Must watch: Australian reality TV captures the moment a Jehovah’s Witness mother abandons her son
avatar

A gay ex-JW named Chris is snubbed on Australian TV when asking his JW mother to attend his wedding

Let me start by saying I am not a fan of reality television.

Even when the format was relatively fresh and new back in the nineties I found it extremely grating to see people’s lives being gratuitously spilled out on television, with even the most tedious details made the subject of exaggeration and melodrama.

That said, Australians have just been treated to a snippet of reality TV that everybody must watch, because it provides the rarest of glimpses into something that, by its very nature, is very hard to catch on camera: shunning.

In a series titled Bride and Prejudice on Channel 7, a gay couple are followed as they make preparations for their wedding in California. Chris, an Australian who proposed to his American partner of three years, Grant, is seen approaching his JW mother, Yvonne, to ask if she will be attending. The answer is predictable, but the spectacle is nonetheless shocking and heart-wrenching.

Yvonne confirms that, not only will she snub the invitation, she will also not be speaking to her son’s soon-to-be-husband Grant… ever.

“Well, Chris, um… you know I’ve got very strong beliefs on that situation. So, um, for us, that’s not an option,” Yvonne says.

Clearly shaken but controlling his feelings with remarkable dignity, Chris asks his non-JW father, Geoff, whether he will similarly be snubbing both the event and his life partner. Geoff, a traditionalist who is seen sniggering when his son first announces the wedding, confirms that he too will be snubbing his son but for “different reasons.”

Chris’ parents, Geoff and Yvonne, are unmoved by their son’s plea for reconciliation

 

As difficult as it is to behold the spectacle of a family literally disintegrating on television over a difference of religious beliefs, it is extremely important that as many people as possible are exposed to this footage. Jehovah’s Witnesses continue to enjoy a false reputation as a mainstream, family-oriented group – a reputation that is completely at odds with reality.

The wider public needs to understand that the beliefs that Witnesses have pummelled into them from childhood very often lead to otherwise decent, compassionate, intelligent people doing deeply inhumane things, such as ejecting a child they once cradled as a baby – a child they claim to “love” – over a mere difference of opinion.

In this instance the shunning is due, at least in part, to one couple’s homophobia. It is notable that the aversion to gay people who refuse to suppress their sexuality is shared even by a man thus far not indoctrinated by Watchtower.

It can certainly be said that Watchtower does not hold the monopoly when it comes to endorsing the Old Testament command that gay people are worthy of execution. (Leviticus 20:13) There are any number of Christian fundamentalist denominations who eagerly join Jehovah’s Witnesses in suggesting you deserve death if you are in a loving relationship with someone of the same gender.

But the truth is, the pain and heartache so clearly evident on Chris’ face is shared by countless individuals who find themselves at odds with their Jehovah’s Witness upbringing. You do not need to be gay or lesbian in order to experience the crippling devastation of having your mother or father turn their back on you, as I can personally attest.

All you need to do is stop being a Jehovah’s Witness.

I, for one, am extremely proud of Chris for allowing this extremely emotional exchange to be captured on camera and I applaud the bravery and dignity with which he handled the hammer-blow.

Let us hope that the pain and hurt he experienced will serve as a loud warning to anyone who had been previously duped into believing that Jehovah’s Witnesses are “pro-family.” Yes, Jehovah’s Witnesses are capable of tremendous love, but it is a love that must come with strings attached. Loyalty to a group of men in New York will always trump all other considerations.

 

Author of The Reluctant Apostate, now available from Amazon in hardcopy and on Kindle.

 

Further reading/viewing…

Bookmark the permalink.

183 Responses to Must watch: Australian reality TV captures the moment a Jehovah’s Witness mother abandons her son

  1. Openmind says:

    Why do you use the word ‘unfortunately’?

  2. Openmind says:

    Where has that first comment gone?!

    • Cedars says:

      I deleted it, as it violated the religious neutrality requirement of our commenting guidelines.

      • Openmind says:

        Thought so, but thanks for letting me know.
        BTW, your book is brilliant, thanks so much for all your hard work. I finished it in 2 days being unable to put it down.
        It’s so informative and at times heart wrenching. A blighted and all too familiar upbringing.
        The book is now passed on to somebody else in a long line of requests for it but I have demanded it
        back! An invaluable reference book which will
        most definitely be used. Thanks again!

        back! It will most definitely be used for reference
        in the future. Thanks again.

        • Openmind says:

          What happened there?! Wretched small phone!!

        • Cedars says:

          Thanks! Glad you’re enjoying it! 🙂

        • May I just say, I am not a writer but it is a bit offensive to me to praise someone for doing a spectacular job writing his heart and soul down for his readers to enjoy, and then lend his hard work out to others. It’s one thing to lend out books that have been around for a while who’s circulation is actually In a public library. But John Cedars has a family to feed and each book actually sold helps him with his needs and responsibilities. Please consider more than just lending new authors books out. Keep it, treasure it, and promote his hard work! He is important enough to also support when he has put his entire life out there for all to see.

          Just concerned is all not trying to be harsh… ❤

          ❤️That One Girl❤️

          • Openmind says:

            My reasons for loaning out the book:-
            I was raised as a Witness in a very dysfunctional family which my parents managed to keep hidden from the congregation even though mother a pioneer and father an elder. Result – a terrible childhood. I moved away from home believing and hoping that a new congregation would prove to me it was the ‘truth’. In my twenties I began to see the ‘cracks’ in all aspects of JW living and system of beliefs aswell as some very nasty and vindictive people, just like in my old congregation. Please don’t get me wrong, there are many, many good JW’s out there, blinded though they might be.
            I was able, with great effort and necessary secretiveness, to form a circle of reliable people to turn to when I left. I later married, very happily, and we raised a wonderful, well balanced and successful family.
            I was never disfellowshiped and never swayed my family either way in order for them to have relationships with my side of the family. Since adulthood I’ve had many discussions with my children regarding my JW life which leaves them alternating between being surprised, appalled and even disgusted. Lloyds book, for me, puts it all in a ‘nutshell’, and I don’t think I am doing him a disservice in giving it to my family to read. They are devouring it and understanding so clearly what I have so often spoken about.
            I also have a good deal of friends who may ordinarily not purchase the book themselves but are also eager to read it. I hope Lloyd will be only too pleased I am doing this as I hope others will also. I know Lloyd has financial family responsibilities but I’m sure one of his prime objectives is to get his carefully researched and gathered information ‘out there’.
            Sorry for the long post!
            Best wishes,
            O.

  3. armegeddonman says:

    He knew darn well what his parents reaction would be. By agreeing to be filmed he was shoving it in their face. That’s why I too hate reality shows. He wants to be played the victim.

    • Aaron says:

      Right on.

    • twistedsister69 says:

      @armegeddonman
      …Like he’s NOT the victim in this situation???

      • Big B says:

        @ twistedsister69;

        Chris, as well as many others, have been made victims of this tyrannical cult. That being said; he would have died of cardiac arrest had his mom said, “sure dear, I would love to attend the wedding and buy you a gift, as long as it’s not too expensive”.

        However, as we all watched the footage, this was not the case and would never be the case for a true practicing Jehovah’s Witness to acknowledge a ‘gay’ marriage much less attend one. If Chris was expecting some sort of recognition for his choice of partners then there were at least two delusional people in the room; namely Mom and Chris himself.

        Truly, a sad state of affairs.

    • Cedars says:

      Ah yes, let’s cover over and conceal religious abuse. Let’s keep it in the shadows and away from the public gaze.

      Let me guess armegeddonman – are you religious?

      • GratefulThinker says:

        Hear Hear!

      • FactsNotFiction says:

        In a way I agree with armageddonman. The TV show was designed to make Chris’s parents look bad. Very staged. But that is what Reality TV is all about. Sensationalism.

        However I was thinking that there is not a lot of difference between a reality TV show and Religions like JW’s

        Reality TV use sensationalism and controversy to bring in viewers and increase their revenue.

        Religions use sensationalism and fear to bring in members and increase THEIR revenue.

        They are kind of one and the same. JW’s do the same thing to others, shoving it in their face (Their religion and beliefs) and trying to make people feel unworthy, just as Chris did to his parents.

        Hmmm not a lot of difference.

    • GratefulThinker says:

      The cynic in me agrees with you 100%… but being able to relate personally to the situation, it still made me angry…

  4. Aaron says:

    To be fair, the son should not subject his parents with taht important request on a trashy reality TV.

    • Cedars says:

      The son can do whatever the hell he likes, as can the parents who were not covertly filmed – they agreed to be on the show. That’s the best you’ve got?

      • Wideawake says:

        I have to say as they agreed to being filmed they cannot protest..I think the mother though upset gave the usual litany supplied by her elders, publications etc….I felt for her…but I was not sorry for her…I would never reject my child even if in the same position my children would probably reject me..I was also impressed that the son asked later for us not to hate his parents..just the detestable mind controlling cult that micro manages his mothers actions, thoughts and feelings…this heartbreaking situation is going on all over the world for one reason or another and families are being decimated by seven men who are in control of their followers.

    • GratefulThinker says:

      To be fair, she could have refused to appear on Television…and will probably appear before a Judicial Committee for having done so…

    • FactsNotFiction says:

      I am sure the whole show is staged. All agreed to participate and probably got paid as well. Probably told what to say, and then it gets edited. I wouldn’t put to much credibility to such shows. However the point made is still the same. People who are stuck with views based either on social derived acceptability or religious dogma can damage family relationships for no reason.

      • Ren says:

        Staged or not this is the reality of being born into JW’s or being a child of JW’s. If you have the audacity to leave, or think something different than what you’re told to, get ready to live this scene out again, and again, until you’ve went through every JW friend and family member you have. It can have a devastating affect on people’s lives. That is the relevant point. Not how much of it is “staged.”

