'm sure I would've been baby shower love bombed.
~Aztec
If the pregnant lady is studying - especially if they have started going to meetings - having a baby shower becomes part of the "love bombing" process to get them hooked even more deeply in the JWs.
LOL at Scully!!! No kidding eh? Someone who's a born Dub with get disfellowshipped for this, but if you're a soon-to-be-Dub, you'll get a baby shower and lots of presents and love and support!!
Hypocrisy and double-standards at it's finest.
That reminds me of an unusual shower at our church a few years ago in our church, when the daughter of one of the board members got pregnant out of wedlock. She had grown up in the church, and was known and loved by the congregation. (We were new to the area, so didn't know her or her family at this time.)
She gave the child up for adoption, and the women's ministries group gave her a shower to comfort and encourage her (personal gifts and books, and refreshments). I couldn't make it, but heard that it was well-attended, and that the young lady was deeply appreciative of the support. I believe that it had nothing to do with her dad's position, but everything to do with how much she was personally loved.
She's now married to another fellow, and they have a healthy tiny baby now. They're very happy and we see them frequently.
About four years ago, the daughter of our Chairman of Deacons, got pregnant out of wedlock. When the father found out, he wanted nothing to do with Becky. The church embraced Becky, even though she had "sinned" in the church's eyes. Why did they embrace her? Because she had been abandoned to take care of a child herself, with no father. Some women gathered together and had a baby shower for her. Did they judge her? I'm sure some did. If so, they didn't do it openly. But the majority of the church loved her MORE because she realized she had put herself into a bad predicament. Did they ask her father to step down from his high level church position? No. It was never an issue. Not all, but MANY Christian churches embrace the "sinners". Why? Because that is what Jesus did and what he commanded his followers to do.
My brother and his girlfriend are expecting a child in August.My brother was never babtised, and his girlfreind was never a JW. I asked my sister if there were any plans for a baby shower and she said they were hoping I would plan the shower and hold it at my house since they "as true christians, cannot in good consience plan a shower for a couple out of wedlock". She said since I am no longer in good standing with the congregation, I can get away with having the baby shower, and they would attend if I invited them.
LS, that is so hypocritcal. Attending the shower is showing they approve of the situation just as much as giving it. Otherwise JWs could attend birthday parties but not give them.
Blondie
Typically, we're seeing sveral examples of double-standards here.
I agree with Scully's assessment, and the examples bear that out.
LS, I agree with Blondie, that is hypocritical on their part. They likely don't want to host it for fear of reprisal from elders. Nevermind the "true Chrsitian' claptrap.
