No problem.
I opened my mouth, and you had every right to call me on it.
Reviewed thses these are all cases against city/local ordinances where the distribution of materials was outright banned, required a license, etc… they have nothing to do with the “no solicitation” sign that a private homeowner may place on thier residence.
So, again, why is it that the “no solicitation” signs mean nothing?
Editing to re-phrase the obvious - why is it that the JW (among others) decide that “No Soliciting” does not apply to them? None of the “legal” articles you posted have anything to do with a private home owners wishes.
Kudos for reviewing 12 Supreme Court cases, digesting and assimilating the decisions (and I assume whatever research you did along the way) in 6 minutes! That’s 30 seconds per cite. Thirty seconds! My hats off to you, sir!
But, it’s not true.
And the Stratton case answered that very question.
The cumulative effect of these cases is that JWs (nor anyone else espousing religious views) can’t be forced to register with the city, buy peddler’s licenses, nor be restricted in their freedom of speech. Which means they are not “solicitors” for the purpose of the law, and have a reasonable right to canvass door to door.
Ain’t freedom grand?
But you just said that they STILL come back at least once a year to make sure you didn’t change your mind or move or whatever. So they don’t really listen to your wishes. They just change their tactics.
Isn’t it horrible?
They call you in 1 year to see if you’ve moved, and to see if your sentiments remain the same; a process that takes something short of 120 seconds.
I wonder what they’ll think up next…
Yes it is actually. It’s annoying as hell because it gives the impression that the church cares about nothing more than bugging the hell out of you until you relent and let them in. I admit, I’m biased against JW’s because of the hell they put my sister in law through. But if I say don’t come back, that doesn’t mean “don’t come back for a few months or so because I might change my mind or move or something”. This applies to JWs and Mormons. The difference is, the Mormons listen.
It would appear that that your bias towards them has a lot to do with how annoying this really is. I’m not discounting your feelings, but it is true that many, many people are glad that JWs have called on them. Some of them were people who had previously said they didn’t want them coming back. In many other cases someone else expressed interest. Many times there are new people living there.
They take this seriously. They too have to find a balance. You had a bad experience (or, rather, your SIL did) and that has naturally influenced your perception if they contact you for 2 minutes once a year.
For millions of others, that call is a welcome visit.
They are not trying to irritate you, and they are trying to find a reasonable balance.
I’m saying they are apparently taking people at the letter of their word and overlooking the spirit of a message like “I am not interested” or “no solicitors.” That way not be wrong and I’m sure it’s not illegal, but it shades into the unethical. And it shows a lack of respect for the person’s wishes, which is at odds with what you said previously. I did not say they should be barred from making contact, or that it’s an outrage or the end of the world if they knock on doors. But that it’s not very consistent with respect. And I also think it’s an ineffective tactic for converting people, but that’s not my concern.
As I’ve said earlier, they are trying to find a reasonable balance.
Is it unethical for the democratic party to contact you one year from now to solicit your support after you’ve told them no? What about your local NPR station? PETA? The PTA? AT&T?
In practical terms, things change. People change. Their feelings change. Their circumstances change. Sometimes other people come into the picture. Sometimes they move.
The JWs understand that as well, and their experience is many people who are JWs now were at one point “not interested.” (some vehemently so) Given that real life is fluid and ever-changing they’ve simply sought to find a reasonable balance.
There are many who feel as you do. There are others who do not. If you tell them you’re not interested and don’t want them to come back in the future, they will respect that. if you’re suggesting that it is entirely unreasonable that one year they check back with you (for the reasons listed above) for the briefest of interactions than I’d have to respectfully suggest you want to restrict their freedoms (and the freedom of your neighbors) just so you don’t have to excercise yours.
And that is unreasonable.
I just might get one of those. There’s a “No Solicitors” sign at the entrance to my subdivision, but it didn’t stop any of the political visitors, or the two religious girls (I can’t say for sure if they were JW’s) who have rung my doorbell. No Girl Scouts so far this year, though.
Sorry, with annual conversions of 37K a year in the USA, I’m going to say that millions do not welcome the visit, unless you include a JW visit to other JWs, which surely isn’t the point. By the way, with 211 million “preaching hours”, that works out to 1.7 conversions per TEN THOUSAND preaching hours. That’s a lot of piss-off for not a whole lot of return.
I think that’s a better summary.
A religion, I’m sure you would agree, is not a busines. When these other groups do it, it’s generally regarded as annoying. Most of them are in the business of making money and doing other earthly things.
Maybe I’m misunderstanding you. But it sounds like the deciding factor is the exact wording in the “I’m not interested” message - not the intent of the message.
The average JW congregation has somewhere around 120 congregants. That 37K translates to 300 new congregations. Many of the churches of the larger faiths are empty, vacant or being turned into Aeropostale stores.
I’d add that the most common sentiment is apathy. You assume that the balance are somehow “pissed off”, something you don’t know. (Sure look good on a message board though!) JWs conduct many bible studies and many do welcome visits by JWs.
