Posts by Cadellin

51

April 15, 2013 Watchtower - p. 22-26: Organization-Obsessed Much???

by sd-7 in

there's a study article "make sure of the more important things", and in no uncertain terms the article makes clear that "jehovah's organization" is the most important thing.

the term "organization" or "jehovah's organization" is used a whopping 24 times in the article, including a subheading titled: "follow the example of jehovah's organization".

i thought organizations were entities, but that sort of subheading makes it seem like the organization is one giant person whose example we can follow.

Cadellin

Many years ago, I worked as a corporate paralegal. My job was to create corporations for clients and maintain them through their life cycle. Yes, life cycle. As I filed Articles of Incorporation, maintained annual minutes, revised Bylaws and mission statements and, sometimes, file Articles of Dissolution (corporate death), I often felt like I was caring for actual persons who had a name, assets, family members and a mission in life. And, legally, I was.

Corporations become imbued with a life that extends beyond their immediate utilitarian purpose and take on an essence or meaning of their own. I think Kant differentiated between animals and humans by noting that humans are aware that their lives are an end in themselves and not merely a means to an end. That's exactly what eventually happens with the "personhood" of a corporate entity. It becomes larger than a mere means to an end and becomes an end in itself--it takes on a weird and creepy kind of personhood. The humans begin to serve the interests of the corporation instead of the other way around. This is exactly what has happened with the WTBS.

64

Anyone Else See Les Miserables?

by BizzyBee in

jw
friends

i went to see it today - by myself (mr bee is on a golf junket).

i was glad that that i was by myself because i cried so much at the end, i wouldn't have wanted to be with anyone who wasn't crying - and that would not have been mr bee!.

les miserables the current film is adapted from what is considered one of the half-dozen greatest novels of the past 150 years and one of the longest novels ever written.

Cadellin

I went with my teenager and we loved it. Mind you, I think the live production was better and they could've cut at least half-hour from the film w/o hurting it. I thought Russell Crowe's singing was excellent and though Hugh Jackman did a good job of Jean Valjean, he couldn't sing to save his soul. The orgiastic melange of sentimental Catholicism and libertine ideology with which the movie ended was a bit much, but I still enjoyed it.

12

Is This the Safest Time To Be Alive?

by 00DAD in

safest time to be alive?

matthew chance takes a look at whether or not we live in a safer world today than any other time in history.. http://www.rr.com/video/2322994712.

of course this contradicts jw perennial gloom-and-doom prognostications and wt end times eschatology, but if you even could get one of them to sit down and consider the real facts, they'd probably just say, "see, we're getting closer to the cry of 'peace and security!'".

Cadellin

I've read Pinker's book and found it fascinating. Your chances of dying a violent death were many times higher in the past than they are today and Pinker does an admirable job of analyzing the convergence of a range of contributing factors, including the influence of the Englightenment and diminishment of religious thinking.

One question to get someone thinking is--if you could be transported to some other time period to spend the rest of your life, what would you choose? Oh, and by the way, there's a caveat: You'll also be transformed into a woman, a person with a physical disability, someone of a minority ethnicity or someone who's gay. NOW--when would you like to live??? It's easy to forget that for someone in one of those categories, the vast majority of time periods have been horrible. For example, to get a glimpse of what life was like for women, you only have to check mortality rates in medically unserved countries like Afghanistan and Yemen (and probably others) and find that as many as 20% of women die from childbirth-related causes and as many as 50% of children under the age of five die. Up until relatively recently, that was the norm everywhere.

95

What was it about Bethel that woke you up?

by cognisonance in

jw
friends

one the how many exbethelites thread it was mentioned that some think one either leaves down the path towards apostasy or as a 100% true believer.

i'm curious what experiences did you face at bethel that woke you up (or started to at least)?.

.

Cadellin

This is a great thread. I just want to chime in and concur with everything that has been said. I had a very close relative who was a "heavy" at Brooklyn. He was elderly but when young sisters would come around on tour, he would make a big deal about hugging them and kissing their cheeks, etc. Everyone chuckled and thought it was "cute" but it made me embarassed. Not only that, but he would do it in front of his wife!

