Witness haters--are you happy now? :(

[digs]

@Revtim

They really should assume that, actually. I imagine they will be right more often than if they assume folks want people to knock on their doors and preach or witness or whatever it’s called these days.

@dougie_monty

Well, that’s your opinion. I’d say it’s up to each individual householder to decide that for himself/herself; wouldn’t you?

Almost everyone else’s default is to be respectful of people’s privacy. Your default shows a lack of respect.

Unless you’ve really convinced yourself that most people would want strangers coming to their house, uninvited, to try to convert them.

And I say this as a Christian who’s willing to “witness”… IF someone asks me about it. I think walking up to someone and asking them if they’re “saved” is incredibly rude. And that’s in public. But in their own house? Unbelievably rude.

I would expect people to hate my guts if I did that. But it would not be because of my religion, it would be because I’m being an intrusive ass.

[running_coach]

@dougie_monty

I carried this rule-of-thumb over into the door-to-door ministry. Incidentally, I never saw any “NO SOLICITING” signs in the neighborhoods, mostly in central Redondo Beach, North Torrance, and Hermosa Beach. (FWIW, I just looked up the word “solicit” in my Random House dictionary and the definitions given are not applicable to what the Witnesses do.)

From Merriam-Webster.

2
: to urge (as one’s cause) strongly
3
a : to entice or lure especially into evil

[digs]

I do hope those JW’s pay attention to my new “NO LURING ME INTO EVIL” sign.

It seems to be working on everyone else. Pretty quiet here lately.

[simster]

@dougie_monty

The reasoning in your third paragraph is flawed. Mainly, one would have to know that a particular resident is “already hostile.”
Long before I was ever acquainted with the Witnesses I used to go from door-to-door in some neighborhood looking for yard work to do, to earn my own money (in high school I did this to pay for my own school supplies and lunches, even in my senior year). If I had an inkling that someone was going to be “hostile” I would not approach the door: front porch light on (they may still be asleep); shouting inside the house; a large dog, seen or heard; and so on.

I carried this rule-of-thumb over into the door-to-door ministry. Incidentally, I never saw any “NO SOLICITING” signs in the neighborhoods, mostly in central Redondo Beach, North Torrance, and Hermosa Beach. (FWIW, I just looked up the word “solicit” in my Random House dictionary and the definitions given are not applicable to what the Witnesses do.)

<bolding mine>

Do you really want to play this pathetic little word game?

What, pray tell, are the witnesses doing if not soliciting?

[Trinopus]

@dougie_monty

. . . Incidentally, I never saw any “NO SOLICITING” signs in the neighborhoods, mostly in central Redondo Beach, North Torrance, and Hermosa Beach. . . .

I’ve had one on my door for years, and it’s done fuck-all nothing. The same assholes knock anyway. Religious boobs, magazine salesmen, Girl Scouts with boxes of cookies, etc. No respect for privacy, the whole damn load of them.

(FWIW, I just looked up the word “solicit” in my Random House dictionary and the definitions given are not applicable to what the Witnesses do.)

Your ability to use a dictionary is now as much in question as a great many of your other competencies.

[Gyrate]

@simster

Do you really want to play this pathetic little word game?

What, pray tell, are the witnesses doing if not soliciting?

“Witnessing”. It’s in the name.

Of course, the semantic quibbling just makes the smug doorstep interruptions that much more annoying.

[Ranger_Jeff]

I favour lawn sprinklers on a motion sensor. Because the gumment won’t let you use Bouncing Bettys.

[Loach]

@dougie_monty

Well, that’s an interesting point… It was big news to me because the Witnesses are rarely mentioned in my local newspaper. (The OP was, of course, in Huffington Press.)
FWIW, what are the other four cities?

Most lists I see have it at #1 or #2. Like this one. The guys from Vice Magizine’s HBO show said it was the most frightening place they have been to. And they were all over Afghanistan, Iraq, the mountains of Pakistan and North Korea.

