Because the church teaches that (1) people are divided into the worldly and non-worldly; and (2) otherwise, all humans, regardless of race, are children of God.
The huge line drawn in the sand divides the JWs from the worldly but makes no distinction between people of different races.
I’m white and Jewish. If I brought a white non-Jewish girl to meet my parents, they would be extremely upset. My mother would likely weep and wonder where she went wrong in raising me. However, if I brought home a non-white Jewish girl, my parents would keep dropping hints that we should get married and have children already. Heck, I could bring home a non-white Jewish boy and my parents would still be happy and keep dropping hints that we should find a rabbi who does gay weddings and adopt a nice baby.
My parents are concerned that my marrying a goy would lead to our kids not being raised Jewish. As a large branch of the family went from Jewish to lapsed Catholic as a result of a great aunt marrying a Catholic, they have a point.
Have you ever done it though? I understand that you know your parents and they probably are just looking for a Jew for you, regardless of any other factors, however bigotry is bigotry. And come on, are there even black jews?
Just kidding, of course there must be.
I still don’t see why it would be exponentially more likely they would approve of a black JW then a white non-JW. If we took religion out of it, and the disapproval was based on the guy being black, wouldn’t it make sense to think they probably don’t like Jews either? (at least for their daughter)
JWs are very evangelical and place a lot of emphasis on converting immigrants and working overseas. They are an extremely diverse group and avoid racial prejudice.
Doesn’t mean they can’t be bigots. Never underestimate the stupidity of bigotry. For example, a white-supremacist may be all for whites and Western culture, but denigrate north Indians and Middle Easterners (who are considered Caucasian) and Mexicans (who are often white and certainly practice Western culture.)
Almost all evangelical religions have an element of bigotry to them. They often believe that they have the one true path to God, so of course everyone else is involved with Satan. If you had the one path to God, would you give much regard to people who ignored that and chose to do Satan’s stuff? Probably not. Being exlusive also helps propegate the religion.
I dated a Panamanian woman for a few years. She’s about the color of Swiss Miss cocoa. My parents didn’t care about that. They were, however, very upset that she was not Jewish.
What bigotry? They don’t want me to marry a gentile. Mom and dad suport equal rights for homosexuals, and taught me from a very early age that all people were equal.
As I said, a great aunt married a Catholic man. Their children (and their grandchildren etc) are not Jewish. A cousin married a Christian woman. Their children are vaguely Jewish. But, I doubt the grandchildren will be Jewish at all. My grandmother married a Jewish man. My mother married a Jewish man. My sister and I are Jewish.
There’s a black synagogue here in Philadelphia. Ethiopa had a bunch of black Jews , but I believe nearly all of them have moved to Israel.
Wasn’t Sammy Davis Jr. Jewish? ;j
[Yeah! I finally got to use that smiley!]
I’ve known some black people who converted to Judaism.
In my books, its bigoted to disapprove of a person because of something they are, not who they are, its simple as that. I do not mean to say anything bad about your parents, I am sure they are wonderful people, however in this they are bigoted and wrong. Why does what you aunt did affect you, and your relationships and there approval on such? Now I am not saying you shouldn’t be allowed to only want to settle down with a Jew, or a gentile who is willing to raise there kids jewish, or that its even wrong. What I am saying is that if before meeting someone you are predisposed to dislike them because they are not something that is bigotry. If it was race this wouldn’t even be an issue. How is this any different?
I didn’t know there was lot of Jews in Ethiopia, I forgot about Sammy Davis Jr, and I am sure many people of all races/sizes/shapes have converted/been born Jewish. I was joking, it was in bad taste.
And I repeat:
I still don’t see why it would be exponentially more likely they would approve of a black JW then a white non-JW. If we took religion out of it, and the disapproval was based on the guy being black, wouldn’t it make sense to think they probably don’t like Jews either? (at least for their daughter)
Wouldn’t you think that?
They believe that if I married a gentile, my children would not be Jewish. They point to the great aunt and the cousin as proof.
You fail to understand. My parents don’t dislike gentiles. They just don’t want me to marry one. They do not care what religion my friends are. They do not care what religion their neighbors are. They do not automatically dislike people based on religion. They do not want their children to marry gentiles. It goes no further than that.
For the exact same reason my parents would approve of a black Jew and not a white gentile, they would be marrying within the faith and the chances are that the children would be raised within the faith.
If we take religion out of it, we’re having an entirely different discussion. Your analogy moves from culture and religion to genetics and so falls apart.
