direct and cross-examination questions in child custody cases.
wtb&ts, page 42.
"be careful that they [jw children being questioned] don't get the impression that they are in a demonstration at the circuit assembly, when they would show that the first things in life are service and going to the kingdom hall.
Restrangled,
I think you probably touch upon the reality of the situation. There seems to be a big disparity between the JW culture pre-1980s and post-1980s in this area. Persons of your generation probably did have stronger social pressure to avoid non-Witness relationships. Persons of my generation and younger had much more flexibility and whether or not we had non-Witness friends depended more on our parents' views or individual circumstances then the continued messages from the Society.
direct and cross-examination questions in child custody cases.
wtb&ts, page 42.
"be careful that they [jw children being questioned] don't get the impression that they are in a demonstration at the circuit assembly, when they would show that the first things in life are service and going to the kingdom hall.
IronClaw, I specifically said "casual" not "close" friendships. While some Witnesses are permitted to have close friendships with Non-Witnesses, it is discouraged. But many Witnesses as I stated have some casual acquaintances who are non-Witnesses. The degree to which they associate with them is dependent on the circumstances. It is clear from Mary's post that (as I stated) anything less than exchanging Valentines and full-blown association is not "normal" in her eyes.
Mary,
There is no difference in what you stated above that would be deceptive and what they are actually saying. "their faith is of primary importance" is no different that "the first things in life are service and going to the KH". Apparently, you are the only one who can't see that
Every now and then I encounter on JWD people who simply do not have a basic grasp of language and grammatical structure and who persist in misreading something. The CCB specifically qualifies your quoted portion above by stating that the situation of example parts at the assemblies or the platform and by using the qualifier "WHEN....the first things" is WHEN one WOULD emphasize that the first things in life are service and going to the KH, etc. (for JWs). That you fail to understand the difference is truly baffling.
As for the assertion about the hourly commitment, etc. the fact is that only a tiny fraction of Witnesses actually DO all that is encouraged that they do. The vast majority of Witnesses put in very little time than what is minimally required to get by without flak from the Elders or their parents if they are children. The fact that the average service hours are less than 10hrs a month demonstrates that half of all Witnesses don't even spend 10 hours a month in formal OR informal ministry.
Once again the difference between the ideal state and the actual state of most Witnesses is lost upon you.
JohnnyCip: Generally, I tend to ignore morons like you, who obviously don't know either anything about me nor my positions, but who place their ignorance on display for all to see. If you really desire, you can feel free to visit my website. From there are links to my law website and from there you can find contact info. It sounds like you have a lot of hatred in your heart and I pity you. Maybe you should pray so that the Lord can bring you peace and help you to let go of the animousity you hold toward others. (Oh and by the way in California both parties must consent to the taping of a phone conversation. I wouldn't want you to run afoul of the law.)
a lot!!!
i have done my share of sleeping at conventions with the elbow in the side, same ol same ol.
you would know which scripture was coming before they ever said it.
a lot as a kid, less as an teen or adult, too busy trying to check out the Watchtower Babes. But i daydreamed constantly so that is almost like sleeping.
huge news everyone!
i recently had a breakthrough with my mom.
we were debating last night for several hours, during which time brought up the mexico/malawi situation, which she of course being a faithful and blind witness, knew nothing about.
GermanXJW,
these excerpts go to what I call the Mexican Question, and the issues of the organization and registration the whole (religion vs. cultural society registration) but not to the Cartilla issue.
on another thread a poster suggested that jw's inherently are 'christian' due to restraint in the matter of not killing each other in warfare.. i personally view this as ludricous, as such non-violence cannot of itself mark christians any more than could the absence of chocolate in a hot beverage mark it as coffee without question.
it is a riduculous assumption that leads to false acceptance of 'facts' that are not.. jeff .
having a little trouble with your post title, and I don't mean the spelling of Pacifism. maybe its because you didn't link to the "other thread" you mentioned.
personally, i think it is one quality of a Christian to avoid violence and killing if possible, but certainly not the only one and not one which is exclusive to JWs nor does it by itself prove that they are true Christians. There are pacifist and conscientious objectors who are atheist, not too mention the handful of religious faiths which also preach nonviolence, thus not wanting to soldier is not proof itself that one is a Christian.
Conversely, however, I do find it a little hard for one to claim that they ARE Christian and to be a soldier.
huge news everyone!
i recently had a breakthrough with my mom.
we were debating last night for several hours, during which time brought up the mexico/malawi situation, which she of course being a faithful and blind witness, knew nothing about.
Shawn,
you make a good point. Since Ray did it in CofC, it is common to compare the two situations even though there are differences as you point out.
I think though that one doesn't need to compare the two situations at all to make a strong point. The Mexican Cartilla situation, standing by itself, seems to raise serious questions about whether the Society blessed or ignored what appears to be facially routine compromise of Christian neutrality by the Mexican brothers. (And that's not even getting into the "bribery" issue.)
