UKC

This weekend, yet again, we were visited  by Jehovah's Witnesses. I'm sure I am considered an 'easy target', an 'ex-pat' identified via  the phone-book. However, I've been here over 30 years and am probably, more french  than  the locals ! 

On this ocassion, the usual 'couple' were accompanied by a child, a boy of 11/12.  I usually just give them a smile  and a 'no thank-you, from which they would never  dream that I'm a 'devout atheist' !  This time I attacked ! I forced them to defend the fact that they had brought along a young child ! They were obviously prepared for this and the young lad came out with a polished  and well learned  piece about how happy he was, how happy his mother was and that it was his free choice to become a Jehovah's Witness. You would have a hard job to produce a more clearly  indoctrinated individual ! 

I consider myself to be 'a nice guy' and I usually just brush off these people as poor dilushioned, weak  sheep but seeing what their misguided beliefs could do to a vulnerable young child  really  made me feel  physically ill.  Parents are free to raise' their offspring in any loony  faith they choose, which is already bad enough, but using them as a means to spread their retarded view of society on others is totally unacceptable.

 

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

If you have the energy, it would be interesting to try and get them "off piste" next time by asking about something they won't have prepared for but you have.

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

A major part of their faith is to spread the word.

Why would a child, being brought up in that faith, be excluded from this?

After all, as your experience proves,  having a child along doesn't make their arguments any more convincing.

In reply to MG:

Offer to lend the lad a few jazz mags while you talk to the parents ?

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

Years ago, spent an hour or so with my brother (now a priest) on the doorstep. They only know bits of the bible, so when they quoted something, he would say "but what about..." eventually they said "We'll have to be going" - considered that a victory!

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

I do agree with your sentiments.
As a parent I feel I have a duty to try and show my children various experinces and ways of living, so they can make their minds up.
However its very difficult.
I often wince when I see people indoctrinating their children into the cult of the outdoors, winching some 2 year old up a climb or some kid sat in a climbing hut, totally pissed off to have no WiFi.
Bringing kids up, so long as you know that whatever you do will be wrong, in someones eyes.

In reply to baron:

Until a relatively recent European court ruling, the French had the good sense to consider  the Jehovah's Wintnesses a sect. Who says sect, says children in danger and this is  clearly the case.

 

https://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/07/05/jehovahs-witnesses-and-freedom-o...

 

If you take the time to read the article, you will understand  that the ruling has more to do with taxation than children's rights !

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

Surely all religions are sects.

Why pick on one religion?

In reply to Mark Kemball:

How ironic. I'm not sure that your brother being part of a watered down version of the same fantasy is much of a victory...

In reply to baron:

I chose the Jehovah's Witnesses following  recent events that I experienced. 

On a broader scale, is there an organisation more historically undefendable  than the Catholic church ? 

In reply to baron:

Well no, of course they are not. Otherwise the word wouldn't mean what it does, would it? 

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

While I certainly wouldn't defend the Catholic church there are many catholics who are disgusted by what their church has done.

It's possibly the same for many religious people.

In reply to Mike Highbury:

If you can define the witnesses as a sect I suggest that all religions are indeed sects except for the first one.

In reply to Mike Highbury:

Some cults or sects just become more popular than others. Their basis and formation vary little. 

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

British Empire?
Nazi Party?
Teletubbies?

In reply to baron:

But it is rotten to the core and at the highest levels.

Asking an imaginary being for forgiveness, isn't really the same as making sure those within your cult see jail time for being pedos. 

In reply to summo:

I don't disagree with you about the horrible goings on in the Catholic church but many of its rank and file members are not guilty of any crime and would like those who are guilty to be punished.

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

Here comes my tumbleweed contribution of the day: Philosopher Karl Popper's "paradox of tolerance" states that if a society has no limits to its tolerance, eventually that very tolerance will be seized or destroyed by those who are intolerant. In order to maintain a tolerant society, Popper assures us, society must be intolerant of intolerance. As a society, are we rapidly heading towards an intolerance of tolerance, or a tolerance of intolerance?

In reply to J1234:

Mercifully, all three of these have disappeared.

The Catholic church still exerts an evil and perverted influence over humanity.

In reply to baron:

Of course.

But when the organisation as a whole is protecting and covering up, it's a given that there are uninvestigated pedos out on the streets right now. How does anyone know if their local priest is a pedo or not. 

They should open the doors and out the lot of them. How can a church knowingly risk kids now, but letting them roam streets, run Sunday schools etc.. 

In reply to baron:

That would be an extraordinary view of the development of human culture and civilisation but it's an opinion so I guess that you can hold it.

In reply to J1234:

True that.  Though in case of illness or injury that requires it, there are a lot of JW's who would rather allow their child to die than consent to a simple blood transfusion.  That is somewhat less understandable imo.

In reply to baron:

Sect is to religion as weed is to plant. The line between the two is very much a value judgement.

