just received a fs visit - first for several months.
an attractive 'yummy mummy' with (what seemed to me) a strained smile and a very young girl (presumably her daughter) about 9 or 10.. the weather was attrocious, i was distracted, and i failed completely to make any comment or to challenge.
looking at the young girl, particularly, i felt nothing but sympathy.. i accepted a leaflet 'can the dead really live again?
Well, there are many well-documented cases of cults using sexually attractive members to 'hook in' converts. I'm not aware of JWs using this as a general practice.
Am I being hypocritical To suggest that an attractive woman would induce me to their crap more than an unattractive person might? I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Moonies etc. chose attractive women as their missionaries ...
just received a fs visit - first for several months.
an attractive 'yummy mummy' with (what seemed to me) a strained smile and a very young girl (presumably her daughter) about 9 or 10.. the weather was attrocious, i was distracted, and i failed completely to make any comment or to challenge.
looking at the young girl, particularly, i felt nothing but sympathy.. i accepted a leaflet 'can the dead really live again?
To be honest, I rather suspect that YM (like most JWs and probably most people who promulgate a faith) would not have been able to explain what she believes. And, just suppose I had challenged her and she ended up looking like a doofus in front of her kid. Not good.
It is always a balance, I feel - but I have the privilege of never having been a jdub.
just received a fs visit - first for several months.
an attractive 'yummy mummy' with (what seemed to me) a strained smile and a very young girl (presumably her daughter) about 9 or 10.. the weather was attrocious, i was distracted, and i failed completely to make any comment or to challenge.
looking at the young girl, particularly, i felt nothing but sympathy.. i accepted a leaflet 'can the dead really live again?
And I decided a long time ago that to challenge someone's faith - especially if that is a crucial thing in their life - is a big responsibilty.
just received a fs visit - first for several months.
an attractive 'yummy mummy' with (what seemed to me) a strained smile and a very young girl (presumably her daughter) about 9 or 10.. the weather was attrocious, i was distracted, and i failed completely to make any comment or to challenge.
looking at the young girl, particularly, i felt nothing but sympathy.. i accepted a leaflet 'can the dead really live again?
I did not even think to ask YM whether she had the latest NNWT or just the 'old' NWT. Nor did I think to ask her about the 'Mass Resurrection' which, according to the NT followed the crucifixion (you remember, when all the graves in Jerusalem opened and resurrected people were wandering around greeting friends. Or about resurrected wives/husbands of widowed spouses who had remarried, and all that sort of stuff.
just received a fs visit - first for several months.
an attractive 'yummy mummy' with (what seemed to me) a strained smile and a very young girl (presumably her daughter) about 9 or 10.. the weather was attrocious, i was distracted, and i failed completely to make any comment or to challenge.
looking at the young girl, particularly, i felt nothing but sympathy.. i accepted a leaflet 'can the dead really live again?
(Lost a previous post so may post this in chunks).
The leaflet is poorly and cheaply printed trash. Personally, I would be embarrassed to hand it out, whoever I was representing.
just received a fs visit - first for several months.
an attractive 'yummy mummy' with (what seemed to me) a strained smile and a very young girl (presumably her daughter) about 9 or 10.. the weather was attrocious, i was distracted, and i failed completely to make any comment or to challenge.
looking at the young girl, particularly, i felt nothing but sympathy.. i accepted a leaflet 'can the dead really live again?
Just received a FS visit - first for several months. An attractive 'yummy mummy' with (what seemed to me) a strained smile and a very young girl (presumably her daughter) about 9 or 10.
The weather was attrocious, I was distracted, and I failed completely to make any comment or to challenge. Looking at the young girl, particularly, I felt nothing but sympathy.
I accepted a leaflet 'Can The Dead Really Live Again?' with a smile and said 'thanks'. I thought about offering the child a pack of left-over 'Halloween' sweets, decided against it. My baser thoughts were that the mum was an attractive woman who deserved to be taken out for dinner and shown a life outside the WTBTS enforced circle. (Mea culpa).