Rockhound, the problem, as I stated in my previous post is that any scans or reprints of the documents are going to be found only at websites or made available by sources that her mom would likely reject as reliable. And by the way, the archive of the Observer site doesn't contain the scans in question.
As I recall correctly from CofC, Ray states that he made copies of the originals which were in the files of the Mexican branch. Thus, the only extent copies of these letters are probably going to be found in the private papers of Ray Franz. Possibly, Ray's publisher or some persons who know him have copies of the copies.
As for the "originals" I would doubt whether Brooklyn Bethel or the Mexico Branch has kept the original correspondence in their files. If they haven't pulled a Nixon by now that would truly be astonishing.
direct and cross-examination questions in child custody cases.
wtb&ts, page 42.
"be careful that they [jw children being questioned] don't get the impression that they are in a demonstration at the circuit assembly, when they would show that the first things in life are service and going to the kingdom hall.
JWdaughter,
first of all the CCB is not for children specifically and the info in it is not somethng that they would be "told" or would read themselves. the CCB is/was prepared to provide the attorneys of JW parents with some useful advice and info. (I don't find it very useful myself but thats just my opinion.)
I really don't think as I just stated in my previous post, that ANYONE is claiming that JWs or JW children are "normal." Normal means by definition to fall within the majority of a population or to adhere to social convention. Given that the majority of persons are viewed as walking in unrighteousness, the heart of JW theology and culture strive to make clear that JWs should not be exactly like persons of the world.
But just because they are not Normal in many ways, they are not also ABNORMAL in EVERY WAY. The fact is that in many ways they ARE NORMAL. More specifically when it comes to the entire range of activity and interests that a JW child or teen has they probably spend more of their daily hours in what would be considered "normal" activities or pursuing normal interests than they do in the activities or interests that make them different from the majority population.
direct and cross-examination questions in child custody cases.
wtb&ts, page 42.
"be careful that they [jw children being questioned] don't get the impression that they are in a demonstration at the circuit assembly, when they would show that the first things in life are service and going to the kingdom hall.
Hi Abandoned,
Moshe's point didn't seem like it needed a specific reply from me. The point may be valid but the answer seems obvious doesn't it? I mean, the cases where a mainstream faith was an issue in child custody battles occurred only when one of the parents adopted a faith that is viewed very oppositionally, such as one parent becoming Jewish or Muslim, for example while the other parent remained mainstream. Otherwise, such mainstream faiths are rarely an issue. thus no need for a brochure by these religions for this issue. JWs have of course unique aspects of their religion, especially in the areas of holidays, blood or medical treatment, patriotism and civic instruction, shunning and socialization, which have served as targets for evaluating whether the religion or continued religious training would be detrimental in some way to the relationship between parent and child or in some cases, whether it might be detrimental to the child himself. Additionally, being a minority religion, even though fairly well known by reference by the judiciary and attorneys, JWs are poorly understood. So it is only natural that the Society would prepare some information which it believes to be helpful to JW parents facing child custody disputes.
As for Mary, when it is obvious that someone cannot be reasoned with it seems pointless to attempt it. Someone who begins their post stating that JWs are "religous fanatics" pretty much demonstrates that they have strong intractable opinions about them. Mary's post is full of blanket generalizations that are belied by the actual facts and experience of many Witnesses. She claims, for example, that Witness kids are not allowed to have normal social contact with non-Witness kids. It isn't clear what she would consider "normal" but it seems that anything short of full-blown acceptance and peer-to-peer relationships would be considered abnormal. Certainly, many Witnesses not only have normal (casual) acquaintances with non-Witness schoolmates, neighbors and workmates, but many of them have close non-Witness friends.
She cites a lot of her own first-hand observation and experiences and bases her assertions on these. I could also cite my own personal experience which in my case included having almost exclusively, close non-JW friends, participating in extracurricular activities in school, everything from Little League to Varsity Football to Prom and Homecomings, etc. to going to college pre-1995. But to extrapolate and make blanket generalizations based upon individual experiences is to commit a basic error in logical reasoning. I would submit that both Mary's and mine own experiences are atypical of most Jehovah's Witnesses.
As for her claim that "countless WT examples" show that Witness children can't have "normal interests" that is just stupid on the face of it. Pick up any Awake! magazine and you can read about various such activities, hobbies, and interests. Every Young People Ask article is practically about how it is fine for the person to have an interest in music, movies, literature and a thousand other things. Only for Mary if the Society adds counsel that warns about not being imbalanced in such things or avoiding such thngs that might be morally corrupting, apparently that makes it "abnormal."
Again it is just so stupid on its face. Very, very few Witnesses are all consumed with "theocratic things" or even "spiritual things." Such things may be all they discuss when it is "socially expected" like at the Kingdom Hall, etc. but take an Witness or two out for a bite or sit them down and you will find that they can tell you what is going on with their favorite sports team, what movies they want to see, what places they have travelled, what albums or artists they like, etc. etc. etc. And that is exactly the situation that the Child Custody Brochure is reminding the counsel or JW parent to do with the child -- to help them understand that in this situation of a child custody examination that they can feel free to talk about their OTHER interests. It is not a matter of hiding what is most important to them, their faith, nor is a mattter or trying to make them seem normal. JWs are not normal in many ways and can't be made to appear so. But neither are they abnormal in every way.