I am sure it doesn’t, and I don’t mean to have this discussion about your parents and their beliefs. However, to me this sounds like the ‘I have a lot of black friends’ "I work with black people’ “I hire black people’ arguement.” until their daughter brings one home with them.
Point taken about your parents. I am sorry they became the focus of this discussion when it would be better served as a general discussion.
I admit we are having an entirely differnt discussion then what was the OP asked. I do not think that moving from “culture and religion to genetics” makes it fall apart however.
From the raindog Bigot: One who is strongly partial to one’s own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
Its right there, race, religion or politics. The reason the OP has a problem with JWs is because of blatant discrimination faced by his brother. This discrimination was not based on anything but the fact he was or wasn’t something. That is intolerance of someone who differs from you. My past situation with some parents is also discriminatory. They didn’t like me for one reason only. I was not Jewish. Other parents of such religous groups also place this pressure onto their children, by disapproving of who they bring home. Klansmen place the same pressure on their daughters, and would strongly disapprove of a black man walking through their doors hand in hand with their daughters. Same thing.
For about a decade I’ve hung out with the same group of guys- two Catholics, an LDS, and a guy who worships the Norse gods. My parents have no problem with this as I am not dating any of these guys.
I think my parents are entirely relevant to this discussion.
I do. Intermarriage is a big problem for American Jews. The children of mixed marriages do not practice Judaism participate in Jewish culture. Ideas are not passed on.
Objections to interracial marriage are based purely in genetics, the erroneous belief that some poorly defined thing will be lost.
NOT THE SAME THING.
I’d appreciate you not comparing my family to the people who burned crosses on the lawns of other members of our synagogue.
Your comparison is still massively flawed. The Ku Klux Klan is based on hating people who are not white or Christian. Judaism is not based on hating anybody. The KKK hates blacks etc in any situation, all the time. Jewish parents don’t hate gentiles. They just don’t want them to marry their kids.
What, in as precise terms as possible, is the Klansmen protecting by insisting his children marry white people? Southern pride? I’m sure you can find black southerners who have that. Nordic pride? Hell, the Panamanian I mentioned has German roots through her dad and is quite proud of them. Some genetic ideal which cannot be defined or proven to exist? Yep, that sounds right.
On the other hand, religious objections are based on the very real problem of assimilation. Intermarriage results in children who no longer identify as members of the faith, do not practice the faith, and do not pass it on to their own children (There are exceptions of course, but the majority do lose their identity).
My aunt and cousins are.
OK, so she was a minor, living in her parents house of her own free will? And they asked her to abide by a fairly straightforward and not-at-all onerous rule while she lived there? And she was 16, so she would only have had to live by it for 2 years at the most.
Am I getting this right? A minor was asked by her parents to abide by a simple, non life-threatening rule that didn’t jeopardise her future? And she was asked to do this for a whole 24 months?
The pretty hateful… NOT.
I’m guessing you are a teenager yourself yukionna78. There’s nothing hateful about someone setting down ground rules for what occurs in their own house. There’s nothing hateful about saying that a child can’t smoke while they live in their parents’ house, or join a gang, or date outside the faith. It’s the parent’s freakin’ house. They weren’t saying she couldn’t be friends with this person, they weren’t even saying he couldn’t come into the house, they were saying she couldn’t date him.
I know a lot of teenagers have this idea that love is a somehow sacred and that they should be able to date anyone they like because, like, it’s love. It’s something you’ll grow out of. It’s not a sign of hatred that parents set limits on who their children get romantically involved with, it’s a sign of love.
Ask yourself this, would you feel the same way if her parents forbade her from dating a drug pusher? A pimp? An ex con? How about just a bum? A no good layabout? Do you believe parents should have no control at all over who their children date while they live at home?
The next point to realise is that teenagers often misrepresent the truth. Was it really the truth that the only objection these people had to this boy was his faith? That he was otherwise a straight A student, member of the glee club and spent his weekends helping old ladies?
So she was a minor, living in their house, and she lied to them. Repeatedly I assume? And they revoked the privilege of living with them rent free and getting free food, clothes etc?
Once again this makes me suspect you are a teenager. It’s a very teenage viewpoint, this idea that you have the right to do whatever l you like in someone else’s house, even if they ask you specifically to stop. That’s not the case. A person has a right to run their house however they like. Its not a public place. If anybody doesn’t like the house rules they are free to leave. They are not free to break them as this child did. They certainly aren’t free to break them and then lie about it repeatedly. Adults usually get that. Teenagers seldom do.