  5. GratefulThinker says:

    This episode has featured all over Australian news websites today and I was hoping it would find its way to this forum, too. It has certainly received a lot of comment on my social media page where I shared it… mostly comments expressing disbelief, disgust and abhorrence for the actions of this ‘mother’.
    As a gay man myself, I assure them that this is truly how JWs think, behave, talk and react to homosexuality – that woman could have been my own JW mother! It was like watching a bad demonstration sequence in the Service Meeting or Theocratic Ministry School! The whiney, self-pitying voice, the ‘holier than thou’ attitude, the ‘I’m SUCH a good Christian that even my own flesh and blood won’t make me waiver from the righteous path’ etc etc…
    Let’s hope that this sort of exposure, coupled with the publicity surrounding the Royal Commission here in Australia, helps to rip the veil of respectability away from the JWs.
    Having said that, my (also ex-JW) sister drily commented that in all likelihood, it will be used by the Organisation as further evidence of “The End” and Armageddon’s (or is it the Great Tribulation’s – I can’t recall the minutiae of this particular doctrine anymore?) impending outbreak… Governments turning against God’s people…blah blah blah, you know how it goes.
    I wish Chris and Grant many happy years together! (Cute couple)

    • twistedsister69 says:

      @GratefulThinker
      You nailed it! JWs garner support & sympathy by being such convincing play-actors. The whining. The self-pity. Always playing the victim. Cynically pulling at the heartstrings. Playing on emotions. DRAMA…DRAMA…DRAMA. “Pity me. I’m a poor, faithful Christian being thrown to the lions by the nasty Romans.” There should be an Academy Award in the “JW” category.

      • GratefulThinker says:

        Exactly! Don’t get me wrong, I too thought “Hmmmm, why on a reality TV show??”, but then I thought “Well hang on – the mother looks as if she is a willing participant in the filming’ and what an actress she was!
        Irrespective of Chris’ motives for appearing on the show, the underlying theme is still this: loyalty to the organisation comes FIRST, before all else.
        Perhaps I’m a bit biased or unduly influenced by the fact that I have gone through such a similar experience in my own life (though not on TV), dunno; as I said earlier, seeing this still made me see red and the bile flow!

        • twistedsister69 says:

          The fact that the mother appeared on the show proves another thing: JWs do like the “limelight”!

          • dee2 says:

            Maybe the mother wanted to give a witness about her great God Jehovah…….. remember Armageddon is coming real soon and Jehovah desires all to be saved and none be destroyed.

          • twistedsister69 says:

            Yeah. She’ll probably count it on her Field Service Report. ha

          • messenger says:

            I didn’t see the show yet, and I have to sleep now. Will look later. But here’s some real irony. What if the mother gets disfellowshipped for going on the show, talking to her son, and making the organization look bad? Because with JW RULES if her son was ever baptized elders can claim he disassociated himself, even if they didn’t DF him.

            Since this is public I bet the elders will want to jump right on it, and talk to her if he was ever baptized and they’re aware of the situation. At least they’ll want to let everyone know they HANDLED it. How would you like to be HANDLED? Don’t think they have a right to HANDLE me. So, I won’t let them.

          • twistedsister69 says:

            Absolutely Goddamm RIGHT!!! Those basTURDS have NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER to poke their filthy noses into ANYONE’S life.

      • Big B says:

        @ twistedsister69;

        Hey, maybe they can buy a fake ‘Oscar’ and display it with their other fake awards.

        The Witnesses want sympathy but are not willing to give any. But what do we expect from an organization that preaches ‘love for neighbor’ but really their love is ‘conditional’.

  6. alanv says:

    Yes I got mixed feelings on this. It certainly shows the view held by JWs, and of course its very sad she puts her religion before her son. The son Chris should have known exactly what his mums attitude would be. And of course JWs are not the only ones who are against gay marriage, I would guess half the world are. However if it helps wake up people to the JW shunning issue then I’m all for it.

  7. FactsNotFiction says:

    Unfortunately it is probable that “Jehovah” does not actually exist and is just an invention of men who use fear of him to control others.

    There will, of course always be men who want to do that. But the sad thing is how many people there are like Chris’s parents, who blindly go along with them and never question what these men teach.

    • Doc Obvious says:

      For Scientologists, instead of “Jehovah”, its “Xenu”. Same difference. Xenu, Jehovah. Just another new light special.

  8. Caroline says:

    Because I emailed my son’s fiance’ last summer and told her how I felt about the Society and the Bible, she went to the elders in her congregation and my son was not allowed to invite me to his wedding in November. But because his relatives (my brothers and their families) who live in the same city and not Witnesses were invited.

    Some of my oldest brother’s family went and some refused because of my not being invited. My younger brother and his wife who live 250 miles from there went to his wedding (not Witnesses either) and they were all shocked that I wasn’t invited and I had to go into the whole long explanation why I was not invited to my son’s wedding. They didn’t know until they got to the wedding and couldn’t understand why I wasn’t there. Many of the people attending asked my sister-in-law and my daughter why I wasn’t there and they assumed I didn’t go because I didn’t approve and it was a horrible situation for them all. It made it look like I didn’t go because I didn’t approve which was especially difficult since my daughter-in-law is black and he is white. It makes it look like I didn’t go because I am a bigot which I am not but since I didn’t go, that is what most of those people probably thought. Nobody else except my son and his wife and the elders knew why I didn’t go, so what does that make me look like?

    When people shun their families like at funerals and weddings and they think they are doing the right thing as far as that religion and God goes, but they leave a really bad taste in the mouth of those who don’t understand the underbelly or the reason for the shunning. For those that know why the shunned Witness wasn’t there was because they are being shunned, it makes the religion look bad.

    Funny thing is though when my husband died, I had plenty of relatives who came from far away to support me and they came to the Kingdom Hall and they aren’t even Witnesses. They were that nice to do that for me but Witnesses can’t do that for them.

    I have spread far and wide to as many people as I can how I was not invited to my own son’s wedding (and that was after they accepted $2,000 from me towards their wedding but never thought about sending any of that money back to me). Everybody I tell that story to, thinks the Witness religion is awful and I don’t make any bones about telling them to never get involved in that religion.

    That show will help spread it around how uncaring and unfeeling and arrogant that religion is and how arrogant it makes it’s followers.

    I know because I was the same way and that is why I can’t hate my son for what he did. I still love him and I know he’s on antidepressants and going to a shrink because of what that religion has done to him and also explains why he’s about 200 pounds overweight. That religion has made him choose between it and me and if he wanted to keep whatever little sanity he has left, he had to chose the religion over me.

    I know so many Witnesses who’s kids are disfellowshipped and it’s killing them that they can’t associate with them. This religion is made up of the most unhappiest people in the world, from my perspective.

    • Meredith J says:

      So sorry to hear that Caroline. What a bunch of opportunists. Watchtower makes them have no feelings for others and they just have no concept of hurt.

      • Caroline says:

        Meredith J, I think a lot of Witnesses don’t have feelings for others but I don’t believe that is the case with my son. I know that he really does love me but he thinks he’s saving my life (at Armageddon) if he doesn’t email me or call me or visit me etc. because the Society has convinced him that it’s the Organization that I have to be associated with or I will die at Armageddon and of course he’s afraid Armageddon will strike at any moment.

        I believe his having to treat me like that is killing him. I know he’d probably like to send me back the $2,000 but he’s was always strapped for money and I know full well that they don’t have it to send back to me.

        Going by my son, that is why I feel that most JW’s who have disfellowshipped relatives or friends, are very unhappy. If they could turn off their feelings, then I think they could be happy but I don’t believe that they can turn off their feelings. The only thing they can keep telling themselves is that if they keep it up, that their loved one will come back to Jehovah.

        My husband had a friend who told him before he died how she had listened to my husband many years ago when her father was disfellowshipped and my husband being an elder at the time, told her that no matter how hard it was that she had to shun her father and after 15 years of being shunned by her, he finally came back to “Jehovah”.

        She told my husband how she was so glad that she listened to my husband and kept up the shunning all those years because her father told her that the reason he came back into the “truth” was because he missed his daughter to much.

        The Society has those kinds of dramas all the time at assemblies and on jwbroadcasting and the Witnesses believe it and they are so afraid of going against “Jehovah” that they follow those instructions, no matter whether it makes sense or not. They trust “Jehovah” (the organization).

        It isn’t a matter of not feeling or caring. I think a lot of them hate it (having to shun loved ones) but go against their gut feelings, thinking that Jehovah knows better than they do and after a while, their feelings become seared.

        • dee2 says:

          [ “…..her father told her that the reason he came back into the “truth” was because he missed his daughter to much.]

          Why did the father leave the JWs in the first place?
          Was it because he no longer believed the WT’s teachings?

        • Meredith J says:

          Yes, you are probably right Caroline. Coincidentally, our son is called Chris, but he is the one still involved with the cult. Sometimes I do wonder what goes on inside his head. He is okay with us, but he makes it very firm on where he stands. I wonder whether he ever questions his going against his gut. Afterall it is a natural instinct to love your children and for children to love their parents. These parasites called the governing body members, make people act unnaturally and destroy their precious relationships with their families. Just like I’ve always said, it is not by accident but a purposeful act to break up families.

    • Winston Smith says:

      The JWs are one of the most hateful religions on earth today, and the sad thing is most of their members have no clue. Hatred is disguised as love in the JW dogma. The hatred that was forced on my psyche by being a JW caused me great psychological distress. I was never happy as a JW. I didn’t like myself when I was one. Now that I am fully awake, deprogrammed, and faded, I can finally express my love for my fellow humans to the extent I have always desired.

      Recently, one of my friends came out and told me he way gay (he was not a JW, ever). He said he had never said anything before as he was not sure if it would end our friendship. He says he has lost so many friends over his sexual orientation. I told him I had no issue with it because it didn’t change the good person I knew he was. Our friendship is stronger now since he is able to be completely honest. I am heterosexual, but I feel no threat to my masculinity when I am hanging out with my friend who is gay.

      People are people, whether they are gay, straight, bisexual, transgender, etc. Some people are good and kind. Others are rude and mean. But their sexuality doesn’t define their nature as good or bad people.

      I am reminded of these lyrics from a song I heard some 20-plus years. At the time I was a fully indoctrinated JW and cringed at the message, but now I can say it is true:
      “I knew he was different, in his sexuality
      I went to his parties, as a straight minority
      It never seemed a threat to my masculinity
      He only introduced me to a wider reality”

      WS

      • Rodger Goode says:

        Good man WS, I feel the same, I’m learning as I go. Went to a “Gay” bachelor party was alot of fun, I have learnt not to judge anyone, everyone deserves their space under the sun!

  9. Doc Obvious says:

    I believe that your sexual orientation is a personal matter and does not belong on national TV. The LGBT community received their rights in the United States Supreme Court and they should move on. Advertising your sexual orientation is none of my concern. The parents of their son are entitled to their opinion and should be left alone.

    • Cedars says:

      I’m assuming you’re just fine with straight couples “advertizing their sexual orientation” and appearing on television with their wedding plans?

