Again, I don’t know your age or where you are from, but when I was growing up this was a frequent topic, even at meetings. When I was a child, the Witnesses were quite active in fighting for the freedom of religion and many court battles were fought over the blood issue, as well as the right to remain politcally neutral and the right to not be forced to salute the flag.
Also, have you hoonestly never seen an Awake article honoring someone who died after refusing blood?
My sister in law is an ex-JW mainly because she got excommunicated (can’t think of a better term) for dating my brother and then marrying him. It took years before they would even talk to her again (after asking permission from the church to visit her in the hospital when she had her first child) and now things are better but they still refuse to share a meal with her. She has to sit at the table and not eat while everyone else is allowed. Even my brother and the kids are allowed but she can’t. Is that normal? It seems completely ridiculous to me…but then again almost all the things they’ve done towards her seem ridiculous.
These comments serve to distort the view that many have about JWs because, while they carry some elements of truth (accuracy), they are stated in such a way to be both (partially or wholly) inaccurate and/or out of context.
And these posts are a decent example of that.
-
JWs profess loyalty to Jehovah God, not to the “religious community.” Any JW would be able to show from the bible the biblical cites that show that Christians were “separate” from the world in as much as they lived in the world, but were admonished to keep separate from it’s influences. Whether Christ had the ability to call upon a “a legion of Angels” to defend himself on the night of his death or not, it remains true that Christians believe he could have. Still even Christ himself took no action to remove the yoke of Roman domination, nor did he involve himself in Jewish/Roman politics. The examples of the Apostles and the early church show again and again that they lived in the world but were “no part of the world.” JWs endeavor to follow the example of Christ and his followrs and take heed of the bible’s counsel on the matter.
-
Still, Paul (et al) wrote extensively that Christians were supposed to “pay attention” to the temporal rulers of this world. Paul wrote extensively about such matters, encouraging Christians to “show honor where honor was called for, fear where fear was called for” , to pay taxes and to respect the laws of the government. In practical terms that has meant that JWs are often some of the most law abiding citizens of every country they live in, without regard to ideology. JWs are encouraged to respect and follow the laws of the countries they live in, both major and minor laws. There are many, many examples of companies who actively sought JWs as employees because of a perception that were/are honest.
It is only in circumstances where government laws/policies are in conflict with the bible’s direction and counsel that JWs respectfully refuse. Because of their strict neutrality they did not support Nazi Germany and they were the only group in the concentration camps that could have walked out of the camps at will----as long as they signed a declaration renouncing their faith. Very, very few did. JWs will not salute any flag, nor serve in the military.
However most laws in most countries do not conflict with the bible, and as a result most JWs lead a normal day to day life. Because their respectful refusal to follow certain laws sometimes makes for notoriety it may lead some to believe that JWs are anti-government. Far from it.
I am 47 years old and I’ve been acquainted with JWs my whole life.
I’m certain that many of experiences would be similar, if not the same. From my experience, the issue of blood transfusions is simply one topic, of many, many, many topics that are part of JW worship. As I’ve said, they deal wiuth the topic in an unflinching way, but it’s hardly a topic that the average JW thinks about in day to day life.
I agree that they have fought many, many battles that every American benefits from. I’m well aware of the general immaturity and ignorance here (and I don’t mean ignorance in the pejorative sense; but a lack of awareness, or knowledge) about the implications of their efforts. A US Supreme Court Justice said, “The Jehovah’s Witnesses ought to have an endowment in view of the aid which they give in solving the legal problems of civil liberties.”
There are dozens of rights in the US that are simply taken for granted that are codified in the laws based on the efforts (and abuse) of JWs to secure those rights, for all Americans.
It’s particularly ironic then, that in a MB that gets apoplectic over the crimes of the Bush Administration (et al) over civil rights, and purports to “Fight Ignorance” and practice tolerance that when the topic turns to JWs (and LDS/Mormons etc) that the most common response (after the litany of juvenile ones) is to advance the type of oppression and stifling of basic freedoms that can only be seen in places like Iran.
the raindog, I’m not sure you’re being fair. My posts are based on the JW culture as I have experienced it through family members. Most have left or been disfellowshipped, but some are current JWs. I have honestly admitted that I don’t like the religion, but I’m not posting deliberate falsehoods or anything, and I don’t think I and the other any other former-JW posters) are ignorant. There is no large group on earth whose members are all uniform in their understanding and espousal of doctrine. My posting on politics seemed to bring out your ire, but it was largely confirmed by others. It may contradict doctrine, but that’s how JWs I have known lived their lives. Likewise, the blood transfusion taboo was a big deal in my family, even though it may be a minor point of doctrine in the church. I have also witnessed a horror of the supernatural in all its forms, even discussions of fiction, and a determined opposition to evolution. (My grandparents, ex-JWs, think the moon landings and the idea of endangered species are hoaxes; I doubt if that’s current JW doctrine, but I know they learned it through their church because they told me so, and had no reason to lie.)