They moved on. I will, no doubt, think about them for a while (not the mum especially, more the child). What a way to live the only life we have!
i don't know if this has any legal implications:.
since the identities of the individual members of the governing body have been publicly confirmed (not that we didn't know that before) can that open the way for direct lawsuits to be leveled against members?.
for instance are there any laws in the usa that would open the way for geoffrey jackson to be targetted by the lawsuits from child abuse or no blood transfusion deaths?.
IMHO, it is always a good idea to include in a lawsuit individuals by name as well as the corporate identities they hide behind.
Here in the UK, at least, individuals are liable in a wide range of legislation, and it certainly concentrates minds when you tell people that they, personally, will be named in a lawsuit (and for example, local government is legally barred from indemnifying against or paying for legal costs of a local government officer).
Whilst organisations may have 'vicarious liability' for the actions of their officers/employees, etc., (watch them run backwards as fast as they can) courts, IME, like to cut through organisational claptrap.
Stand the individual up in court and watch then crap themselves/spread the blame would be my suggestion.
http://cyprus-mail.com/2013/10/04/third-party-assisted-reproduction-is-adultery-says-church/.
when discussing 'church' doctrines, many people cite 'protestant' -v- 'catholic' etc., forgetting the 'orthodox' churches which split from rcc about 1,000 years ago in the 'great schism'.
the orthodox churches are as wacky and controlling in their way as any other (cf.
http://cyprus-mail.com/2013/10/04/third-party-assisted-reproduction-is-adultery-says-church/
When discussing 'church' doctrines, many people cite 'Protestant' -v- 'Catholic' etc., forgetting the 'Orthodox' churches which split from RCC about 1,000 years ago in the 'Great schism'. The orthodox churches are as wacky and controlling in their way as any other (cf. the current power of the Russian Orthodox as an ally and supporter of Putin).
As an ex-resident of Cyprus I follow the goings-on there with a bemused and cynical view. The Cypriot Orthodox church is autonomous because the grave of Lazarus was discovered there (after his second death) and is nowadays rightly regarded by most rational thinkers as as good an example of a wholly corrupt organisation as one could wish to meet. The current archbishop, Chrysystomos II, was elected through a shenanigans as corrupt as any in the 'worldly' world. A fine example for christianity, and to my cynical mind a parallel for what the GB is doing to JWs (except that the GB can only dream of the power that the church exerts in CY, where its influence over political elections is clear).
The article referenced above (sorry I don't know how to make it 'clickable') is a good example of the ludicrous statements that the church comes out with. I suspect that their thinking is not a million miles away from that of the GB, and just goes to illustrate the danger of religious groups.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjmg69xmjp8.
this is a documentary from louis theroux on his return visit to westboro baptist chutch - as wacky a bunch as you'll meet.
but not that different, imho, as jdubs.. i never was a dub, but i hope as a human that i can share their pain.. being entirely secular here, it seems to me that some of the young ladies in the film need to experience 'worldly' love,.
Captian Obvious: Sorry for your pain.
One reason I posted this video is to demonstrate, perhaps, how crazy some religions can be. Many people might watch this and agree that they, and their practices, are crazy. They are a very small nutjob group. It doesn't take much imagination to scale this up to JWs and show just how crazy they are too.
With respect to exiting/fading/faded/successfully out IWs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjmg69xmjp8.
this is a documentary from louis theroux on his return visit to westboro baptist chutch - as wacky a bunch as you'll meet.
but not that different, imho, as jdubs.. i never was a dub, but i hope as a human that i can share their pain.. being entirely secular here, it seems to me that some of the young ladies in the film need to experience 'worldly' love,.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjmg69XmJp8
This is a documentary from Louis Theroux on his return visit to Westboro Baptist Chutch - as wacky a bunch as you'll meet. But not that different, IMHO, as jdubs.
I never was a dub, but I hope as a human that I can share their pain.
Being entirely secular here, it seems to me that some of the young ladies in the film need to experience 'worldly' love,
The comments re shunning will, I';m sure, strike home with many JWs - the crazy beliefs may strke home even more.