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

I was brought up as a Jehovas Witness ages 7-12 by my mother, my step father is an atheist so didnt get involved. I wasnt into it. My mother was encouraged to home school me, the family had to attend meetings 3-4 times a week and you were encouraged to socialise only with other JW's. I wasnt fond of knocking on doors as i would see other kids i knew and clearly be very embarrassed about it. When we were a little older my brother and I pointed out a lot of glaring contradictions in it all and eventually my mum left. Whole thing definitely created a lot of problems for me later in life. 

If that kid says he is happy, then fair play, he may form his own opinions later on or stay in the congregation for his entire life, but i wasnt and i was forced into it for quite a few years which was wrong and i think that is where the problems are. Id already made up my mind about it all but had to go along with it anyway as i was still ''just a child''. 

Later in life ive read into a lot of horror stories about it all, all of which are believable, but nothing that you wouldnt find in any other religion about. They're no different to anything else out there really, if a little more controlling than most western religions. 

If they ever knock on your door, just tell them youre disassociated and had to move house because you were being harassed by the elders. They'll soon piss off

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

There's a kingdom hall just up the road from my parents, on land owned by a JW farming family - I went to school with one of the sons.

Nice enough guy in himself. He was excused from RE lessons - while the rest of us were subjected to learning about Christianity, Islam and so on, he was allowed to sit in the library and read a book!

Occasionally, we got visits from them at home - generally politely told we weren't interested.

I was brought up as a Catholic, against my will - caused no end of argument with my Mum, until she finally gave up forcing me to go to church, where I mainly just sat at the back in sullen silence, wondering why I was wasting an hour of my life each week for something that no-one could give me any proof of the existance of and, to my mind, seemed to be one of the biggest causes of war and suffering ever invented.

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

I've only ever had a visit from them once, when I was about 18, and annoyingly, obnoxiously scathing about religion in general. I stood and talked to them on the doorstep for just over 40 minutes. They gave me two copies of the Watchtower and another pamphlet about how to judge the accuracy of historical sources. I said that I'd love for them to come back and we could discuss each one.

I read everything cover-to-cover, twice, highlighting passages and writing comments in the margin, which spilled onto the pages of a notebook I had when I ran out of space.

 

They never came back.

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

I don't think the JWs have a reputation for anything sinister - and they will go away if u are firm enough. Their religion may be seen as repressive but it does offer a strong social network, values and morals etc - a structure to live by.

Its incorrect to imagine that a child raised outside of any religion is 'free'. The current generation is slave to IT/media pressures and desperately consumer oriented. I assure you any teenager in possession of a smartphone is a brainwashed addict - my own 13yr old included.

 

In reply to Mark Kemball:

Please don't try to tell me that JWs are somehow inferior to any other branches of Christianity. I don't know whether your brother is a Roman Catholic priest or an Anglican one. What I do know is that JWs base their beliefs totally on their interpretation of the Bible. A lot of Catholic beliefs such as Purgatory and miracles due to the intercession of Saints have no Biblical basis at all. Live and let live is what I believe in. If the worst that JWs do is annoy you by coming to your door then I don't see much harm in them. At least they don't use fatwas to condemn people to death for mocking their religion. By the way, I don't have any religion but my parents were members of the Church of Scotland

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

To me they’re one of the more understandable branches of Christianity.  For someone as anti religion as me the JWs really split my opinion.

If they actually beleive in thier faith, saving others by bringing them to the faith is the kindest thing they can do.

To me their position is at least understandable, unlike that of the various weak partial believers who will defend their church and its exceptional (under the law) influence, but don’t really have certainty in their beliefs.

Mind you it’s much nicer to share the world with weak believers than strong believers.

My tolerance of their conviction stops when they would allow a child to die for want of a medical procedure.

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

J.W.s are dealing with their own pedo priest 'nonce-gate' or rather dealing with the aftermath of not dealing with it - worldwide. Ask them about that next time they drop round for a nice chat about Jesus and the end of the world. 

They are totally nuts, authoritarian, sex obsessed fundy millennial death cult - souce grew up in it - but on the other hand they are super pleasant, positive and active in their christianity. It's weird that you can't have one without the other.

Also that's the unfortunate part of freedom of religion up close and ugly I'm afraid, the alternatives are much uglier.

D

 

In reply to LeeWood:

I used to be rude to them much of the time, but I'm not proud of that now.  They will invariably go away immediately if you just tell them you're not interested and ask them politely to go.  I find them *far* less pushy than either 'chuggers' or people trying to persuade you to switch your gas/electricity/broadband/etc provider.  (Is there a catchy name for them?)