      • dee2 says:

        ………..so heterosexuals do in fact advertize their sexual orientation after all.

      • Doc Obvious says:

        No. Personal matter. I invited some workmates to my JW wedding who were gay. They declined my invitation. They gave my wife and I a wedding gift at a later date. There was no animosity between the 3 of us. It was their decision.

      • Gardy says:

        Hi! I should said that enjoy reading your articles or posts but I cannot agree with you on that subject of homosexuality ! Everyone is entitled to have his/her beliefs and free to practice his or her religion! I don’t hate anybody for their sexual orientations but nobody should be forced or emotionally black mailed to assist to a wedding that they don’t agree with! Those parents have every right to refuse to attend their son’s wedding if that would make them feel uncomfortable! I love all my family members with all my heart but that doesn’t mean I had to be part of anything they want! Its unfair to criticize the parents of this man uniquely because they want to respect one of the core values of their bible based faith.

        • Winston Smith says:

          The question is whether or not the mother is being emotionally blackmailed through the JW dogma about homosexuality and whether she is making the choice of her own free will. If left to her own choice, without the JW influence, would she make the same decision? If without any undue influence she would make the same choice, then you are right: it is her decision to make.

          WS

        • Caroline says:

          Gardy, I am taking some classes at my local college called “Introduction to the Christian Greek Scriptures” and a couple days ago our professor related a story about a friend of his in our town. He was telling about how a friend of his was told by another friend of his how the first man was going to hell when he died and the first friend asked why and the 2nd friend says because he didn’t go to the right church.

          Why this was so funny is because they both belonged to the same religion (Lutheran) but one church was evidently the “right” church and the other one wasn’t.

          The professor was telling the story because he said there are 30,000 different “Christian” denominations in the United States and they all teach different doctrines of the same Bible.

          He was illustrating the arrogance that people develop because they think they have the only right way of doing this or that or the only right religion etc.

          I think the point of that television program is to illustrate people’s arrogance in not accepting of other people’s beliefs and life styles and that they are arrogant as to set the standard of what is right and wrong by the way that they believe.

          In other words they think that they are so smart that they can set the standard of what is right and wrong. It’s narrow thinking and ignorant thinking.

          It is a form of bigotry the same as somebody who is brought up by parents who hate the color of another person’s skin, thinking they are superior and Jehovah’s Witnesses are all taught that they have the only “right” religion and God is using them specifically in teaching the world about what is right and wrong. They are arrogant, the same as any other religion that also thinks they have the only right religion.

          I was always glad as a child that I wasn’t born a chicken because I knew that I would grow up and have my head cut off and thrown into the bowl of soup.

          I was so glad I wasn’t born a dog or a cat because I’d have to live outside in the cold and have crap to eat.

          I was so glad I was born a human. I didn’t understood why I wasn’t born a dog or a cat or a chicken but I never looked down on anybody who wasn’t a certain religion or a certain skin color but I sure felt sorry for the chickens thrown into our soup pot.

          In other words, people who judge other people for their religion or skin color are people I hate. I can’t help it.

          We don’t have a choice who we are born to and what color our skin was and how happy we are that we were born at all and we don’t have a choice who we are attracted to when we grow up.

          I can remember liking boys from the time I was 7 or 8 years old. It wasn’t a choice and the thought of kissing a female would be horrible to me so how can I judge anybody who is homosexual? It’s not in me and I don’t care what the Bible has to say about it.

          The Bible has to be proven to me to be from a perfect God first to make me judge other people by what it says and if that God is real and actually authored the Bible, I have absolutely no respect for that God and it’s condemnation of homosexuals is only a small part of the reason why I have no respect for that god if that God actually existed at all.

          • Gardy says:

            Caroline, I respect your point of view and won’t ask you to believe in the Bible or any deity! You and I should recognize that religions is a part of our society ! As in politics people have strong feelings about their beliefs no matter if they are rational or not! Anybody who chooses a system of belief or a religious group does it by convincing himself or herself that’s a better way of life. Jehovah’s witnesses might be brainwashed or sometimes arrogant by thinking they are the only ones in the “truth” but from an historical viewpoint isn’t that a characteristic of religion? People have killed and continue to kill in the name of religions, deities, and political ideologies. I think people have the right to stand for their ideas, values, and beliefs! Those parents have the right to refuse to attend any wedding that goes against their core values! Is it without undue influence? Probably not, because we are all the products of history and geography!

        • dee2 says:

          I wonder:
          When people speak about “one of the core values of their bible based faith” have they really read the Bible?

          Here are some more “core values of their bible based faith”:

          – Judges 19:
          A Levite man is a guest in the house of a Benjamin resident. Some men of the city surround the house and demand that the owner send out the guest so they can have sex with him. The owner begs them not to do such a thing to a guest of his, and says, “Here are my virgin daughter and my guest’s concubine. I will send them out and you can abuse them and do to them whatever you like. But don’t do such a disgraceful thing to the man!” (Judges19:24)

          That last sentence nicely contrasts the value attached to a man compared to the lack of value of the women that is evident in the previous sentence.

          In the finale to this story the guest throws his concubine out to the crowd, who serially rapeand abuse her all night. She died of the attacks. The guest only learned of his concubine’s death when he was leaving the house in the morning and stumbled across her body.

          This makes him quite angry, but he’s not at all repentant about the fact that he caused her death by considering her of such little value that he gave her to a crowd he knew would rape and abuse her. The woman was clearly considered expendable and of little value.

          – Genesis 19:
          The men of Sodom gathered around Lot’s house, and asked that he bring his two guests out so that the men can “know” them. This is frequently interpreted as a desire to gang rape the visitors, although other interpretations are possible. Lot offers his two virgin daughters to be raped instead.

          Lot is recorded as saying: “I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes.” Yet, even after this despicable act, Lot is still regarded as an honorable man, worth saving from the destruction of the city.

          For his bravery in trying to save his male guests by sending his daughters to getraped, Lot was favoured by God, and was saved from Sodom’s destruction by God’s angels (Genesis 19:11-13, 15-17,19). Lot is also described as just and righteous in the New Testament (2 Peter 2:6-8).

          God was apparently not critical of Lot for offering his two daughters to be raped. If he were, he might have decided to not save Lot and his family.

          Although the men of Sodom did not accept Lot’s offer, there is every indication he would have gone through with it if they had. There is no condemnation in the Bible, indeed no elaboration of any kind, related to Lot’s offer. Evidently the biblical author didn’t feel it was unreasonable enough to warrant comment.

          Allowing one’s daughters to be sexually assaulted by multiple rapists appears to be treated as a minor transgression, because of the low status of the young women.

          – Deuteronomy 22:28-29:
          Requires that a virgin woman who has been raped must marry her attacker, no matter what her feelings are towards the rapist.

          “If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife….”

          Nowhere in the scriptures is the woman defended. No one ever thinks to ask the woman how she feels about it. The woman has to go along with the marriage, she is not allowed to divorce. As long as the father of the rape victim got the ransom (50 shekels of silver – is that all the daughter is worth?) which the rapist must pay the father, the father didn’t care. He is essentially saying “she’s all yours, thank you for your business.”

          Rape is a crime under the current standards of morality and ethics in the western world. A father is required to report the rapist, not sell his daughter for 50 shekels and force her to marry her rapist.

          – Deuteronomy 22: 23-24:
          A rape victim was to be put to death for the crime of not screaming for help. A woman who has just gone through what is possibly the most horrific event in her life should be put to death. The bible does not give us any details as to whether the rapist held his hand over her mouth to prevent her from screaming or if the rapist told her that he would kill her if she screamed.

          • Gardy says:

            Dee2 I have read the Bible multiple times! Not only when I was a young man but also as an adult and using my critical thinking.
            So I understand your point! My point, however, is not about the intrinsic value of bible rules and practices! I am just trying to say that no matter what you think there will always be people who believe in the Bible as the word of God! And it goes without saying that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible.

          • dee2 says:

            Gardy,

            The Bible not only condemns homosexuality, it also commands that homosexuals be killed:

            Leviticus 18:22, 29: “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.
            For whoever commits any of these abominations shall be cut off from their people.”

            Leviticus 20:13: “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.”

            Do you agree with this?
            Would you kill a homosexual?

    • dee2 says:

      Agreed.

      A person’s sexual orientation is a personal matter, it’s nobody’s business.

      • Cedars says:

        “It’s nobody’s business.”

        More like: “we would rather not be reminded that there is such a thing as gay people.”

        • dee2 says:

          More like in the sense that an adult is entitled to his/her decision regarding his/her sexual orientation. It is not up to someone else to make that decision for them – it is a personal matter, a personal decision.

        • Doc Obvious says:

          I believe that there are gay people in the world and I appreciate that the LGBT community as whole went through the legal process to get their rights. I believe that being LGBT is a genetic disposition and it is not something you can just disregard as JW.org states. I even hired gay people to work at my place of employment. They are excellent workers.

          • Painfulreality says:

            ” I even hired gay people to work at my place of employment. They are excellent workers.” Wow. Are you saying gay people are excellent workers, like being gay makes them so. And you even “hired gay people” I am truly impressed.

      • Gardy says:

        Dee2, You and I can agree on the fact that our sexual orientation is a personal matter! I am against anybody or any religion that would kill or persecute someone for their sexual orientation, religious beliefs, and political ideologies. It should be also clear that nobody can force me to go to their wedding if I don’t want to be part of it ! It’s my absolute right to say I will not be part of a religion, a social group, a political party, or a cultural event. I want people to respect my choices as I am respectful of theirs. I might have my personal issues with the Watchtower or the Governing Body of the JW and some of their doctrines but I don’t hate them as individuals! I am fortunate enough to know that my family will never shun me for disagreeing with the watchtower! When it comes to some Bible parts where it is stated that people should be killed for some sexual practices or preferences we know that most christian denominations believe that these commands no longer applied to them! We live in a more tolerant society.

        • dee2 says:

          Gardy,

          [ ” When it comes to some Bible parts where it is stated that people should be killed for some sexual practices or preferences we know that most christian denominations believe that these commands no longer applied to them! WE LIVE IN A MORE TOLERANT SOCIETY.” ] (emphasis mine)

          I am puzzled that persons insist that the Bible is the inspired inerrant word of God, yet they are willing to go against a law which God himself gave.

          Why go against God’s law?
          Isn’t that law inspired of God so how can Christian denominations believe that God made a command that is no longer regarded as relevant/important? Is it that that law is no longer inspired of God hence its irrelevance?

