speaking to a sister while i was in, she mentioned to me some trouble she was having trying to get her young daughter into a skirt for the meetings.
to cut a long story short, the girl just did`nt like skirts.
simple as that.
Dear Desertlily:
Welcome! I hope your comment was meant sarcastically and not literally. I trust you are aware that how a person dresses does not make her (or him) more or less likely to be the victim of a sexual crime, including childhood molestation. In fact, the 'good, little, modestly dressed, passive, Jehovah's Witness child' is the the MOST likely to be abused.
speaking to a sister while i was in, she mentioned to me some trouble she was having trying to get her young daughter into a skirt for the meetings.
to cut a long story short, the girl just did`nt like skirts.
simple as that.
Thanks for the support Virgochik. You would be surprised at how many "good" sisters are looking forward to my doing this. The Society's position has always been that our dress should match the professional standards of our community. However, I feel the dresses/skirts only dogma has morphed into the JW burka (spelling?).
I am open to any brother presenting a LOGICAL reason for the prohibition. My oldest daughter in an accountant for one of the Big 6 national accounting firms. She routinely flys the nation performing audits. All women in positions of power and accountability in her firm prefer and wear pants. However, open toed shoes are frowned upon.
Women lawyers routinely argue cases before state Supreme Courts in pantsuits. Accounting and law are the two most conservative industries in the US. If pantsuits are NORMAL wear for these two industries, pantsuits are more than acceptable for the Kindgom Hall.
Besides, have you seen some of the dresses the sisters wear? I understand that not everyone has tons of money and many frequent the Goodwill, but must you buy clothes more fitting of a bag lady?
speaking to a sister while i was in, she mentioned to me some trouble she was having trying to get her young daughter into a skirt for the meetings.
to cut a long story short, the girl just did`nt like skirts.
simple as that.
I told my husband that I am going to start wearing pantsuits to the service meeting. I work in a professional legal setting and wear very nice pant outfits. I have decided that if Condoleeza Rice can greet foreign dignitaries in a pantsuit, then pantsuits more than meet the "mainstream business wear" standard for American women that the Society has set. Interestingly, I have a very good friend in Denmark. The sisters there wear pants to all meetings AND OUT IN SERVICE.
If the brothers want to speak with me, I will direct them to follow theocratic procedure, and ask permission of my "head." If he says no........
dear jehovah god,
how are you today?
as a representative of your 'earthy organisation' i learned you are now nearing the end of your 7,000 year 'day of rest'.
...thank you Lord for thinkin' about me. I alive a doin fine...signs, signs, everywhere a sign...
Remember the song?
i received this email from a friend of a friend:.
'comments made by brother lett at morning worship today.. the comments were about the work we have of bearing witness of the truth.
" again, the angels make note of it.. we knock at the fifth house and again no one is home.
Aahhh, Lyman Swingle. I attended the same congregation as his nephew. His nephew had a hugh crush on me; I did not feel the same way. He ended up marry a regular pioneer sister...and started partaking about a year after his marriage. This sister desperately wanted a child; he didn't saying that she wanted it for the wrong reasons...she just wanted to keep a piece of him on earth.
Just think...that all could have been mine.
i received this email from a friend of a friend:.
'comments made by brother lett at morning worship today.. the comments were about the work we have of bearing witness of the truth.
" again, the angels make note of it.. we knock at the fifth house and again no one is home.
At meetings when individuals are droning on about how important the preaching work is, we are saving lives, angels in midheaven are helping us, etc., I have a stock answer.
I talk about all the wonderful encouraging and faith-building experiences we hear of individuals praying to Jehovah for help, and, amazingly, a Jehovah's Witness shows up at their door! What does that tell us? That Jehovah saw these people, recognized them as sheep, listened to them and answered their prayers. So sometimes His sheep are Jehovah's Witnesses, and sometimes they are not! But, how comforted we can be that Jehovah already knows where each and everyone of his sheep resides.