A strong social network that can be yanked out from under people at the drop of a hat should they fail to toe the line and find themselves "disfellowshipped", leaving them extremely isolated and vulnerable.  (And bearing in mind they're encouraged not to mix with those outside the religion, there's a good chance they'll be suddenly be getting blanked by *entire* social network, family and all.) Friends and relatives who fail to 'shun' them could face the same treatment themselves.  'Repressive' is a good word for it really, it's pretty brutal.

In reply to deepsoup:

Yes. Wankers.

 

In reply to deepsoup:

Agreed - there is the downside. I wonder if recruits are made aware of this before they sign-in ?? But while it lasts they have stronger bonds than a climbing club … I suspect. If we quit climbing (and eventually following it as an interest) then we would become 'outsiders',; there's no hierarchy to impose  - it would be a natural consequence.

I wonder if joining up with JWs and being a climber are mutually exclusive - anyone know someone who does both ? 

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

If you attacked them about bringing along a child then I think you went about it the wrong way. I always invite them in and then pick apart their arguments. If there is a child present then I ask them why they believe in God and had they thought about other religions or even no religions. They don't bring children round to me anymore after one of them agreed with me. You want to indocrinate your kids fine but don't get upset when I try a little de-programming

In reply to LeeWood:

Yes, and pretty accomplished too.

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

Quickest way to get rid of JWs is to propose praying together - with you in the lead. They use a specific address - i.e.. Jehovah / Yahweh - and if you don't then it could be communication with the devil

In reply to Mike Highbury:

Likely a struggle for whoever it is. Respect. Big pressures not to associate with normals + big frowns all around about seeking out physical risks and challenges from top down, also if you are young and able bodied, the ministry is supposed to be the focus, discouraged from higher education, career etc, because saving souls is more important as we live at end of world....any day now...

D

 

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102008083

Just tell them that you used to be a JW and have been disfellowshipped and they have to keep away - it's like kryptonite! 

In reply to Mike Highbury:

 

 

Schisms of shisms since paleothithic sun worshipping died out.

D

 

 

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

OK. I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing with you but, aren't you using a selective argument here? If you attack JWs for bringing along a child when they are trying to "spread the word" what are your views on people having young page boys and flower girls at a religious church wedding ceremony? Aren't they also being subjected to witnessing a marriage ceremony "before God/Christ" and being expected to take part in it in their "official" roles?

Just a thought. 

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

My wife’s father is a JW, and when they were still married, he regularly beat the shit out of his wife (now my mother in law), financially & mentally abused her and tried to indoctrinate the kids. The church’s response when she went to them for help? Telling her that it’s a sin to get divorced and that it must have been her fault for driving her husband to what he did. 

I’ve never met the prick and never want to, and any church that thinks condoning that sort of behaviour can get bent. 

In reply to Trangia:

 

Just a thought ?  Well not a very well thought out one !

You had to be there and hear what the child said to appreciate just how much he had been indoctrinated.

Page boys  / flower girls at a wedding are most likely  just accessories. Chances are no one attending really believes any of the God stuff. I really don't think you can compare the two.

 

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

I always tell them we're Jewish (I hope this isn't anti-Semitic, Mike), a bloke I served my apprenticeship with told me this was the best way to get rid of them.

They usually thank me and move on.

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

You seem to have a problem accepting such belief - is it really so bad ??

In reply to LeeWood:

In my original post, I do classify myself as a 'devout atheist'.

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

That's a very heavy statement - and a number of people agree with you. Your rationale?

In reply to Footloose:

Do you have a couple of hours to spare?

You're unlikely to ever see the case for the Catholic Church as a force for evil better presented than in this debate on the telly:  youtube.com/watch?v=JZRcYaAYWg4&

In reply to deepsoup:

Well done ! 

I'd forgotten about that ! Saved me from getting into a long-drawn-out debate that's been done to death on here so many  times ! 

In reply to Pyreneenemec & deepsoup: It's a deep and divisive debate, for sure, and not one to pursue here, as you say. I'm not saying I disagree with you. I reserve my right, however, to be intolerant of your intolerance.

 

In reply to krikoman:

We have a mezuzah, a glance at that and they move on.

And you are welcome to join, I'll bring the knife.

In reply to Dauphin: 

So I understand but you'd have to ask him; assuming that you know who he is/they are, of course.

 

In reply to Baron Weasel:

Disfellowed, is that anything like being de-flowered?

In reply to Mike Highbury:

 

I'll pass on that if it's OK.

It might be old and wrinkled, but I'm very attached to it, and it to me, (and intend to keep it hat way). 

 

In reply to Pyreneenemec:

Next time just ask

”Jehova? Whats he ever done on Grit?”

In reply to Pete Houghton:

Haha. Yes, been there. My red-penned copy of Watchtower must have been waiting by the door for months before I finally binned it. 

Recently they called round when my wife was in, and they played her a video on a tablet - a far more efficient way of talking at without discussing. Need to get me a "disfellowshipped" window sticker because they don't give a fiddlers about the "cold callers" one.