as a wee damselfly in the late 70's/early 80's i loved the smurfs!
i watched the show and had the coloring book and the little plastic figures.
then some jw kid had a nightmare, it was taken as demonism and my smurfs were taken away!
Shera I never heard about the cabbage patch kids. What was the reason behind that I wonder?
I remember when the Cabbage Patch Kids first came out there was such a frenzy that the thought among JW's was that since people were fighting (literally) to get them for their children for Xmas (like they do whenever a new toy is released at Xmas time) the demons must have had some influence on them. At least, that's my best recollection.
as a wee damselfly in the late 70's/early 80's i loved the smurfs!
i watched the show and had the coloring book and the little plastic figures.
then some jw kid had a nightmare, it was taken as demonism and my smurfs were taken away!
We couldn't watch Scooby Doo because it had ghosts. We couldn't eat Lucky Charms because we didn't believe in luck. And, oh, we couldn't watch the Exorcist... I swear I still can't watch that to this day, but that's because I was so scared of it as a child.
one of my best friends lives in the same building as this single woman in the congregation i used to attend.
we'll call her "pam.
" this woman's father is an elder (he was on the committee that df'd me) and he lives in the building next to them.
One of my best friends lives in the same building as this single woman in the congregation I used to attend. We'll call her "Pam." This woman's father is an elder (he was on the committee that df'd me) and he lives in the building next to them. Anyway, my friend and another neighbor in the building "Angelica" thinks that Pam is fond of other women because she undresses them with her eyes. Angelica ran into Pam's father (the elder..PO actually) and they were chatting briefly about Angelica's upcoming trip to France. Pam knocked on Angelica's door with her hands behind her back. She proceeded to tell Angelica (to whom she has only said a brief hello in passing) that she heard she was going away to France and she wished her a safe trip. Angelica was a little freaked out because (1) Pam had never knocked on her door before; and (2) she had no idea what Pam had behind her back.
Finally, Pam pulled her hands from behind her back. She had a huge stack of Watchtowers (and probably Awakes) bound with a rubber band. She told Angelica that since she had such a long trip ahead, she thought she would like some reading material and she also suggested that Angelica distribute these mags to others on the plane! The audacity! The gumption!
Angelica's boyfriend was so upset by that gesture, that he divided the stack of mags up and put one stack in front of Pam's apartment door and the other stack in front of the garbage can in plain sight for Pam to see.
Funny? Pathetic? Disturbing? Or Classic?
it's a weird feeling.
all of my instant messenger buddies are all my old witness friends.
none of them have blocked me or deleted me from their contact lists since i da'd myself.
If you delete them, you won't have to torture yourself about them ignoring you.
rambaldi, .
my faith has been destroyed by these apostates.
as a jw we are fed by the faithful and discreet slave at the appointed time.
Who is Rambaldi??????????????
I have never heard the name b4. Someone enlighten me.
was wondering the clarification of a relationship someone can have with their mother if they have been disfellowshipped and the daughter is in good standing with the congregation?
the daughter was baptised after the disfellowship.
does this mean the daughter is not to have a relationship with the mother.
If someone disassociates themselves, can they return. This woman took it to the Supreme Court and lost.
From www.watchtower.org (http://www.watchtower.org/library/w/1988/4/15/article_01.htm):
'But,' someone may ask, 'is it not harsh to expel and then refuse to talk with the expelled person?' Such a view surfaced in a recent court case involving a woman who was raised by parents who were Jehovah's Witnesses. Her parents had been disfellowshipped. She was not, but she voluntarily disassociated herself by writing a letter withdrawing from the congregation. Accordingly, the congregation was simply informed that she was no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses. She moved away, but years later she returned and found that local Witnesses would not converse with her. So she took the matter to court. What was the outcome, and how might this affect you? In order to understand the matter properly, let us see what the Bible says about the related subject of disfellowshipping.
You may want to know the outcome of the court case involving a woman who was upset because former acquaintances would not converse with her after she chose to reject the faith, disassociating herself from the congregation.
Before the case went to trial, a federal district court summarily granted judgment against her. That judgment was based on the concept that courts do not get involved in church disciplinary matters. She then appealed. The unanimous judgment of the federal court of appeals% was based on broader grounds of First Amendment (of the U.S. Constitution) rights: "Because the practice of shunning is a part of the faith of the Jehovah's Witness, we find that the 'free exercise' provision of the United States Constitution . . . precludes [her] from prevailing. The defendants have a constitutionally protected privilege to engage in the practice of shunning. Accordingly, we affirm" the earlier judgment of the district court.