My husband was at Bethel b/f we married for several years. His overseer was the worst sociopathic asshole I've ever encountered (and that's saying something). The way he treated my husband was despicable--even by "worldly" standards, and yet he remained in perfectly good standing. He would go out of his way to berate my husband until he was literally crying (this was b/f I came along and my husband was a tender-footed twenty year old with a naive, well-meaning heart) and would not leave him alone until he made sure he was in tears. He would also do the same thing to my husband's older sister who worked in the same department--verbally abuse her until she was sobbing, then leave.

When we got engaged, we applied to remain at Brooklyn as a couple. My husband was given an excellent report by his table head, and his home overseer but his work overseer said terrible things about him. Now, I'm not naive--it may be that some of those things were true regarding minor shortfalls. But he was regularly pulled onto jobs that had a short deadline because he was the only one who could get things done when the crunch was on. Because of his overseer's spiteful report, we could not come in to Bethel after our marriage and my husband was absolutely crushed.

Of course, in retrospect, it was the best thing that could have happened!! Ironically, a few years later, his overseer's experience was in one of the mags as a model of faith!!!! We both could NOT BELIEVE IT. I was still active and "unawakened" at the time, and even then, it gave me pause to think that holy spirit had directed this psycho's life story be printed as spiritual food??? I realize now that was the first stirrings of my own epiphany regarding this nutty religion.

Everything that has been said regarding absolute lack of recourse to underlings with grievances and the iron-fisted dictatorial rule-bound mentality is true--and more!!

7

Update on the Mermaid

by Cadellin in

i don't post here that much, though i read posts everyday.

it's mostly because of the ie7 problem (don't use ff that much).

anyway, that's beside the point.

Cadellin

Thank you for all your kind words. Believe me when I say it helps tremendously!

Flipper: He was an elder but since we moved, he has not been reappointed. This is probably due to the fact that both his wife (me) and his child (who's 14 now) refuse to go. He's actually okay w/not being reappointed (I think he's kind of relieved not to be doing the kind of heavy lifting he was doing in our prev. cong.) and I'm fine either way. But yes, I do have to be circumspect about what I say.

OTWO: Thank you for your reassurance. Yes, now that I've thought about it, I don't think it changes anything. And I do love him dearly, and him I as far as I can tell.

Blondie: No, I don't think he's getting impatient. Well, hmm. Now I'm having second thoughts. I think that, just as we "awake" to the truth about the "truth" in stages, believing spouses have to get used to the inactivity of their awakened spouse in stages. Initially, when we moved here, he wanted me to go to one meeting/month, which I did. But I'm not now (yay) and maybe this is reverberation from that realization.

Idrnomo: Great idea, but I honestly don't know what effect it would have. I think he just might read parts of it if no one were looking but he might just as easily decide that his loyalty's been tested far enough and run to the BOE.

LITS: We can commiserate! Yeah, I have to wonder how believing spouses just "don't get it." Funny thing is, my dear hubby will go to worldly events with me, talk extensively about the political situation (he followed election stats devoutly), read fiction that would be nixed by most JWs, and make references to how climate change is going to affect life on earth but we'll both be gone by then. All of which reflects a profoundly non-JW perspective. I think there's cognitive dissonance up the ying-yang going on with him.

16

Fall of Giants---Ken Follet

by ldrnomo in

one of the most freeing things i've been able to do since fading from the watchtower's tendril like grasp is, "read what i want to" i particularly enjoy historial novels because they entertain and inform all at the same time.

i'm just finishing the first of a trilogy "fall of giants" and there was a paragraph that made me think of the great influence of propaganda machines (probably because i was so influenced by the watchtower) i am hugely aware of it's power to lead people all over the place like the waves of the sea i suppose.. here is the paragraph:.

maud knew the proprietor of the mail, lord northcliffe.

Cadellin

I like Follett, though I find some of his work a bit too violent for me (weak stomach). But, yeah, that quote resonates. If that isn't what the WT does, I don't know what is!

