We believe it is wrong for someone to get paid for preaching
Note what the Bible Gateway commentary says about 1 Timothy 5:17:
. "Not only had God chosen them, but they had proved themselves to be devoted to the work. On the other hand, as verse 18 indicates, those called elders were to be supported financially (or perhaps "materially," since we do not know what form this support would have taken) by the church for their service. Double honor, therefore, brings together respectful submission to authority and remuneration.
The full-time minister's right to remuneration was not an innovation but a well-established tradition in the early church. Paul supports his teaching by appealing to the Scriptures. First comes a citation of Deuteronomy 25:4, which originally provided that threshing oxen be allowed to eat from the field in which they were working. Paul had applied this text earlier, in 1 Corinthians 9:9, to argue for the right to material support from that community.
A second citation applied the teaching of the Lord to the matter; in Jesus' opinion those working for the kingdom of God deserve to be supplied by those benefiting from their ministry (Mt 10:10; Lk 10:7). This principle probably derives from God's regulations for provision for the priests and Levites, who had no lands to till and whose responsibilities as ministers of God occupied their whole time (Num 18)."
It's not wrong to be compensated for ministering, as Paul showed at 1 Timothy 5:17-19, which read: 17" The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. 18 For the Scripture says, "Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain," [1] and "The worker deserves his wages." [2]
He simply declined so as not to impose a possible burden on the church. But, as he explained, it would not have been wrong for him to accept remuneration.
Slightly off-topic, but I just wanted to throw that in.
Back on main topic, I agree with Euphemism - while jws may be harmful, I cannot support a ban on their activities.