OK, so her repeatedly refusing to obey house rules is OK, but the parent’s refusal to attend the wedding is bad? I’m not getting this. I know soap operas will have us believe that weddings are the most important things in the world, but realistically, it’s peanuts compared to how people actually live their lives after they marry, including what sort of household they live in.
Iif they tried to get her to leave your brother then you should notify the church elders of that fact. That is a serious offence and probably warrants disfellowshipping her parents. JWs only tolerate divorce on the grounds of adultery. Noting else. If your brother wasn’t cheating on his wife then she could not leave him with the blessing of the church. My BS meter is starting to flash on this story. Any woman leaving her husband if he wasn’t cheating has some serious explaining to do.
The next question is, what had she done to be disfellowhipped? Dating or even marrying a person not in the faith is not even a serious offence for the JWs. It’s discouraged but entirely a matter of conscience. So that isn’t why she was disfellowshipped. This girl had done something naughty, and done it repeatedly. JWs don’t disfellowship anyone unless they commit multiple offences or state outright that they intend to.
My BS meter just went off, big time. We are being told half-truths with this story. My guess is this girl wasn’t just dating this boy. She was having sex with him. That’s why she was disfellowhsipped and that’s why she was kicked out of home.
This would be the same family the ‘poor thing’ had repeatedly lied to and showed a total lack of respect for? That family?
Once again, this seems like a very teen things to say. She repeatedly lied to her parents, disobeyed them and forced them to remove her from the house because she wouldn’t follow some basic and very temporary rules. But the parents should have turned up to the wedding anyway. Because weddings are like, so romantic and stuff.
Right. That’s because she had been disfellowshipped. JWs are permitted to associate with or even marry pretty much anyone they like. The one exception is that once a person is disfellowhsipped they are cut of entirely form the organisation.
Yes, and she knew all this when she repeatedly committed whatever act got her disfellowshipped. She would have been told explicitely that those were the consequences. And she chose to carry on anyway. This was her choice. Nobody held a knife to her throat.
No, that is just plain wrong. JWs are free to dine with or even marry pretty much anyone they like. What they can’t do is associate with people who have been disfellowshipped. People who are going to be disfellowshipped are told this explicitely and repeatedly and given every chance to avoid it if they wish. This girl made the choice not to.
I’d have to ask how you know her family do this when you have said you don’t speak to the parents?
And once again, if you have any evidence for this claim present it to the church elders. Speaking to anyone who has been disfellowshipped is a serious offence. Sending other JWs to speak to them is even worse. At the very least it would result in a public reprimand for the parents and guarantee that they stop it.
Your brother doesn’t need to join, So long as he has no objections she can re-join any time she likes. All she has to do is say that she is sorry for whatever offence got her disfellowshipped (presumably having pre-marital sex with her now husband), and give an undertaking not to commit such an offence again (since they are now married this is not an issue) She then goes through all the bible studies again and gets rebaptised.
It’s not hard. People who disfellowhsipped aren’t cast out forever. They can come back whenever they like so long as they can make a reasonable effort at convincing the elders they have repented.
Once more, BS meter is going off. What exactly is preventing her from re-joining?
From what you’ve presented so far this family values family to the extreme. They set standards of decency for everyone in the houselhold and made it clear they were either to be lived up to or else the person would have to live somewhere else.
How is that showing alack of value for family? Are you suggesting that allowing teenagers to behave however they like is the way to show that you value family values? To me that shows a total lack of any values.
That is what Jesus explicitely commanded Christians to do. Anyone who doesn’t value their religion over their daughter is damned if you believe the words of Jesus.
Would they all demand standards of behaviour within their households and be willing to expel anyone who lies and repeatedly breaks those standards? Yep they are all like that, or they should be. Of course I’m like that too, and so are all my friends. And we are not JWs.
yukionna78 I don’t quite see what you are finding so objectionable. It’s always sad when families fall out, but it does happen, in almost all families.
It seems you want this girl and your brother to have their cake and eat it to. You want them to be able to make decisions about their life and future as though they are adults, which at their ages is not entirely unreasonable. But at the same time you want them to be able to repeatedly lie to other adults and act against their express wishes without any serious consequences. You want them to be able to live in their parents’ house, rent-free yet not obey any house rules.