          Isn’t God’s thinking and his laws superior to mankind’s thinking and mankind’s laws so why go against God’s law to accommodate to what society thinks?

          Psalm 18:30:
          As for God, his way is PERFECT: the word of the Lord is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him.

          Psalm 19:7:
          The law of the Lord is PERFECT, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.

          Isaiah 55:8-9:
          “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways”, declares the Lord. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are MY WAYS HIGHER THAN YOUR WAYS AND MY THOUGHTS THAN YOUR THOUGHTS.

          It becomes clear that what God wants from his people or what he doesn’t want them to do at any given time in history, seems to depend largely on what is generally happening or possible or acceptable in the world around them at the time.

          There doesn’t seem to be much constancy on the part of God over what is a very short timescale in his eyes yet this is the God who declared: “I am the Lord, and I DO NOT CHANGE” (Malachi 3:6)…………….proof that the Bible is a product of the culture, time and place in which it was written, and not the product of divine revelation?

          • Gardy says:

            Dee2,
            It’s a fact that the Bible is an expression of a culture and history! It was written by men who were bearers of cultural values, taboos, and prejudices. One cannot fully understand the Bible without taking into account its cultural and historical background . Even those who argue that the Bible is God’s inspired word don’t really believe in a mechanical inspiration . Moreover, the Bible in an eclectic book which lends itself to multiple and competing interpretations! No matter what you think there will always be people that believe in the Bible, the Quran, or some higher power . By example, Friedrich Nietzsche and others before him have foretold in vain the decline of religion and the rise of Atheism. God still didn’t die despite enormous scientific progress! Your non-belief is irrelevant for so many people who have chosen to go the opposite way! Myself, I don’t judge! I just respect people’s choices!

          • messenger says:

            dee2
            The people you refered to, that as you state, ‘go against God’s laws,’ include Christians in your mind, is that correct? In other words, you were not writing only about those practicing the Jewish faith were you?
            Christians are not under the mosaic law, according to Paul’s writings, and also according to other Bible writers. Also, Jesus claimed to have fulfilled the law-he having been the ultimate sacrifice. So, taking no part in killing homosexuals is not going against God’s law for Christians.

          • dee2 says:

            Gardy,

            Hopefully, you are not implying that I can’t question/challenge what Bible believers believe?

            There will always be believers:

            – People like the idea that death is not the end of them. The notion that they will be able to perpetuate, immortalize themselves after they die when God rewards them with eternal life in heaven is very enticing……….get over yourselves!

            – People have been taught for so long that they live in a godly universe, that a godless one is unthinkable and frightening to them.

            It frightens people to acknowledge that God did not write the Bible.

            It frightens people to acknowledge that God does not speak to anyone.

          • dee2 says:

            Messenger,

            This simply means that:

            1. A perfect God gave a flawed law. Even the Bible admits this:

            Hebrew 8:7 “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.”

            It is difficult to understand how the first covenant could have been flawed if Yahweh, the perfect one, had given it to the Hebrews.

            2. There is no constancy with God who declared that he does not change (Malachi 3:6). God is beginning to sound like the GB who are known for their ever changing doctrines.

            I find it interesting that Christians invoke the OT writings of Leviticus (Leviticus 18:22, 29, 20:13) when condemning homosexuality yet dutifully ignore the part about murder because society doesn’t allow this.

            Are Christians truly no longer under the Mosaic law with regard to homosexuality? Aren’t there also scriptures in the New Testament which demonize homosexuals though there may no longer be an explicit command to execute them?

          • messenger says:

            @dee2
            Again dee2 your claims are just yours…that’s all. Maybe you can rally the cries of those with a similar lack of experience in the areas of your assertions, but that’s all. You only know what you know, yet you speak as if you’ve experienced everything in the universe. Just because God doesn’t speak to you does not mean he doesn’t speak to any people. Assume, assume, assume…and call it reality. Doesn’t make it so. No one here, are anywhere, is asking you to believe nor does anyone seek to prove anything to you, as you frequently request. But your insistence that YOU know what a God -that you don’t know or believe in- does with other people is ridiculous. No one denies you have a right to make such claims…but I suggest making comments on things you have no experience with doesn’t make sense, it and gives no weight to your assertions.

          • messenger says:

            The point I’m making dee2 is why should I have Bible discussions with someone that doesn’t believe in, or if she does, she hates God? Come up with an intelligent response to that and maybe I’ll answer your question. But don’t hold your breath, since I can’t think of a logical response to that myself that would move me to respond.

          • dee2 says:

            Messenger,

            So I looked up the definition of
            Ass-u-me and this is what it states:
            Ass-u-me:
            Makes an ASS of U and ME.

            How do you know that I am assuming and that I do not have any experience with whether or not God speaks to anyone?

            It is because of having lots, and I mean lots of personal experience of this in my own life and having observed what has transpired in the lives of others why I came to this conclusion. On coming to this conclusion I then realized that it is I who has to figure out what I need to do from day to day.

            Further consider the claims of people who assert that God speaks to them:

            – The GB claims that God speaks to them yet their doctrinal changes are legendary. When is God going to finally tell the GB what the truth is so that these doctrinal changes will end?

            – Charles Taze Russell whose Bible studies formed the foundation of the Watchtower claimed that God had revealed things to him.

            At a sermon delivered by Russell in 1913, in San Francisco at a convention of Bible Students, Russell publicly stated:

            “I said that I had been in conference with the Great Master Workman, the Lord himself, and I have secret information through the Holy Spirit and guidance in respect to what the Bible says, and that contains all the truth, I believe, on every subject.”

            http://ctr-rlbible.com/?p=233

            Yet Russell’s end of the world predictions did not come true. According to Russell’s chronology:

            1799 – Last days began
            1874 – Start of Jesus’ invisible presence
            1878 – Jesus became king in heaven
            1914 – End of the world

            Yet the world has not ended the last time I checked.

            Charles Taze Russell was strongly convinced that God was revealing things to him yet his end of the world predictions were wrong.

            So how does a person know when God is revealing things to them so that they will be able to put forth correct doctrines?

            Does God make it unequivocally and explicitly clear to the person that it is he who is revealing things to the person or is it that the person has to guess and try to figure out whether or not God is revealing things to them?

          • dee2 says:

            Messenger,

            Another example to consider as to whether or not God really speaks to people:

            When people are exercising their free will to choose a religion, what is the basis for their choice of religion?

            Did they choose their religion because of:

            – their geographical location?
            – their culture?
            – what they heard from others?
            – their own efforts to read about, research and sort through the diversity of beliefs, creeds and practices?
            – what they heard directly and explicitly from GOD HIMSELF?

            Does GOD HIMSELF directly, explicitly and unequivocally let people know what the right religion is so that they will know what God’s religion of choice is when exercising their free will to choose a religion?

            OR is the basis for a person’s choice of religion based solely on the geographical region or culture in which they live or what they hear from others but NOT what they hear directly and explicitly from God himself?

            People may have free will to choose their religion, but before choosing, do they actually hear directly and explicitly from GOD HIMSELF which religion is the right religion? Or do they have to figure this out all by themselves?

            When people are exercising their free will to choose a religion is there any input, help directly from GOD HIMSELF in the process?

            Does GOD HIMSELF directly and explicitly help people with their choice by directly and explicitly informing persons about what God’s religion of choice is/which religion is the right one?

            If GOD HIMSELF is directly and explicitly helping people with their choice, does he tell everyone the same thing?

            If God does in fact actually speak to people, does he tell everyone the same thing regarding which religion is the right religion?

            Perhaps you should do a survey to find all of this out.

          • dee2 says:

            Messenger,

            [ “No one here, are anywhere, is asking you to believe nor does anyone seek to prove anything to you, as you frequently request.”]

            Amazing.

            1. Apparently you are not aware that this is an ex-JW website NOT a JW website.

            As I previously stated: If you do not want your cherished beliefs to be questioned/challenged then you are in the wrong place. This forum is not for you. So why are you here?

            2. Further:
            – What is the purpose of this website? Apparently you are not aware that this includes making points and counterpoints, debating arguments,
            Please familiarize yourself with the website’s purpose and rules.

            – There are many instances in which you yourself have made counterpoints to comments made by others on this website.

            You have been allowed to do this because this is in fact the purpose of this forum – to debate arguments.

            So you can make a counterpoint to a comment but I can’t? Where does the website rules state this?
            ______

            [“….why should I have Bible discussions with someone that doesn’t believe in, or if she does, she hates God? Come up with an intelligent response to that and maybe I’ll answer your question.”]

            So then why do you bother to respond to my comments if you do not wish to have discussions with me?

            Further,
            Is this what you also tell persons who challenge/question your beliefs when you go from door to door in field service?

            Does it make you uncomfortable when people challenge your cherished beliefs so that you prefer to speak only to persons who don’t?

            It is obvious to me that you only want to have discussions with persons who confirm your cherished beliefs, not persons who question or challenge them.

            This is what I have noticed about Christians, JWs especially, they do not want anyone to challenge or question their cherished beliefs, you must just gullibly accept what they tell you, no questions asked. Why? Because they need to use a person’s gullibility to confirm to themselves that what they believe is true.

            Ironically, I can use my critical thinking skills to question and analyze all areas of my life to help me make good decisions and avoid harm to myself but this is taboo, off-limits, when it comes to the Bible. This just must not be done.

            Also, can you prove that the Bible is the infallible, inerrant word of God?

          • dee2 says:

            Messenger,

            I implore you:

            Please familiarize yourself with the website’s purpose and rules so that you are aware that:

            – this is an ex-JW website NOT a JW website

            – the purpose of this website also includes making points and counterpoints/debating arguments.

            As I previously stated: If you do not want your cherished beliefs to be questioned/challenged then you are in the wrong place. This forum is not for you.

            Best wishes.

          • dee2 says:

            Messenger,

            [“….why should I have Bible discussions with someone that doesn’t believe in, or if she does, she hates God? Come up with an intelligent response to that and maybe I’ll answer your question.”]

            How can I hate what I do not know? I haven’t a clue who God is. I have never seen or spoken to or heard from God so how can I hate what I do not know?

            What I hate are people who insist that:
            – the Bible is the inspired, inerrant word of God which should not be questioned/challenged
            – their “Bible-based” beliefs should be gullibly accepted, no questions asked, just submit to their brainwashing

            Otherwise they will discredit/demonize you if you do not agree with their position.

            So if by “God” you mean bigoted, arrogant people, then yes, I hate bigoted, arrogant people.