Also, without some benchmark, 1.7 conversions per “TEN THOUSAND” preaching hours tells us little. (although it too looks impressive in CAPS and all)
And you know, even if there were some performance benchmarks you’re missing the point. JWs would follow the commission of Christ and do this work for that reason.
I didn’t ask any of that, now did I? I took only as long as you did to ‘review’ the links, to see that city bans/requirements were struck down.
These case’s make it clear that the citys and localities cannot make a ban or requirement that infringes on first amendment rights - they have nothing to do with my right to say “no solicitors”.
If you can’t see the difference, then there is no point discussing this with you.
If they do, then please, by all means, post the relevant quote from the decision, any decision, that says that “JW are not solicitors”.
I asked why the JW feel they can ignore a PRIVATE citizin’s request not to be bothered by solicitors.
Now, you can justify your groups view of “well, we aren’t solicitors” all you want, but you know that the spirit of the sign is that “door to door peddlers” of anything - are simply not welcome.
The HONEST truth is that those “no solicitor” signs aren’'t legally binding, but they are socially accepted norms accepted by reasonable people.
The simple HONEST truth is that you feel your right to ‘witness’ trumps the rights of those that dont want to hear it.
No means no. I’ll contact YOU, should I change my mind (as if). The irony is that most JWs only come around here about once a year, so telling them that I’m not interested will “expire” by the time they come around again. I’ve been here 23 years. The answer is still no. It will always be no. It would be no, even if I truly thought they might be on to something, for the sheer fact that being bothered in my own home beats any remote possibility of heavenly reward, ever.
This doesn’t just occur at home, but at work. Yes, I faced JWs at work! Every Sunday morning (not in the rain or the cold, which speaks volumes re their dedication–they seem to have no problem harassing folk, but god forbid they get wet or cold doing so), 2 JWs stand outside our hospital’s main entrance. I walked past these people at least (8x26=208) 208 times-usually more due to having to go outside or whatever. I no longer work on Sundays and so am no longer accosted by them). Every time I walked past them, EVERY TIME, they offered me a Watchtower rag and asked me if I wanted to chat.
Um, I’m in uniform. I have a clock to punch/a pt to get to a car/whatever. GO AWAY. I have distinctive hair and (if I may say so) am attractive. There is NO way they don’t recognize me. I recognize them: the same 2 older black people, one male, one female. I have said no (I used to say no thanks, but stopped bothering since they didn’t listen). It was annoying to enact this ridiculous social ritual, just so they could practice their right to free speech. Don’t I have a right to not be bothered every time I enter/exit a building? No other religion/political group or fundraiser does this. At least the Salvation Army only rings a bell at you. They don’t try to convert you.
I take it, raindog, that you are a JW. Bully for you. Please don’t try to convince people that JWs really mean no harm when they act passive-aggressively and do constitute a nuisance for most people. When it comes to annoyance, the “victims” of it get to decide the degree of it, not the offenders.
Actually, I was being gratuitous. Given that it must have taken 3 minutes for your post, you couldn’t have spent any more than 15 seconds per cite.
So, I would ask you to actually read them rather than ask me for more cites.
We’ll talk then, k?
Exactly!
Both our culture and our laws hold the expression of free speech sacrosanct. It is a element of our freedom that I must answer my front door for Barack Obama’s followers and exercise my freedom to tell them “no thanks”------or even not answer my door at all.
Is it annoying to me? Not really. Even if it was, it is the smallest price to pay for freedom.
Well, we can only discern intent through words.
However, if someone says “I’m not interested” that is not an indication of how they may feel in the future. They really have no interest in tricking anyone. if someone simply says, “I’m not interested, and don’t want anyone else coming back in the future” they’ll respect that.
No, we won’t.
You are doing what you always do - You refuse to answer the questions posted to you. When you are challenged on your answers, you refuse to back them up, instead reflecting questions back.
The simple question that has been put to you, that you have not answered is simple:
Why do the JW choose to ignore a PRIVATE citiizen’s request that they not be bothered by “Solicitors”.? (eg, having the “No Solicitors” sign on the door).
The Cases you’ve cited only speak to the ability for a law/regulation to be put forth banning the activity - It is up to you to provide evidence otherwise.
It doesnt take a lot of review to see what these cases were about. I’ve read them all before, my review this time was simply to see if there was something that I had not seen.
The only other thing you have to stand on will be nit picking what a “Solicitor” is, and how you feel that the JW are not. (That they aren’t selling something, that they only ask for donations, etc.) All of which ignores the spirit of the “No Solicitor” sign that I might put on my door.
Have a pleasant day.
I like this idea! Well, maybe not a whole cake, but if they just brought cupcakes or brownies I’d listen to anything they had to say for a good 5 minutes. 10 minutes if they brought me some milk, too 
Maybe that’s the solution to all life’s ills. Cake. Or Brownies…hard decision…cake has frosting but…so does my favorite brownie recipe… But apparently it’s not in their budget. You’d think they’d have oodles stashed away from all they saved by not putting windows in their halls…