Usually the brothers on the platform looks at me puzzled. They seem to understand what I just said, but I couch it in so much JW jargon, it confuses them.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/law/03/08/fatherhood.suit.ap/index.html.
men want 'say' in unplanned pregnancyactivists seek right to decline financial responsibility for kids.
new york (ap) -- contending that women have more options than they do in the event of an unintended pregnancy, men's rights activists are mounting a long shot legal campaign aimed at giving them the chance to opt out of financial responsibility for raising a child.. the national center for men has prepared a lawsuit -- nicknamed roe v. wade for men -- to be filed thursday in u.s. district court in michigan on behalf of a 25-year-old computer programmer ordered to pay child support for his ex-girlfriend's daughter.. the suit addresses the issue of male reproductive rights, contending that lack of such rights violates the u.s. constitution's equal protection clause.. the gist of the argument: if a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood.
If a woman doesn't want to have children, she must employ birth control. If a man doesn't want to have children, he must employ birth control. Birth control is not just the female's job.
I feel for you and others who were decieved by women; however, I have no more sympathy for these 'tricked' men than I do for a woman who uses the excuse that 'he said he loved me and not to worry about it, or he said he had a vasectomy, etc.'
http://www.cnn.com/2006/law/03/08/fatherhood.suit.ap/index.html.
men want 'say' in unplanned pregnancyactivists seek right to decline financial responsibility for kids.
new york (ap) -- contending that women have more options than they do in the event of an unintended pregnancy, men's rights activists are mounting a long shot legal campaign aimed at giving them the chance to opt out of financial responsibility for raising a child.. the national center for men has prepared a lawsuit -- nicknamed roe v. wade for men -- to be filed thursday in u.s. district court in michigan on behalf of a 25-year-old computer programmer ordered to pay child support for his ex-girlfriend's daughter.. the suit addresses the issue of male reproductive rights, contending that lack of such rights violates the u.s. constitution's equal protection clause.. the gist of the argument: if a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood.
Bad grammar...sorry. Each person has full and conscious knowledge of the possible repercussions of his or her acts.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/law/03/08/fatherhood.suit.ap/index.html.
men want 'say' in unplanned pregnancyactivists seek right to decline financial responsibility for kids.
new york (ap) -- contending that women have more options than they do in the event of an unintended pregnancy, men's rights activists are mounting a long shot legal campaign aimed at giving them the chance to opt out of financial responsibility for raising a child.. the national center for men has prepared a lawsuit -- nicknamed roe v. wade for men -- to be filed thursday in u.s. district court in michigan on behalf of a 25-year-old computer programmer ordered to pay child support for his ex-girlfriend's daughter.. the suit addresses the issue of male reproductive rights, contending that lack of such rights violates the u.s. constitution's equal protection clause.. the gist of the argument: if a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood.
Both individuals decide to have sex; therefore both individuals are 100% responsible for the results. Each person has full and conscious knowledge of the possible repercussions of their acts.
Please keep in mind that men also argue the counter-argument. Many couples are afraid to adopt newborns given up by women who have chosen not to have an abortion, but to give up the child because these same guys can come back and assert their 'parental rights.' We have all seen tragic cases such as this on the evening news.
This same 'mens' organization has been at the forefront of legally establishing men's parental rights; now they want to argue that they do not want the corresponding parental financial responsibility. Such spin doctors are worthy of Bethel!!!
If you are a woman, the only way you to shield yourself against such consequences is not to have sex; If you are a man, the only way to shield yourself against such consequences is not to have sex.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/law/03/08/fatherhood.suit.ap/index.html.
men want 'say' in unplanned pregnancyactivists seek right to decline financial responsibility for kids.
new york (ap) -- contending that women have more options than they do in the event of an unintended pregnancy, men's rights activists are mounting a long shot legal campaign aimed at giving them the chance to opt out of financial responsibility for raising a child.. the national center for men has prepared a lawsuit -- nicknamed roe v. wade for men -- to be filed thursday in u.s. district court in michigan on behalf of a 25-year-old computer programmer ordered to pay child support for his ex-girlfriend's daughter.. the suit addresses the issue of male reproductive rights, contending that lack of such rights violates the u.s. constitution's equal protection clause.. the gist of the argument: if a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood.
Men control the decision-making 100%. They decide whether or not to have sex.