7

Update on the Mermaid

by Cadellin in

i don't post here that much, though i read posts everyday.

it's mostly because of the ie7 problem (don't use ff that much).

anyway, that's beside the point.

Cadellin

Hi:

I don't post here that much, though I read posts everyday. It's mostly because of the IE7 problem (don't use FF that much). Anyway, that's beside the point. I'm posting today just to vent, to send my angst off into the ether, cast my bread upon the waters, all that stuff. I'm inactive now for about four years, have an active JW husband and all my immediate family are JWs.

Things have been pretty good between my husband and I, despite my awakening and his resolute determination to "stand firm" for the "truth." He refuses to discuss any WT matters with me, not even addressing my questions, mostly, I believe, because he knows he doesn't have a leg to stand on. At any rate, today there's a "special" Bethel speaker at the KH and he wants me to come with him to hear the "special" talk. I replied that I have given most of my productive youthful years to this organization which had, in turn, made promises they couldn't keep and, even worse, lied to me and I felt no obligation to give one more minute of my limited time on this mortal coil to it.

His reply was, "May I quote you on that?" And I was about to say, "Sure," when it dawned on me that my words could be used against me. So I said, "No, I'll deny ever saying a thing."

This made him sullen and silent and he stalked off to the service group. It left me angry and appalled. And now I'm worried that my marriage might be at stake.

Damn this horrible religion and what it does to people. No wonder I've ended up a liberal, secular agnostic.

60

New video: Stephen Lett warns about "Women's Lip"

by cedars in

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=citaz613koc.

.

cedars.

Cadellin

Dear God, this is outrageous. Don't the GB have any idea how outdated and out of touch they appear when they refer to women's lib like that? Even when I was an active JW, this kind of shit made me squirm.

What talk or occasion was this given at?

73

A letter from a College Dropout

by Ethos in

jw
friends

dear harvard university,.

i have decided go leave this institution of education.

let me explain why.

Cadellin

Okay, I can't help myself.

Ethos, sweet Ethos, I write to you from my office at a large, public university where I teach, among other things, critical thinking. While it has been acknowledged by other posters that certain kinds of classes require memorization (and for good reason), many--if not most--of the classes you will take at Harvard, or any other credible institution of higher learning, emphasize higher cognitive skills including analysing, evaluationg, synthesizing, and creating. Books are read with the goal of learning, yes, but always with an active and critical eye, and usually in conjunction with multiple perspectives. As far as my own students go, I tell them that they can argue whatever position they please in their papers, as long as they can substantiate it, reason through it and support it with credible evidence.

Like the FDS? Not.

98

Latest "Shun Your Family" Statement - Jan 2013 Study WT

by LostGeneration in

solomon alluded to it yesterday in a thread, i found the online large print pdfs here, not sure where the regular version is yet.

here are the full paragraphs, grab your barf bags .

19 on the other hand, if you choose the path of resentment.

Cadellin

No, Black Sheep, Rory, and everyone else, it is a LIE. That little piece of fiction drummed up by the WT's public relations boys and slapped onto JW. Org that states that "normal family affection and dealings continue" is a bold-face, out and out LIE. How can you put that side by side with this latest WT article stating unequivocally that even e-mail "assocation" must be avoided? Do you really think that the supposed weepy sister quoted in that article really has continued "normal family affection and dealings" with her DF'd daughter? Is that the impression being given?

And what are "worldlings" supposed to make of that JW.Org pr piece that Rory linked to? "Oh, no, witnesses don't shun family members--see, it says right here that if a man is disfellowshipped, blood ties remain! Normal family affectin and dealings continue, see? Right there."

Of course, what a dyed-in-the-wool JW reads in that pr piece is that the "children" are school-age, living at home, right? But does it state in that article that the children are only 5 or 6 and so they wouldn't be taught to shun the father? No, of course not. A non-JW reading that article assumes that it applies whether the man is 32 and the kids are 10 and 11 or the man is 52 and the kids are 28 and 30 and living on their own.

This makes me physically ill. The religion claims to be "The Truth." And yet engages (once again) in such clear and unambiguous lying, all in order to make themselves "look" more acceptable to those who aren't part of the cult.