IOW you seem to want them to have all the benefits of children and none of the responsibilities of adulthood. Once again this seems like a very teen POV. At some point teenagers need to decide if they are children or adults. If they are adults they have to act like adults. That includes respecting the rules of the society or household you live or accept the consequences of breaking the rules. This couple clearly seems to have made a conscious choice to repeatedly break the rules, and they got caught. You are now bitching because they took the consequences of repeatedly breaking those rules. Consequences they knew about well in advance and could have avoided at any point by simply obeying the rules again.
OTOH if this couple want to be treated like children, with no serious consequences for breaking the rules and repeatedly lying, then they need to act like children. That means showing respect to their parents and their girlfreind’s parents.
You really do seem to want them to have it both ways. The real world doesn’t work like that, as you will no doubt discover.
How nice for you. Of course they have no problem, you aren’t dating them. You do, they have a problem solely because they aren’t Jewish.
This is why they aren’t:
So there is no black culture? No white culture? No klansman culture? No southern culture? No whatever culture? Every difference can claim to have its own culture if its wants to. The quebecois do it all the time.
I was obviuosly using an extreme example to highlit my point. I have no idea what the klansman is protecting by insisting his children marry white people. You would have to ask a klansman that. Maybe white culture? I also have no idea what Jews/catholics/JWs/buddhists whatever are protecting by insisting on same culture marriage.
Your last paragraph could be uttered by that klansman as well. The very real problem of assimilation of his culture into a new and different one. Therefore he disapproves of inter racial marriage, just like religous folks, such as the OP talks about disapprove of interfaith marriage.
And if you did drugs at 16 and your parents ordered you not to do them anymore, would you just say “okey dokey?”. The truth is not many teens would.
And if you cheated on school exams at 16 and your parents ordered you not to cheat on them anymore, would you just say “okey dokey?”. The truth is not many teens would.
There are many things many teens do. Many teens do drugs, many teens steal, many teens cheat.
yukionna78 this is what is called an appeal to popularity. It is a well known logical fallacy. How many people do something goes no way to determining whether it is right. If most teens endorsed slavery or most tens burned witches would those things then be acceptable as well, even against express parental wishes? The popularity of a behaviour simply isn’t relevant.
What is relevant is whether ou believe these people should be treated as children or adults. Children recieve no serious consequunces for their actions but limited freedoms and an expectation of obedience and respect simply because they are children. Adults OTOH have no obligation to respect or obey anyone or any rules. But they also suffer serious consequences for disobeying rules or showing disrepect. The problem I’m having is that you semto think it was OK for this couple to break the rules and show gross disprespect to their parents, while at the same time you think there should be no serious consequences to thier actions. Life doesn’t work that way.
So let me get this straight, a 10 year old child repeatedly and knowingly disobeyed a parents wishes? And the parent punished the child in a direct, non-violent and poetically appropriate way for that disobedience?
And you think this is wrong?
I don’t think you’ve had bad luck and run into crazies. I think you have a very unusual view of what constitutes crazy when it comes to parenting. Asking a child to return something they took against your express instructions is not crazy. Crazy would be letting the child go unpunished and allowing them to keep it.
You compared people who will not let their children marry outside their religion to members of the KKK. If you do not want it pointed out to you that just compared my family to the KKK, don’t make such sweeping generalizations. If you’d like, I can get CMKeller, ZevSteinhardt, Alessan, and ScubaBen to come in and be upset that you’ve compared their families (and in the case of Zev and Allessan themselves) to the KKK.
If you make a general statement about all members of a group, then specific members of a group are most definitely relevant.
Black culture? I’ll go with a yes on that one although I’m unclear on the specifics. White culture? Hell no. I’d even disagree with European culture. Russian heritage festivals and German heritage festivals are very different things. KKK culture? Not especially. The KKK doesn’t date back that far. It was created from a pastiche of sources. It is extremely heterogenous (besides various organizations now claiming to be the official KKK, you’ve got all kinds of NeoNazis, Aryan Brotherhoods, Christian identity movement, Astaru groups etc). Besides not white=bad, I don’t think you could find a set of beliefs or practices to hold up as KKK culture.
I DID mention southern culture. I also mentioned that we have black Dopers who have southern pride. I meant to convey both a literal pride in the south and in having been born there, and a pride in and participation in southern culture.
I thought I made this clear. Great aunt E’s descendants (OTTOMH between 30 and 50 people) are not Jewish. However, E’s sister married a Jewish man. Those were my mother’s parents. Mom is Jewish. She married my Dad, also Jewish. My sister and I are Jewish. Besides participating in Jewish culture, we believe that there is one G-d, that He delivered us from slavery in Egypt and led us to the promised land, stopping on the way to give us the ten commandments on Mount Sinai. I could go on, but you should get the idea from that.
