so i was just reading a thread and came across a completely new jw 'rule', that of not being allowed to go fishing!..
at least it's new to me as i always enjoyed fishing as did others in my old congregation.
anyone else heard of this or had this imposed on them in they're jw lives?.
That would totally be ironic - Jesus calling his disciples to be "fishers of men", and JWs not allowed to go fishing.
If it were true, and I find it highly unlikely that it is, that might well be the straw that breaks the camel's back with a lot of JWs who enjoy leisurely days fishing.
my son was saying he seen this episode the other night.
i checked my local cable and it is not on for the coming week but i will make sure to pvr it when it comes on.
this is the second one deadly devotion has done about the jw's.
William, check out the link here:
http://www.investigationdiscovery.com/tv-shows/deadly-devotion/
The excerpt on the right with the title "The Psychological Toll Shunning Takes on Peoples' Lives" is from the episode.
my son was saying he seen this episode the other night.
i checked my local cable and it is not on for the coming week but i will make sure to pvr it when it comes on.
this is the second one deadly devotion has done about the jw's.
We save Deadly Devotion on our PVR.
The most recently aired episode in Canada was about Robert and Janet Bryant and their four children. This case was discussed at length on JWD when it first occurred, and Dave Malone (seven006) actually took it upon himself to attend the funeral and initiate contact with Janet's sister, Sharon Roe.
this has been a controversial issue among doctors and medical ethicists.
i think it basically comes down to the fact that physicians have a responsibility to establish the presence of informed consent.
is it really possible for a person to give informed consent if they are not accurately informed?.
As I understand it, the ethics around the right to informed consent are with regard to the patient consenting to medical interventions on their behalf, and having the risks and benefits of having such interventions performed on their behalf.
There is no opposite ethical position of "informed refusal". A patient can refuse due to misinformation that they've gathered themselves. They can refuse because they don't like the practitioner. They don't even need a reason to refuse.
Having said that, it would be really helpful to have some kind of resource for medical personnel to utilize when they are discussing blood transfusions with JW patients. Personally, I don't think it would be unethical to include information that raises questions regarding what JWs have been taught, without sounding like undue influence.
just have to rant here for a bit.. i was on the phone earlier with my dub sister.
she was telling me how her daughter, my niece, just met a "nice man" (i take it he is a good dub), that things were going good and that if things go as plan they would probably be married this coming summer.
now this is after my niece just got out of a dysfunctional marriage of 20 years and their divorce was just finalized this last november.
I agree that there's pressure for dating JW couples to jump into marriage quickly before they get sexually involved. I'm wondering though if there might be some financial pressure as well - pooling resources, only having to pay for one residence, etc. depending on how your niece fared in the divorce.
Then again, some people can't stand being alone - they are terrified of being alone and will jump at the first chance to get back into a relationship. There's lots of pressure in JW-land, and I think some JW women prefer to have the decision-making responsibility in someone else's hands, and enjoy that role of Wifely Submission™.
jt further expounds on why we left the watchtower.
why we left the jehovah's witnesses part 2.
it was about 15 years ago.......... i was at a one day special event in woodburn or.
i was talking to lyman swingle about how the society could save some money.
it was a crazy idea ( to crazy to relate here)...............anyway he laughed and said to me.. "brother..........we have always had the money to do the things we needed to do.......and if we didn't.......we felt it was god's holy spirit telling us, it wasn't what we should be doing".......so...i said "so the money is like a barometer, no approval, no money"......he said "yea..... i guess you could say that!
Guy Pierce passed away some time ago... March 2014
https://www.jw.org/en/news/releases/by-region/world/guy-pierce-governing-body-member-dies/
just wondering about witness weddings and what is and isn't acceptable these days.
i know that toasts are a no-no, but i'm wondering about other things, such as:.
is it ok to have a best man?.
In my experience, a lot depends on the couple's JW background and their extended families.
When my BIL and his newly Baptized™ bride were married, her non-JW father was allowed to walk her down the aisle and her non-JW sister was allowed to be her maid of honour. The Elders™ didn't want to alienate these non-JW people by making JWs look like intolerant fanatics. Plus, the bride had been Studying™ with the wife of one of the stuffed shirt Elders™, so some influence had clearly been peddled.
However, when Mr Scully and I got married several months prior, I was not permitted to have my raised-JW but unbaptized best friend be my maid of honour. Had I insisted, we would have had to find another officiant and somewhere else to have the wedding ceremony.
i was really close to this family, it's.
been over 20 years since i saw them last.
but the husband an elder in his 70's .
It's the decent thing to send condolences to the family of someone who was a friend.
It's a shitty thing to do to exclude people from a funeral, to deny them the opportunity to grieve and share memories with other friends and loved ones.
You can be decent. Let the JWs be shitty.
ok, at our recent assembly, i noticed that there were quite a lot of brothers wearing beards.
not just the older dudes, but right across a range of ages, young men, middle aged men and older men.
is watchtower beginning to relax this rule at last?
I wanna see the Sisters™ showing up to Meetings™, Conventions™, etc. wearing SLACKS.
They don't get Privileges™ anyway, so why the heck not. Maybe they could get a doctor's note saying that the wind blowing up their skirts makes their fannies chap.