          • messenger says:

            @dee2
            “How do you know that I am assuming and that I do not have any experience with whether or not God speaks to anyone?

            It is because of having lots, and I mean lots of personal experience of this in my own life”
            Your quote above dee2

            Dee2 I didn’t know God speaks with you or that he had spoken to you before. You didn’t give me that impression from your comments. Has God actually spoken to you? You have had that personal experience?

            Some years ago I looked up the definition of experience in a university library. Here is how that read: “That which is observed or participated in.” (That was the first definition given.)

            Does your experience fit that definition? Because that’s how I define experience. Whatever stories you read or verbally heard about God speaking to other people isn’t your personal experience to me, or as defined above.

            And so, I used the word assume, because my thinking is that if God had spoken to you and supplied evidence to that effect then you would not be making the assertions you were.

            Has God in fact spoken to you dee2, and did he supply you with enough evidence so that you know unequivocally that it was God? Please tell us if that’s the case.

          • messenger says:

            @dee2
            Okay I just scanned your reading again. You write so much in one comment I don’t usually read it all until some time after a first viewing.

            Your comments are contradictory since you also stated you never spoke to God. Because of that I see no reason to address my previous request asking to let us know about your personal experience(s) in doing that.

            I don’t know what other experiences you might have. They are not ones that could be presented in a court of law…..Russell’s claims as well as the others you mentioned are legally considered here-say in that field, and those would be inadmissible as evidence because the testimony would not be first hand evidence.

            And the fact is the experts that you put your faith in (psychologists, and other scientists) have no experience in this area either.

            The scientific method verifies through testing…and conclusions are then subjected retesting seeking similar conclusions. And truth is only verified if similar results can be obtained. Similar results to a previous event…using a similar test.

            So tell me….If God actually spoke to Russell or anyone today, how is anyone going to test that to prove it true of false?

            Again, that’s why I said you assume. Since random acts like these are impossible to test then you have no experience unless God spoke to you, and gave you some type of proof. And even if that happened how are you going to prove it to anyone, since scientific proof requires re-testing and getting similar outcomes?

          • messenger says:

            @dee2
            Hello dee2
            There are several other reasons why I used the word assume, when I spoke of the way you present arguments. I’ve not a lot of time now, but let me briefly explain one of those reasons and demonstrate it for you. Somewhere in your arguments you claimed that in the Bible incident involving God, Satan, and Job that God was destroying Job’s life to prove a point and to win a bet with Satan. Did you see those reason’s stated anywhere in the Bible? Are did you ASSUME those reasons? When you made your statements you didn’t give those reasons as possible answers, you stated them as factual. Isn’t that the same way the WT interprets scripture, by stating their opinions as factual? The only difference is your opinion was diabolical and WT at least has good intentions.

            I’m not God, and so I cannot state reasons why he does things that are not clearly given by him. However, I can suppose, without stating things I don’t know as factual.

            Suppose God is doing everything he has been related to mankind and the Earth to teach us, you and I, and everyone else. That explanation at least harmonizes with scripture, “The one teaching you to benefit yourself.” Your statements do not. Suppose the dinosaurs, the flesh eating animals, all the evil that has ever been done is allowed by God to give us personal experiences of what it is like, not to prove a point as WT claims, but to teach us what living in conditions that disobedience from God results in is like? What if his purpose includes giving us first hand experience so we will want to do things in a better way, a way that will not result in detrimental living conditions?

            Since I said suppose, my argument is not an assumption of facts like most of the ones you present, and mine harmonizes better with ideas that are in scripture.
            best wishes!

    • twistedsister69 says:

      @Doc Obvious
      I think you’re missing the point(s):

      1. This show is not a “gay advertisement”. It’s simply another in a long line of diversely-themed reality shows (from Survivor to Big Brother to the Bachelor(ette)), with its own unique theme. No one is forced to be in it, or watch it. That’s what the Remote Control is for.
      2. If you really don’t want to see sexual orientation flaunted on TV, a great way to start is by moving for the banning of all those silly diamond commercials – you know, Spence, DeBoer’s, People’s, etc. Personally, I’m a little tired of those sappy things. But then again, as I said, it’s a lot easier just to hit the Remote.

      • Doc Obvious says:

        @twistedsister69 – I agree with you. A remote control is a decision everyone should make when viewing channels. I am not much into reality TV. The sappy commercials on diamonds, boner pill commercials, and women’s hygienic products can go as well.

  10. Whatever happened to “unconditional love”?

    • Chiafade says:

      That doesn’t exist with JWs. Love is merely a tool or a weapon that can be used to manipulate those closest to you. ” I will only demonstrate my love for you if you believe exactly what I believe. Otherwise I’ll just say I love you but never show you that through actions.”

      A vile approach to take. This attitude is now gaining the exposure the jw organization has tried to hide. Even on their own website.

  11. Ted says:

    I can understand why some people, perhaps mainly older ones,
    have problems accepting homosexuality, especially in one of
    their own offspring. It takes time to reverse centuries of
    prejudice and mis understanding.

    It’s only relatively recent that public apologies have been made
    to ones who were jailed or chemically castrated for their orientation.
    Among those was Alan Turing , world war 2 code breaker, said to
    be the originator of modern computing. He died from cyanide
    poisoning.

    The origin of the prejudice originates from ancient writings such
    as the Bible and Quran, written by tent makers and fishermen etc
    (did they have window washers back then? I’m not sure!).
    What did Paul know about “Neuroscience” that explains how some
    things are hard wired into the personality? Absolutely nothing!

    The Wt org, is steeped in these ancient and divisive ideas and
    prejudices, they’re still living in the past mentally. They’ll use
    and quote scholarship and science when it suits their purpose,
    but ignore it at other times when it exposes their ignorant and
    life damaging propaganda .

  12. As a parent, I cannot understand how it feels right to withhold love and support from your own children. So sad… I agree with you on reality TV… its too bad we must feel the need to avoid living outselves and live a drama-filled life vicariously thru someone else …

    Thank you for posting this.

    ❤That One Girl❤

  13. Sharon Christensen says:

    Staged or not….this is reality that one must face…human compassion and understanding…none! One must worry as to how it looks to…religion or others….Parental love, especially as should be between Mother and child is not there…Disgust for Mother or father who would turn against their very own flesh and blood, so as to mk them feel not worthy of pride, acceptance…of the very existense that one should be happy to have in life…many have to live in the…”shadows”, in fear of losing the love that should be unconditional no matter what…anyone who treats a child like this..Themselves should have been…”neutered and twittered”, and never been allowed to be a parent…they do not deserve such a blessed priviledge….

  14. Eyes opened says:

    Perhaps the parents had their own agenda. Perhaps they thought they would have bragging rights for taking such a firm stand with their son, maybe even reasoning they are setting a good example. The parents may or may not be so duped and innocent. And if this is how the heart wrenching effects of shunning are exposed, so be it.

    Regards

  15. Tara says:

    This is already appearing on facebook and the results in cry shame on the parents. A lot of the comments reflect what is being said on here but also that the parents knew what the story line was and could have backed out of it at any time. I also noticed that one doing the rounds is from JW Survey.

  16. Lost life says:

    “Hammer-blow” . Well said. That’s exactly what it is, every time.

  17. twistedsister69 says:

    Sex, sex, sex. Why are so many religions obsessed with sex, & the private sex lives of individuals? Why do they want to insert themselves into people’s bedrooms? Probably 1. Religious leaders are mostly perverts anyway. 2. Sex is such a powerful, primal urge, they figure they can use it as another “handle” (like fear, guilt, and indoctrination) to use to control the individual. I mean, if you can control the most private aspect of someone’s life, their sex life, then you can bet you can control the ENTIRE individual. And that, of course, is their goal.
    As a side note, one ‘study’ determined that men think of sex once every 11 seconds (not sure how they came up with that lol). If it’s true, then men like the GB must think of sex once every TWO seconds!!

    • messenger says:

      One of ‘the more important things’ was to conduct a survey to find out who likes tight pants.

    • messenger says:

      I say, where’s Jado on this thread. He believes the WT exists for one purpose, to gather information on sex acts.

  18. Meredith J says:

    I saw this preview on tv last week and I did not see the show advertised. I did not know it was showing a JW family. While I believe in the Bible’s viewpoint about homosexuality, I could never heartlessly confront my son with my opinion like that, which he would know anyway to make it clear he was unacceptable to me. I used to meet people who seemed nice, and then in a casual sentence they would tell me that their child was disfellowshipped and they had not spoken to them for years. How can a parent do that to their own flesh and blood?

    At least she could have gone and then kept the precious relationship going with her son. After all he probably became gay from the weirdo treatment he got as a witness and as a son of strict witness parents. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Could anyone honestly tell me that Jesus would have been impressed with that? The Witnesses talk about giving a bad witness, well that was indeed a bad witness. Just typical. I’m so glad I am not one anymore. The heartless way this woman spoke to her son was like she was victorious or something. Shameful.

  19. twistedsister69 says:

    @Caroline

    I’m sorry for all the misunderstandings, misconceptions, and misrepresentations those lunatic Elders put you through. However, I had to laugh when you mentioned the $2000. While I was still fading, but had not yet DA’d myself, the jw members of my family (comprising most of my family) could tell my heart was no longer in it. So my siblings & their spouses would, of course, indoctrinate their kids against me, behind my back. Anyway, one day I happened to buy a little kid’s wallet (with a picture of a racing car or something on it) for one of my nephews. I also slipped in a $5 bill. At a family get-together, I gave him the wallet. However, he refused it (can’t accept any gifts from the Big Bad Wolf lol). I insisted, telling him to look inside. He unzipped it and found the $5 bill. Guess what? He keeps the $5, and walks away, leaving the wallet. All I could think was, “Wow, these idiots (my sister & her Elder husband) are really doing a bang-up job of raising this poor kid to be a good and proper jw!” Apparently, disfellowshipped folks and “bad associates” are unworthy. However, MONEY from disfellowshipped folks and “bad associates” is JUST FINE!!!
    No honor among thieves

  20. GEM says:

    @ Gratefulthinker:

    Yup, I share the lump in your throat and the gut wrenching anxiety of dealing with issues of sexuality in an often hostile world.

    I had my Civil Partnership on my birthday in 2009. My partner faces similar socio-religious attitudes from his staunch Catholic background.

    We chose to wait many years before we took our vows. This will be our 20th year together. Our Fathers remain with us, though frail. Time has thawed the estrangement, to the point that both accept the other’s Son as part of the family.