But, due to intermarriage, a whole branch of the family is Christian.
What culture exactly is the Klansman afraid of losing? Jewish culture has taken from and given to surrounding cultures. Most New Yorkers know a little Yiddish. Jews brought the bagel to America. But it works both ways. Yiddish itself is a mix of Hebrew and German. Many foods considered part of American Jewish culture were taken from Germany or Slavic countries. Despite the differences between the European-descended Ashkenazic Jews, and Spanish/Middle Eastern Sephardic Jews, we’re still recognizably Jews, hold the same tenets, read from identical Torahs etc. This is because we marry other Jews and pass down Judaism.
Blake!
Kudos for an extemely well thought out series of posts! (Although you’re probably aware by the responses it’s an excercise in futility)
A couple nitpicks:
2)A person who comes back (“reinstated”) is not re-baptized.
I’ll dispute that, and dig out the references if I can. To the best of my knowledge talking to disfellowshipped witnesses is grounds for disfellowshipping itself. As you say, there is leeway for people they work with, family members etc. Essentially they can associate with them if its totally unavoidable., Anything else is right out.
That’s definitely incorrect. JW doctrine is very big on Jesus’ statement that those who stumble there brothers ‘would be better to have a millstone tied aorund their necks and dumped in the ocean’. Sending someone else to commit an un-Christian act on your behalf is definitely worse than doing it yourself. An order of magnitude worse. What might be a minor infraction for an individual becomes a major infraction of they invoke others to do it on their behalf.
Which is precisley what sending other people to talk to them every time they move is.
No doubt. But were it brought to the attention of the elders, especially by a ‘person of the world’ then it be very much noticed and could not be overlooked. Very big on appearances are the JWs.
I will ask for a reference for this and see if I can find a counter-reference. To the best of my knowledge a perosn who is disfellowshipped is considered to be reduced to their pre-baptismal state, They are no longer part of the the church and have to go thorugh all the same instruction and rituals as a someone who never was baptised.
Which makes it less serious than smoking cigarettes, which warrants automatic disfellowshiping. It remains a matter of conscience. How you choose to define ‘serious offence’ is up to you of course, but I stand by what I said. It’s not serious insofar as it results in a rebuke and a stern talking to about how serious it is and nothing more.
I would really have to se a reference to believe this. People have certainly been disfellowshipped for marrying people who considered inappropriate (criminals for example). But that was because the person was a criminal, not because they were non-JW. Have you any evidence of any JW ever being disfellowshipped for marrying a non-JW of otherwise good character?
Such as?
Blake said:
Hmmmmmm
I will reiterate that I thought your posts were well written, and well thought out.
I was motivated to say that, in part, because I have seen thread after thread here that dealt with JWs that had almost complete false information----anecdotal, third hand, exagerated and many juvenile type posts.
The information you posted was more accurate than any information I have ever seen here about JWs, with the exceptions being the minor examples I noted.
I was also impressed with the balanced, rational posts by John_Stamos’_Left_Ear, BobLibDem, Mr. Moto, Shodan, and Monty. The usual stuff is the type of nonsense that Bryan Ekers posted. And that has nothing to do with JWs—I’ve seen the same level of banality posted about other churches also.
But I wasn’t interested in debating you on the subject. I am a practicing JW in good standing. I attend the meetings regularly, as I have continuously for 11 consecutive years. I was married to a woman for nearly 20 years who was a JW. Of my parents, one was a Roman Catholic and my mother became a JW 40 years ago. I have been well acquianted with JWs, their faith and doctrines for appoximately 35 years—and an active member for the last 11. I am extemely well acquainted with their doctines and practices.
I have never seen a thread here where someone was actually interested in understanding what JWs believe, or I would have started one of those “Ask A LDS…”, Ask a Wiccan…" , Ask a Jehovah’s Witness",type threads. Most threads about JWs that I have seen here have been the type of this OP. I have no interest in those types of threads.
Once again, I applaud you for your measured posts, and the fact that you were very accurate. But where I noted some minor innacuracies, you were, sir, incorrect.
I think it would be more precise to say that it’s a big problem for Jews who are opposed to intermarriage. The ones who are actually getting intermarried do not, presumably, have a problem with it. And if the problem’s “big,” it seems likely that there are a significant number of them.
Was your great-aunt happy in her marriage?