The court opinion continued: "Shunning is a practice engaged in by Jehovah's Witnesses pursuant to their interpretation of canonical text, and we are not free to reinterpret that text . . . The defendants are entitled to the free exercise of their religious beliefs . . . Courts generally do not scrutinize closely the relationship among members (or former members) of a church. Churches are afforded great latitude when they impose discipline on members or former members. We agree with [former U.S. Supreme Court] Justice Jackson's view that '[r]eligious activities which concern only members of the faith are and ought to be free—as nearly absolutely free as anything can be.' . . . The members of the Church [she] decided to abandon have concluded that they no longer want to associate with her. We hold that they are free to make that choice."
The court of appeals acknowledged that even if the woman felt distress because former acquaintances chose not to converse with her, "permitting her to recover for intangible or emotional injuries would unconstitutionally restrict the Jehovah's Witnesses free exercise of religion . . . The constitutional guarantee of the free exercise of religion requires that society tolerate the type of harms suffered by [her] as a price well worth paying to safeguard the right of religious difference that all citizens enjoy." This decision has, in a sense, received even more weight since it was handed down. How so? The woman later petitioned the highest court in the land to hear the case and possibly overturn the decision against her. But in November 1987, the United States Supreme Court refused to do so.
Hence, this important case determined that a disfellowshipped or disassociated person cannot recover damages from Jehovah's Witnesses in a court of law for being shunned.^ Since the congregation was responding to the perfect directions that all of us can read in God's Word and applying it, the person is feeling a loss brought on by his or her own actions.
was wondering the clarification of a relationship someone can have with their mother if they have been disfellowshipped and the daughter is in good standing with the congregation?
the daughter was baptised after the disfellowship.
does this mean the daughter is not to have a relationship with the mother.
I didn't realize that people were still disassociated from the congregation. For some reason, I thought that was done away with.
was wondering the clarification of a relationship someone can have with their mother if they have been disfellowshipped and the daughter is in good standing with the congregation?
the daughter was baptised after the disfellowship.
does this mean the daughter is not to have a relationship with the mother.
6 In the Immediate Household: Does this mean that Christians living in the same household with a disfellowshipped family member are to avoid talking to, eating with, and associating with that one as they go about their daily activities? The Watchtower of April 15, 1991, in the footnote on page 22, states: "If in a Christian’s household there is a disfellowshipped relative, that one would still be part of the normal, day-to-day household dealings and activities." Thus, it would be left up to members of the family to decide on the extent to which the disfellowshipped family member would be included when eating or engaging in other household activities. And yet, they would not want to give brothers with whom they associate the impression that everything is the same as it was before the disfellowshipping occurred. [This only applies to a disfellowshipped JW living in the same house.]
I am constantly amazed at the "changes" that I witness in my own lifetime. When I was a teen (16 to be exact) I was disfellowshipped and lived in my parents home and they would barely look me in the eyes, let alone eating with me. When I graduated from high school, they attended my graduation (I have no idea why) and when the ceremony was over we climbed into the car went to a chinese restaurant to order carry-out, brought our food home and my parents along with my younger brother and sister ate at the dinner table, while my older sister (also disfellowshipped) ate at the kitchen table. No one uttered a word. We finished eating and went to our respective rooms. It was the weirdest thing ever.
Now, it is o.k. to eat with and engage in other household activities with a disfellowshipped person as long as they live in the same household with you because it is difficult to cut off that type of interaction. Well, my family had no problem AT ALL!
was wondering the clarification of a relationship someone can have with their mother if they have been disfellowshipped and the daughter is in good standing with the congregation?
the daughter was baptised after the disfellowship.
does this mean the daughter is not to have a relationship with the mother.
6 In the Immediate Household: Does this mean that Christians living in the same household with a disfellowshipped family member are to avoid talking to, eating with, and associating with that one as they go about their daily activities? The Watchtower of April 15, 1991, in the footnote on page 22, states: "If in a Christian’s household there is a disfellowshipped relative, that one would still be part of the normal, day-to-day household dealings and activities." Thus, it would be left up to members of the family to decide on the extent to which the disfellowshipped family member would be included when eating or engaging in other household activities. And yet, they would not want to give brothers with whom they associate the impression that everything is the same as it was before the disfellowshipping occurred. [This only applies to a disfellowshipped JW living in the same house.]
I am constantly amazed at the "changes" that I witness in my own lifetime. When I was a teen (16 to be exact) I was disfellowshipped and lived in my parents home and they would barely look me in the eyes, let alone eating with me. When I graduated from high school, they attended my graduation (I have no idea why) and when the ceremony was over we climbed into the car went to a chinese restaurant to order carry-out, brought our food home and my parents along with my younger brother and sister ate at the dinner table, while my older sister (also disfellowshipped) ate at the kitchen table. No one uttered a word. We finished eating and went to our respective rooms. It was the weirdest thing ever.
Now, it is o.k. to eat with and engage in other household activities with a disfellowshipped person as long as they live in the same household with you because it is difficult to cut off that type of interaction. Well, my family had no problem AT ALL!