Many other religious and atheistic citizens have gone to court and secured rights that apply to all Americans. Do JWs respect their beliefs?
I don’t mean to be unfair, and I’m sorry if you feel that way. It seems to me that you’re posting in good faith. I do not believe you’re posting falsehoods at all, and I apologize if it appears that I felt that way.
To be fair, I think the gist of your post was largely correct----JWs do have allegiance to God—not to government. Your point also about “not paying attention” to government is accurate also-----in as much as JWs don’t involve themselves in politics. Recently there has been immense interest in Politics worldwide because of the election of Barack Obama. Yet, JWs offer no opinion on such matters.
My point in response simply put your post in the correct context. I think a reasonable person could infer that JWs were anti-government as a result. I am a JW, and it is my view that your post was lacking context. I am not an official spokesman for them. That said, I am quite familiar with their teachings and I’ll let the readers decide for themselves my veracity.
As to your grandparents, I have never heard anything about moon landings or endangered species from the JWs at all. My guess is that their beliefs were their own.
I was a baptized JW in my youth, from about 1975-1981 and I can definitely attest that the whole lack of windows thing was absolutely presented as a defense against unbelievers during Armageddon. We were told that we would all gather in the Kingdom Halls and we would be safe because they couldn’t break through the windows to get us–as there were no windows. I got a rather snippy talking-to when I asked what would happen if the non-believers doused the building with gasoline and set it on fire. Perhaps I just wasn’t meant to be part of an authoritarian religion.
I tell you one thing–when there’s a power outage during a crowded service it’s panic central in those things–nobody thought that maybe a backup generator and emergency lights might be a good idea, apparently.
:smack:
Candles are out of the question, I’m guessing?
They may not have thought of emergency back up lights, but the international building codes thought of them and they have been a standard of building construction and building codes for decades.
How did they get occupancy permits considering emergency back up lights would have been a required part of building, and no building for public occupancy would have been granted one without them?
How do you suppose that happened?
:smack:
:smack:
My WAG: I assume that just as religions aren’t taxed, “the Man” doesn’t prescribe how a church is built. Nobody would allow a church to be constructed of hay doused in kerosene, of course, but maybe the authorities remain as hands-off as possible to avoid being accused of persecution or something.
That has to vary from country to country. E.g. there was a Discovery special, “Does Europe Hate Us?” They said that in France all vestiges of religion have to be removed before entering public schools. So put away the star of David, the crucifix, the scarf, the veil, anything and everything before entering. If a Muslim in a US public school were forced to remove her scarf…? That would be a legal shitstorm.
I also wonder, were JWs anti-flashlights or something?
In Memphis, at least, the “Man” does. My now-former church got in trouble a while back over soem zoning ordinances. But it probably didn’t help that they’re so liberal.
I’m a contractor (Electrical/HVAC & Plumbing) and I can tell you that churches have to follow building codes like all other buildings. Even buildings built decades earlier would have been required to meet current code to maintain a C of O.
Flashlights were not allowed. They were tools of Satan. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=54&chapter=11&verse=14&version=31&context=verse
Interesting! I wonder how the JWs ever got away with not having windows, which would seem to be a fire code violation.
So what’s the difference between flashlights and lighting fixtures, which they surely must have in their windowless halls?
As I’ve stated, many JW churches do have windows, although many do not. At any rate, that is not a building code requirement.
Actually, I am whooshing you. I made that up on the fly. I suppose it makes my earlier point, and one I’ve made here many times: You can’t take what you see on the internet, and here at SDMB as being true or accurate. JW churches meet all required building codes and are equipped with emergency lights where they are required by code. They do not, and have not, taught that the moon landing was a hoax, that animals haven’t gone extinct, or that flashlights are evil.
No lie (see below)? I mean, I can understand that windows per se might not be required…but since they eliminate an escape route, I would think something in their stead would be required. Do JWs have “secret passageways” or tunnels or…is it just a matter of waiting for a tragedy to strike before windows are written into the books?
Well-played! 
Only problem is, five years from now I’m going to “seem to recall reading somewhere that…” :smack:
LOL! And it will be reported on that web site that was referenced as one the core beliefs that JWs are “vehement” about.
Well, to be honest I would prefer that they all have windows.
With all due respect to other posters I have never heard, formally or informally, from anyone talk of the churches having no windows because of a Sodom & Gomorrah type attack. (re: the attack on Lot’s household…)
I think that’s more internet folklore. I’ve heard (and incidentally JWs build their own churches and are extremely good at it) that it was for simplicity and lowers the cost of building. I would also assume in urban areas it may reduce break ins.
ETA: I actually prefer windows for the scenery, and to stop the urban legend type speculations that are posted about them.
So how exactly does the church marginalize the numerous failed predictions of Jesus’s return? Seems like it would really put a damper on attendance…
Do they explain it away like an alcoholic’s ex-wife soothing a child when daddy failed to show up at career day again? Or are the predictions sort of a highest probability of impact scenario; Christ as a stray astral body in near earth orbit, chance of collision 13% in 1975?