It is just so stupid to say that JWs HAVE to make up false interests or hobbies, etc. That is not what the Society is saying and it would be stupid to try and do. And in any case it is completely unnecessary as I have stated because all but maybe a handful of Witnesses have some non-JW activities, interests, hobbies, etc. The examples provided are only examples, not meant to be taken and used by persons if they are not really applicable. How silly!
As for the excerpts provided by Mary, every citation indicates a "balanced view" between theocratic pursuits and non-theocratic pursuits. For example one that she highlighted stated that "hobbies and other activities are not permitted to interfere with meeting nights." That obviously proves that one (the person referred to) DOES have hobbies and other activities. (Duh!) But Mary highlights it because she doesn't like that the Society advocates not letting such things interfere with the meetings. Similarly, Mary highlighted a quote which stated that a married couple put away "some" of their non-theocratic hobbies, etc. She ignores that it doesn't say "ALL" but only "some" of these activities.
Right or wrong, the Society's viewpoint has always been to place "kingdom pursuits" first, AND to enjoy non-theocratic living in a balanced and moderate way that doesn't interfere with that first priority.
direct and cross-examination questions in child custody cases.
wtb&ts, page 42.
"be careful that they [jw children being questioned] don't get the impression that they are in a demonstration at the circuit assembly, when they would show that the first things in life are service and going to the kingdom hall.
Carpenter,
No one is denying that for Witnesses their faith and theocratic activities are not of primary importance or that the goals of full-time service aren't what are emphasized in the literature or from the platform. That viewpoint is sure to be revealed by the JW parent themselves if not opposing counsel.
At issue in this thread is whether the CCB's statements are meant to foster deception or not.
IF the the CCB stated something like "Make sure that they don't say that their (the children's) faith is of primary importance" then in that case it would be contradictory to the Society's publications and JW culture and also it would be asking the children to deceive the court.
BUT THAT is clearly NOT what the CCB states:
"Be careful that they [JW children being questioned] don't get the impression that they are in a demonstration at the circuit assembly, when they would show that the first things in life are service and going to the Kingdom Hall. Show hobbies, crafts, social activity, sports, and especially plans for the future.
"Be careful they don't all say that they are going to be pioneers. Plans can be trade, getting married and having children, journalism, and all kinds of other things. Maybe you can show an interest in art and the theatre. They must be clean, moral, HONEST, but with interests you would expect from other young people." [CC: emphasis]
It can't be any more clearer that what is being told to counsel or the JW parent is to ensure that the child understands that they are to relate the whole story of what their interests are and what their plans are. In the vast majority of cases, this will not be full-time service and ALL JW children have "outside" interests which they can share with the court evaluators. This is not deception it is accuracy.
Of course, opposing counsel if they are savvy and prepared can reiterate the point that while JW children may have the other pursuits that the constant message and the most socially (among JWs) approved goals are that of full-time service.
I get that most lay persons don't understand the counsel and what the information is saying. Because this material is so easily misread, especially with those already holding a predisposition to do so, it is one of the reasons the CCB is available by request and not just a pamphlet widely distributed among JWs.
------
Children are rarely asked to give testimony directly to the court in child-custody disputes. Normally the court relies upon an examination conducted by professionals. These interviews are lengthy enough and the ones conducting them generally skilled enough that no amount of preparation would be able to hide the fundamentals about the child's views, goals, attitudes, etc.
-----
Every witness in a trial is prepared by counsel or some other expert. If counsel doesn't prepare their witness they are not doing their job. The difference between "coaching" which is unethical and prepping the witness is that with prepping the witness you familiarize them with the situation of giving testimony, review their direct examination and the likely cross examination questions and address other aspects of their testimony like body language and so forth. Coaching a witness is rehearsing a witness to the point where they are not giving their own testimony but answers that originate with someone else.
raised 4 kids in jw religion.
none are baptized and all are now adults.
they all have their own issues to this day from the crap that they were raised in.. anyone else share this similar history?
How old are the kids?
You can never go back and relive the past. The best direction is forward. You can do a lot to making up what you feel you did wrong by moving ahead. Shower them and the grandkids with love. Celebrate holidays and whatever you didn't do as a JW to the hilt.
As for exploring their spirituality or discussing religion, God, etc. let these topics arise naturally. If you have strong views on these now share them, but in a less authoritative way than you might have as a JW. If you are still re-formulating your ideas about these things don't be afraid to tell your children that you don't have all the answers and encourage them to share their own views and to engage in their own exploration. Maybe if they express that they would like to attend some different churches or learn about some different faiths, let them know that you are willing to do it with them.
best wishes,
Eduardo