    We could have taken a WTF attitude and bust up an already fragile set of relationships, but we bore the brunt and let “love come what may” endure all things.

    Reality TV attracts viewers, Soap operas have every one on the edge of their seats. A million eyes see things from a “different angle”.

    My family crest has the inscription “Regardez mon droit” (Respect my right). I met Mum and Dad independently after 2 years to repair the breech caused by my Coming Out, fleeing from Execution by the leaders of the Faith I actually loved, and the tensions of a divided family. I wanted to Love and be Loved…by someone of the same gender.

    Please accept my next comment in good part.

    Reality TV could well have interviewed my Mum, the brokenhearted lady that would never get to make the wedding dress of my bride or see the grand children she so desperately wanted to spoil. What a selfish Son!

    My Father, and Elder of 50 years standing, an ex Merchant Seaman…could have cried on TV about his disappointment at my leaving the Faith of my Youth and his pride in me for serving as a Pioneer and at Bethel. What a selfish Son!

    My Partner’s parents could have been interview with their GP, saying that their only regret was that they would never see grand children from their Son. What a thoughtless, selfish Son!

    Yet, time and showing love brought the barriers down. Blood is thicker than water.

    I want to share with you the words of My Father, who is being nursed into death now. “Thank you for coming to see me Son and for all you are doing. I couldn’t sleep last night, thinking what I could say to you…His eyes began to water and he simply said, “I just want to let you know I sit here looking at a REAL man”…

    My lip quivered my eyes finally watered and we hugged one another. We can now both Rest In Peace.

    • messenger says:

      Glad for you that you made up with your dad. What about your mom?

      • GEM says:

        We made peace with all our parents, Messenger. I told my Partner’s mother I vowed to look after him and my Mother accepted my Partner as a son, they would hug. Both our Mum’s died with their Sons at their side.

  21. gary says:

    We all should be accepted for who we are but is that really truthful?, where should an individual or society draw the line?
    We all have an opinion and we all have the right to establish our own conscience, such is freedom of choice.
    In this case, it would seem, religion has enforced a moral code but that in its self is up for an individual to decide.

    • Openmind says:

      Yes we all have a right to establish our own concience. I remember a talk at the KH once on concience and we were all told how ‘Jehovah’s organization’ gives us the guidelines for buildind a good concience for moral standards and knowing right from wrong. Many guidelines are good but it took my waking up to realize a lot of them are from the organization,
      from men, leading to a malformed conscience. In the end I chose freedom of choice, freedom of thought, to build my own concience not based on the thoughts, and many wrong opinions, of a bunch of deluded men in New York. I am now far more tolerant of people in all walks of life, more tolerant of accepting people for who they are, not on what their religious bias may be.

    • outandabout says:

      I wouldn’t call it a ‘moral’ code, Gary. ‘Immoral’ seems to fit better.

    • twistedsister69 says:

      @gary

      I respect what you’re saying. But what does “draw the line” mean? Is anyone forcing you to do something against your will? Is anyone pointing a gun at your head, forcing you to “go gay”? lol If you don’t like something you see, look away, move on, change the channel. It’s not like gay people are wandering the streets en masse, biting people, like the zombies in Walking Dead. lol Hey, you don’t have to love everyone. You don’t have to love ANYONE. Seriously. I’m not being sarcastic. But as long as no one is bothering you personally, or interfering with your “Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of happiness”, where’s the problem? Personally, I believe in “Live and Let Live”. Don’t @#$% with me, I won’t @#$% with you. Believe me, it makes things a LOT simpler. Frankly, there’s too much talk about love, love, love in this world. Love is great, but R-E-S-P-E-C-T is better. No one NEEDS love (contrary to populist propaganda), but a new-born baby. The hospitals are full of people suffering from STRESS-related illnesses (mental AND physical). Where does all this stress come from? The birds and the bees? The flowers and the trees? The blue skies and sunshine? No, it comes from PEOPLE; from the LACK OF RESPECT / the outright DISRESPECT people show others. Love is like champagne. Respect is like water. Which one do you want? Which one do you NEED?

      • twistedsister69 says:

        Personally, I ‘draw the line’ at criminal activity, such as child abuse. THAT is intolerable. I don’t need to point out the blatant hypocrisy displayed by an organization which condemns & shuns homosexuals, yet protects child molesters. Hence, Watchtower = Pedophile’s Paradise. THAT is where society needs to draw the line, instead of blaming their personal problems and failures on the sexual habits of other consenting adults.

    • dee2 says:

      [ “….religion has enforced a moral code” ]

      Where does religion’s moral code regarding homosexuality come from?

      The Bible.

      The Bible not only condemns homosexuality, it also commands that homosexuals be killed:

      Leviticus 18:22, 29: “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.
      For whoever commits any of these abominations shall be cut off from their people.”

      Leviticus 20:13: “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.”

      Why doesn’t religion also enforce this part of the Bible’s moral code?

      • outandabout says:

        Because nobody would join? As society has progressed over the centuries, parts of the bible have had to be watered down in order to remain palatable to the masses. To hide the horrors of God and who God really is. To lie.

        Witnesses are the only ones following the Bible? If they did they just simply could not live alongside the rest of society. If they honestly want to live alongside people who follow their God they should go and live with ISIS and their literal translation and then see what they think of that.
        Witnesses don’t have a clue what real Truth is and persecution to them is somebody being rude to them at the door.

      • Winston Smith says:

        And, correct me if I am wrong, while the Bible condemns homosexuals, there is no clear mandate again child abuse is there?

        WS

        • Winston Smith says:

          Should read “against” child abuse

        • messenger says:

          Every scripture (in both the old and new testament) that outlaws fornication bears on sexual child abuse. Sexual child abuse is considered a form of fornication. Scriptures dealing with rape will apply also. I don’t know if the Bible addresses a statutory rape situation, if sex is consensual (But I don’t think so, because I don’t remember it being there), but that would be unnecessary because consensual sex by a child would be considered fornication. That’s why the elders reproved the subject of another article, even though she was a minor and considered a victim by the courts.

          • Winston Smith says:

            @messenger,
            So I think you are in agreement with my point that there is no direct scriptural mandate against child abuse, like there is in regard to homosexuality. Everything else you have stated is an extrapolation.

            So if we are to extrapolate, we might consider: Numbers 31:17-18 “So now, kill all the male children and kill every woman who has had sexual relations with a man, but keep alive for yourselves all the young females who have not had sexual relations.”

            So when it says “keep alive for yourselves the virgins” it really seems to elude to keeping young underage girls for sexual purposes, likely as concubines. Although simple slavery cannot be ruled out.

            WS

    • Meredith J says:

      But they can’t decide for themselves. Personal thought is shoved aside. They are trained to be like robots by way of brainwashing. Freedom of choice? I don’t think so, when they are blasphemed forever for going against Watchtower by saying that one is going against ‘Jehovah’s arrangement’. There’s no freedom in that. Enforcement as you said, but in the land of the Watchtower there are very little options. It is like being in gaol while there is an observant watchtower ready to send out the dogs when anyone defies them and tries to escape.

  22. Jeffery What says:

    Lloyd I agree with a lot of your opinions however , as demonstrated by the Fathers reaction, it’s not always because of religion. Homosexual relationships do not exist is a society without surplus. That scientific fact alone can shape opinions. The mother did not shun her son and the video shows a calm respectful mother and a Son trying to elicit a reaction for the camera that did not materialise. People in the “world” cut their children from the will or shun them for all sorts of reasons , no just religious reasons. It’s articles like this which make me realise how much of your activism is about you and your experiences and your attempt to rationalise them. I feel for you but I think you’re loosing direction…

    • Cedars says:

      The mother did shun her son. She refused to accept him for who he is because he does not embrace her beliefs. Of course, people are entitled to shun whoever they like. What is wrong is for a religion to mandate shunning within a family when its requirements are not adhered to, which is precisely what we are seeing here.

      And if I am wrong about homosexuality, by all means present rational, evidence-based argumentation to support the claim that homosexuality is an abomination and that gays and lesbians should be ostracised, discriminated against and treated as second-class citizens. I look forward to hearing what science has to say on the above, since apparently you are apparently an authority on this.

      • messenger says:

        Lloyd did I miss a point in my reading, or did you fail to state whether Chris had ever been baptized as a JW? Because JWs are not required by WT to shun family members who were never baptized by WT.

        Here are some points about the WT shunning policy vs scripture: Even if the words by Paul are interpreted to shun Christians who sin, Paul states that’s to be done to, “anyone called a brother,” and to treat them as a person of the world or nations. If a JW is DFd or DAssociated then JWs no longer consider those folks spiritual brothers, but worldly. And JWs associate with people of the world, they don’t shun them. And then of course, we have Christ’s example. He didn’t even shun Judas, even after he knew he was betrayed by Judas-which he knew he would be from the start, but not according to WT. How many did Christ shun? Zero. Who was it unlawful for Jesus to talk to? No one. Whose example are Christians suppose to follow? Christ’s. Seems like if Christ believed in shunning there would be an account of him doing so somewhere in the Bible over the 33 years he lived, especially with all the attention he received, and all the sinners he was around.

        • messenger says:

          Here are several translations of 1 Cor5:13 starting with a word for word English against the Greek:

          (Note that this is counsel given to Christians, telling them to put the sinners out of their church groups. It mentions nothing about removing sinners from family relationships or associations)
          1.”And you should put out the evil one from yourselves.” Remember Paul wrote about judging those inside the congregation. So inside(yourselves) is the congregation.
          2.”Take the evil man out of your group.”
          3.”But you yourselves must deal with this man and put him out of your church.”
          4.”Expel the wicked man from your number.”
          5. It is your plain duty to expel this wicked man from among your fellowship.”

  23. Cassandra says:

    This is sad. I know the feeling though because my father didn’t attend my wedding. The reason was he couldn’t miss his meeting. My mom came but only to berate me. She left too get to her meeting also. They didnt attend my graduation either because it coincidentally was on the 1st day of the DC. This was after I paid for tickets. My uncle happened to with the security firm that was there. He saw me and was surprised. My parents told no one of my accomplishment. Yet when my 2 jw siblings graduated and when 1 married, it was a huge deal. Those feelings of being disowned, shunned and ignored have not gone away. Still hurts. Yet I was there to the end for them to the end. That religion is horrible.

    • twistedsister69 says:

      @Cassandra

      I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. As cold as it sounds, YOU’RE BETTER OFF WITHOUT THEM.

  24. Ted says:

    It’s a serious issue families being split up, mainly through cult
    indoctrination, and it needs exposing. Normally one would have
    every sympathy for both sides. But because of the setting that brought
    this particular case to light, any compassion is somewhat diminished.
    (At least in my case.)

    From what I’ve read about these reality shows, they are staged for
    maximum sensation. The subjects are coached, told what to say,
    what to wear. On one show a guy was told to wear a track suit,
    (Apparently to give the impression of a trashy hard case.)

    In the Aussie show, the camera shot of the son getting up and
    walking away leaving his parents sat there, was almost a movie cliche.
    The participants become actors, and not themselves, and therefore
    not completely credible.

    What their motive was for being there and allowing private family
    matters to become prime time entertainment, I have no idea,
    although I have read that there are some perks involved.

  25. Ted says:

    Right Dee, how real is it? It’s not impromptu they don’t just
    turn up on the day and straight on camera. The prog, takes
    several days to prepare and the combatants, adversaries,
    are put up at quality hotels and given the Limo treatment.

    The reality and the illusion are two different things. “That’s
    Entertainment”.

  26. Sharon Christensen says:

    Gem…glad you and your partner could make up with your parents…the parent child bond is a precious one not to be tapered with by a cultish religion…they say gay/lesbian actions are against God’s set out idea of family…well to turn your back on your own child and break the bond of love and acceptance and nurturing a parent should have with their very own flesh and blood…if the family set up was instituted by God himself…are they not going against God’s family arrangement? Of course they will say…in ancient times…parents were to toss the first rock…uh yeah…well Roman civilization fell because of broken families…uh perhaps…Jw.Orgy shall likewise see their downfall…because of their contributions to broken families…And Yes…Dear Twisted sis69… I know …after a severe chastisment by a CO…who looked in disgust at me questioning something he and the elders of a small Northern Mb, Can. Cong. were guilty of in regards to what amounted to stealing from the neighboring Sk. Prov. recycling program….He called me Jezebel…proceeded to point out her in the now no longer good Rev. Bk…me fit to be eaten by dogs on the Native Reserve near by…? Okay…I figured…flash him some cash…after all and see how that goes…to my surprise…well not really…well actually not at all! ;). it went zup…before I could blink! Haha…and then he proceeded to snub me and so…I went to the police…and well…:). They had to…well they know ehat they had to do…:) All I can say…yeah it hurts…but just be glad….like I was watching the movie…”Spirit”… wild horse called ….anyways when the army caught him and tried to tk him by force…reminded me of how one feels so tied within the bonds of the corrupt cult….but once you are out…wounded and bruised, mind and heart….But be thankful…YOU CAN’T TAKE ME…..I’M FREE!!!!!! No greater feeling to not be under their corrupt bondage any longer….Continue to help others be free…Thanx to Cedars/Lloyd and all who are trying to do this….much THANX!!!! and love….Keep up the good work!

  27. Erica Phillips says:

    Thankfully, since I could think and observe at about age 7 I refused to get indoctrinated by that organization. It took my mom 40 years of trying to convince me to see “the truth” before she left the organization and said she was glad I never participated.

    – I have an uncle, an Elder, who participated and disfellowshipping one of my cousins for sex before marriage. Yet, years later I saw porn on his work computer. Yes David Shelton, that is you. I am wondering, did he enjoy the detailed conversations about the act, before he and his fellow white males disfellowshipped her?
    – I have an aunt who refused to speak to her sister, my mom, after my mom left the organization. She got diagnosed with breast cancer and conveniently calls my mom who is very great at scientific medical assistance. And, she flies to California, stays with my mom to get medical treatment. Yes,
    Jackie Miller, that is yoU.
    – I finally connected within my fathers side of the family after finding cousins on ancestry.com. I was never told about my relatives. One of my cousin said, after your grandfather married the holy roller, they wouldn’t talk to us anymore. My conclusion, they are horribly devisive people.
    – I have kept their nasty little secrets for too long, so hopefully one of them will stumble upon these comments on the site and find some nice conversation topics with their family and congregation.

    • outandabout says:

      Now this is among the best comments I’ve ever seen on here. Come on people, if you can, name and shame them! Hit them where it hurts. The meek shall NOT inherit the earth. Instead, they shall forever be in subservience to the strong…..unless they stand up! Bullies are essentially cowards. Remember that.

    • Tara says:

      Well done Erica. That was a brave thing to do 🙂

    • Winston Smith says:

      As a former elder, I believe several of my former cohorts did “get off” on the salacious details of sexual encounters. I remember cringing at some of the questions they would ask “offenders.”

      Some years ago I had an JW aunt (by marriage) who cheated on her JW husband, my uncle. I recall my uncle telling me that during the committee meeting, one of committee members could not keep the smile off his face while my aunt described the details of each sexual encounter.

      WS

  28. JBob says:

    I suppose this is a first for Aussie television but YouTube and USA television has had many television reveals where a gay son (twins, even) came out to their Jehovah Witness parents with much the same result.

    And, on the religious community scale many individuals in conservative and traditional viewpoint denominations would side with the parents who stood steadfast in their faith and beliefs. No shock to them.

    On the positive side, a growing number of denominations do welcome and affirm LGBTQA members and provide support for parents of LGBT children to come to understand and coexist with their child.

    The structure of the Watchtower bars this sort of advocacy on behalf of LGBT children or individuals. Where an advocate might take literature and approach a local pastor or church administration on the subject, JW’s have tiers and tiers of leadership thwarting direct contact to leadership which would evoke change. Why, even recently, the participants are discouraged from writing HQ with questions.

    Only a choice few who are “inner circle” (elites) with connections to CO’s and Bethel pointy-hairs can drop words of advice or inquiry to evoke change (usually because their circle of elite friends is suffering from the issue). [yeah, I know you ex-types from Bethel and CO’s are cringing–what you were…]

    To advocate for something that is immediately labelled as a severe sin in the eyes of the Watchtower’s leadership council is tantamount to putting one’s head on the chopping block for JudCom.

  29. Ted says:

    The Catholic Church says homosexuality is “Innate and not a
    Choice”. That’s very clear and unambiguous. Yet to follow these
    urges, compulsions that God has inflicted upon us is a Sin.
    (For believers in God, it’s a cop out to blame nature).
    Rationality and religion seem to have little in common! (My view)

    The wt org, in a reluctant way has now given in and admitted the
    innate factor but uses weasel words like, being prone to homo-
    sexuality. When I was in 50s to 80s there was no compromise,
    Homosexuality was by choice, it was learned behaviour. But as
    with the Blood Fractions they’ve backtracked slightly. ( How far
    they will compromise remains to be seen)

    As yet the death sentence awaits all practicers, they invoke the
    the ancient writings of Leviticus and in typical propaganda mode
    link homosexuality with incest and adultery, practiced by the evil
    nations, ( But not by Gods pure people, heaven forbid !) G/ 1/12/2012

    Morality question, which is the greater sin. Two adults living life in
    the way the genetic dice have rolled? Or slaughtering all the little
    boys from a foreign tribe and keeping all the young virgins for your
    own pleasure ? Num,31/17.

    • JBob says:

      @Ted – The curious thing, tho, years ago the Wt actually compromised a lot for dead (perceived) homosexuals of Sodom and Gomorrah [going to Jesus’ own words that these had greater probability of entering Kingdom of Heaven than hypocrites], but later backtracked from this and aligned with the more severe stance of most conservative protestant evangelical groups.

      The current standing, as I hear it, is that while being homo may be innate, a person ‘must choose’ not to act on their nature. This throws it into the same line as “a person may be innately disposed to being alcoholic, but” choose not to act on it.

      And, that seems to be smearing homosexuality as a “disease”, and while some Wt / Aw articles highlighted celibacy of gays and lesbians, it would not be the same as a “different gender attractant” choosing to be celibate (if they have that “calling”).

      And, there’s another card in this house of cards, no where in Wt parlance does “the calling” or “the gift” come into the works. Everyone has a cookie cutter role in which to fit–proselytize, conform to code of conduct prescribed for said proselytizer, and procreate to form new sets of proselytizers. The perceived (promiscuous) gay, doesn’t fit well within that model. Being straight and single doesn’t fit well in that model either–unless you’re widowed, and even then it’s awkward, because the best advice for that indidivual is “evanglize-your-heart-out” and even if you chance to marry, keep evanglizing and if you have children (which is not advisable), see if you can keep on evanglizing.

      Given that the current leadership council derived from middle managers whose sole objective was to keep the proselytizing game going, this has become the obnoxious message that dominates the Watchtower presently.

      Character development so that one becomes a better person is not emphasized, especially since there’s a list of policies and codes of conduct that mold persons into “ideal JWs” so people can “fake it” and “fake it” until they breakdown from guilt of being one person on display in conflict with their core person.

      So, the concept of a greater power calling individuals with varying talents and approaches to serving and ministering is foreign. Foreign too is the concept that a person is given a path in life to walk that demonstrates the unconditional love, and grace, from God. Anything on the checklist of JudCom offenses throws one under the bus of ostracism.

      This is where some appreciate being a JW–clarity. If Person A performs Offsense Act B or Action B, then they’re no longer considered fitting to be JW, so there’s no puzzlement why Person A calls themselves a JW and is doing B, when my walk with God I wouldn’t consider doing B. And, it’s why the vast majority of former JW’s, hate it–too many freaking rules and constraints where conscience is supposedly the guide.

      So, for the benefit of the corporation, clarity–no arguments, no debates, no distractions, just focus on proselytizing and keep the revenue flowing and let “management” deal with the policy violators.

  30. Will says:

    Poor guy. I get that he knew his mom was going to say no, but I’m sure he was hoping her heart would change. So heartbreaking. She just landed a convention part for her loyalty. Congrats, b**ch!!

  31. Doc Obvious says:

    Presentation for Field Ministry.

    Publisher: “Do you know that Jehovah God is a loving God.” (Allow for response)

    Householder Response: “Yes I would like to hear more bullsh!t from Watchtower on how the LGBT community caused Watchtower’s child sex abuse problem since at least 1950.”

    Publisher: “Oh. I’m sorry. I have to run. Bye”

  32. Bad Penny says:

    Just a thought from the other side of the fence –
    When my partner and I began studying the Bible with JWs we were living together (not gay by the way). The elders soon made it their business to push us into marriage in order to please Jehovah. Up until that time we had always ‘done our own thing’, and didn’t give a hoot about what other people thought as long as we were happy. Now we had to come under the jurisdiction of the ‘superior authority’. We arranged our marriage.
    My mother (not a JW) was OK with us living together but refused to come to our wedding on the principal that we would never have got married if it hadn’t been for those Jehovah’s! I respected her point of view and we had a happy day without her.
    The difference in our case was that my mother never cut us off and continued loving me despite my strange religion! Unfortunately, she died some years ago and never knew about our leaving the org.
    So, to Chris, I would say that you probably knew your parents would not attend your wedding. Do your own thing and be happy – better that they do not attend than have a black cloud over the proceedings!
    The cruelty of it all is the shunning process – this is the unloving practice that we are all so much against. Life is too short. We should live and let live and as far as it depends upon us, be peaceable with all men!

  33. rikos says:

    To be a victim of sexual abuse or any other injustice case, from a religion organization, this person has the support from all of those who love justice. But for those who chose their lifestyle, is a totally a deferent story. I found his parents very reasonable, regardless of their religious beliefs. the camera was set up to expose his parents.

  34. tun2 says:

    She was not rejecting his son, she was rejecting his choice. They still love their child.

  35. Jado says:

    I am afraid the parents ignore what Watchtower” says about them!In one the Watchtower Magazine their wrote in 70’s as follows:

    When a young man turns to homosexuality, the trend today is to implicate his father and mother as possibly having laid the basis for their son’s unnatural practice. Authorities believe that the parents may do this even before their child reaches the age of six. Thus, according to Dr. Irving Bieber, an international authority on the subject: ‘A disinterested father and an overbearing mother are the perfect combination to produce a son that is a homosexual.’ He further stated: “I do not believe it is possible to produce a male prostitute if a father is affectionate to his wife and son and supportive of the son’s masculinity.” (w70 5/15 pp. 314-315)!!!!

    • messenger says:

      Yes Jado,
      I agree with you that they have an obsession with sex. Why is it that the main reasons for DFing members are acts that are usually related to sex when there are so many sins defined in the Bible? Why is it that the BIG sins usually have to do with sex, in the minds of JWs? And why is it that they collect information on these acts? Once a person is forgiven by God, Biblically shouldn’t the matter be forgotten? Why do they write a report and pass that report about sex on for other clergy members to read, even sending it to other locations? Yes surely sexual obsessions. It’s too bad they’re not obsessed with undercovering sins of lying. That was the first sin recorded in the Bible, so why doesn’t it get the attention and investigation sex does? I think you know Jado!!!

      • Jado says:

        Yes, we need to know that. Ivan Pavlov explained the concept of Conditioned Reflex in dogs as you can see here ” http://www.fugetaboutit.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Pavlov_Dog.jpg “!

        In the picture, replace the food with the son/daughter, the dog with the parents and the bell with Jehovah you will understand how JWs behave before conditioning and after conditioning.

        Even JWs sex behaviors are “conditioned reflexes”! For example, in the Yearbook 2004 we can read a report from a circuit overseer as follows:

        In one city that I visited, it was thought that 1 Peter 2:17, which says to ‘have love for the whole association of brothers,’ meant that sisters were available to any brother in the congregation. If a sister became pregnant by a brother other than her husband, the husband accepted the child as his own.

        It means that at a given point, “1 Peter 2:17” in those congregation controlled sex behaviors of sisters that natural affection with men (brothers)! “Clear example of conditioned reflex where brothers were coupled with “1 Peter 2:17”!!!!!

  36. Doc Obvious says:

    According to Watchtower Bible and Tract Society’s attorney, Calvin Rouse, Esq. in the case of Jason E. Cobb vs. Ernest Brede (Case No. CIV508137), Watchtower is “a hierarchical religion structured like the Catholic Church. And when the order from the Pope comes down in the church defrocking a priest and kicking him out, he no longer has any say in any matter in the local parish priest — in the parish.”

    “The same situation as here. In his complaint he brings one claim. He claims that he wants to be reinstated as a director and an officer in the Menlo Park Congregation. This is contrary to our church rules and regulations and bylaws.”

    In addition, Watchtower brought their “organizational bylaws book, our rule book here, and we are prepared to present witnesses that this is a hierarchical organization. It is governed from the top down. We are protective of property rights and office holding rights of any degree at all in any of our churches.”

    There is more and I encourage people to read the legal transcript. Talk about religious fraud. The Watchtower Babble and Tract Society claims to be the true religion but still has ties with the Catholic Church. Even mirroring them in their hierarchical religious structure.

    Now we can see why Watchtower now has a Christendom choir inside Watchtower. Church rules and regulations from where? The Bible? Or, is it your traditions of men? Plus, Watchtower has cases of child sexual abuse from their “clergy”. Just like the Catholic Church.

    Watchtower’s ties with Babylon the Great and wanting to be just like her is real reason why people are leaving them. Not scientists. Not atheists. Watchtower lawyers being stupid.

    Thanks Lloyd for bringing out the lawsuit of the Menlo Park Congregation vs Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. What an interesting read.

    • John Redwood says:

      Doc

      You may find it of interest that last week, Watchtower’s attorneys and key witnesses argued for 2 days that elders are not clergymen. In a sudden reversal in the Fessler V Watchtower case, Watchtower’s attorneys came to an agreement with the attorneys for the plaintiff that elders are indeed clergymen. This new stipulation was so significant that the Judge had to bring the jury in, explain what a stipulation is, then read the new stipulation to the jury.

      I was in near disbelief when I found that Watchtower was willing to agree to this, after 2 straight days of a very heated debate.

      Stay tuned – more to come

      JR

      • messenger says:

        @John
        They had to agree to it because they couldn’t win the argument. But their reasons behind that attempt to win may explain why they stated that ridiculous claim in a recent WT study article. Too bad the judge didn’t hit their lawyers with a sanction for filing a frivolous motion that wasted the court’s time.

        You’re probably aware that WT elders lost clergy-penitent privileges in California on everything they write down about somebody and give to others to read. So, their thinking may have been that since they lost those privileges here they can argue elders are not clergymen….stupid argument, they just lost the privilege, and the fact they argued in court their elders had those rights proves WT knew elders are legally clergymen. If I was the judge I wouldn’t have listened to that argument unless I knew nothing of WT’s history, and its previous claims in other court cases. Its tooo foolish to waste court time on.

    • JBob says:

      The choir is probably a new thing for people joining since 1980’s, but as far back as the 1950’s, the Bethel choir (mainly men) sang and distributed at least one LP vinyl (A&B side) between 1960 and 1975.

  37. Bill Cummings says:

    Take a look at this https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=698235507022267&id=100005074728244

    It looks like it’s starting in the US…

  38. Adrian says:

    I, for one, am extremely proud of Chris’s Mum for allowing this extremely emotional exchange to be captured on camera and I applaud the bravery and dignity with which she handled sticking up for Jehovah’s Laws.

    Adrian

    • Jado says:

      Unfortunately, in “conditioned stimulus” in Chris’s Mum.

      In all Jehovah’s Witnesses do, JEHOVAH is a “neutral stimulus” before conditioning which becomes conditioned stimulus” after conditioning.

      This is true even in heterosexual partners. For example, in this concept as explained by Ivan Pavlov: http://www.fugetaboutit.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Pavlov_Dog.jpg replace food by a man, the dog by a wife and the bell by Jehovah.

      For you to understand, what stimulates this http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/mp/r1/lp-e/jr/2010/33 JWs Woman? His Husband or Jehovah?

      A clue to your answer! Look the woman now: http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/mp/r1/lp-e/jr/2010/74 ! See how excited she is. Why? Because the husband is back to Jehovah. That’s how it works! All sex behaviors in Jehovah Witnesses is “Conditioned response”! Products of reflexes instead of reasoning.

      Is that what you call Jehovah’s law? If yes, hois “Holly Spirit” is “Sex Drive”!

    • messenger says:

      @Adrian,
      I understand that you believe Chris’ mom stuck up for Jehovah’s law. But did you know that back in the 1950’s WT wrote the Catholic policy of excommunicating (similar to DFing) its members was Satanic? If DFing members is one of Jehovah’s laws why would it take God’s org (WT) over 60 years to discover that, and why would WT consider it a Satanic practice prior to that discovery? WT did not start to DF until the 1950s.

      Also, Paul’s words at 1 Cor. 5:13 direct the Corinthian congregation to remove the evil man from their congregation. Read those yourself, and see if you see in them Paul’s reference to (your)family.

      One thing that I find EXTREMELY dangerous with WT doctrine (rules) has to do with Christ’s point of view on rules. Think about this. The only people, or groups of people, Christ condemned were the ones that raised additional rules, in their attempts to prevent people from breaking God’s laws. They made their own laws to do that. The WT paints those ancient people as evil, but that actually wasn’t the case. Paul came from that group.

      Everyone of us knows WT does what that group did. If you don’t want to admit so, try to find this one of WT’s rules in your Bible. WT rule – a Christian cannot vote. Tell me please, is that a Bible rule, or WT rule? And since Christ is everyone’s judge, well, you can figure out the rest of my thought.
      best wishes!

      • messenger says:

        So there is no mistake Adrian when I claimed the only people Christ condemned I speak of actual individuals in his presence, not a future generation that would consist of all types of sinners during his second coming.

        But who did he speak so disparagingly to and in fact condemn, that was in front of him, while he was a man?

    • messenger says:

      @Adrian,
      One last point please—-
      When Christ condemned this group he said, “It will be more endurable for the people in Sodom …than for you,” on judgment day. Please overlook the exact wording, for I don’t usually look those things up. Anyway, you know he was saying that it will more endurable for homosexuals than for this group, or this type of person on judgment day.

  39. Jado says:

    I am afraid we will never understand the complexity of a religion which uses “sex drive” to confuse humans. This powerful tool they use make them stronger than we imagine. See this Bonono https://www.flickr.com/photos/clintjcl/5124334338 in sex museum to understand what I want to say.

  40. Ted says:

    Hi Dee2, If God has hardened your heart, maybe he’s about to
    demonstrate his power on you, remember pharaoh!
    Wouldn’t it have saved a lot of trouble if God had softened his
    heart instead of hardening it? Not as much fun for God though,
    no one to try out his bag of tricks on, why does he always do it
    the hard way?

    Following that example, he seems to have hardened the heart
    of the vile org, against the cries and suffering of many abused
    children. I wonder what plagues he has in store for them!