You live in California, claim to read newspapers and have no idea about the horrific violence that has been happening in Mexico for years? The fact that you only heard about it now shows exactly what kind of “newspapers” you actually read.

[Loach]

@Ranger_Jeff

I favour lawn sprinklers on a motion sensor. Because the gumment won’t let you use Bouncing Bettys.

Has the Supreme Court ruled on toe poppers?

[Revtim]

@dougie_monty

Well, that’s your opinion. I’d say it’s up to each individual householder to decide that for himself/herself; wouldn’t you?

By going uninvited to homes, JWs are assuming the home is OK with it. Which is just their opinion. I’d say it’s up to each individual householder to decide that for himself/herself; wouldn’t you? Leave people alone unless they opt-in to be witnessed at.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Legally speaking, solicitation is an opt-out matter. There are serious constitutional consequences to the idea (and especially to legislation) requiring households to “opt in” to solicitation.

Unless the householder manifests externally in some way his wish to remain unmolested by the visits of solicitors, it would seem that the solicitor may take custom and usage as implying consent to call where such custom and usage exist. 31 Michigan Law Review 543. Invitation may be implied from custom, usage, or conduct. Lawrence v. Kaul Lumber Company, 171 Ala. 300, 55 So. 111. And it has been held that a license may be implied to enter the house of another, at usual and reasonable hours, and in a customary manner for any of the common purposes of life. Lakin v. Ames, 10 Cush., Mass., 198. See, also, section 167 of Restatement of Torts.

Prior v. White, 180 So. 347, 355 (Fla. 1938).

I recently analogized this principle to argue that using someone else’s unsecured Wi-Fi network wasn’t a crime in an extremely long and extremely boring paper.

[Revtim]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Legally speaking, solicitation is an opt-out matter. There are serious constitutional consequences to the idea (and especially to legislation) requiring households to “opt in” to solicitation.

I recently analogized this principle to argue that using someone else’s unsecured Wi-Fi network wasn’t a crime in an extremely long and extremely boring paper.

I wasn’t arguing it was illegal, I was just saying that if they are to assume one way or the other, assuming a homeowner does NOT want to be preached at is more likely correct than assuming they do want to be preached at. Hence, the polite thing is to only go when invited.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

No argument there. I occasionally yearn to be one of those weirdos in Montana or Idaho who shoots anyone fool enough to walk onto their land. Except not because I hate darkies or anything.

dougie_monty, that’s a joke. I am unfailingly polite to people who bother me early in the morning with news of religions I have no interest in joining.

[dougie_monty]

First, although I don’t really feel it was my place to do it, I offer an apology to those who were pestered by repeat callers who had specifically asked Witnesses, or any other specific callers, not to return. Nobody likes people who can’t take an explicit hint. Implicit hints are not the kind of thing that put an obligation of courtesy on a possible caller. (I know that if someone specifically told ME not to return, I would not.)
As for Ciudad Juárez, I am certainly not ignorant about the strife and danger in Mexico that has prevailed there in the last ten years or so. As a paralegal I have, more than once, prepared documents for an attorney defending a client who did not want to be deported to Mexico, for obvious reasons (and finding good solid American law in support of his argument). I merely did not know that that city was the worst offender.

I agree with you about those street evangelists who approach you on the street and ask, “Are you saved?” I would pause and say, “That’s bad if you’re wondering too.” Then I would walk away. That’s easier for me, I admit; as big and husky as I am, most people take one* look* at me and, IMO, conclude that that I could be dangerous if I became violent. I rarely do–I like to consider myself a gentle giant and don’t go around scaring people, but, hey, I use what resources I have when I think someone is too adhesive for my taste.

Opt-in/out; Bouncing Betty; toe-poppers…I’d appreciate it if you would give me definitions for these words. Thanks.
Am I playing word games? Here’s the entire entry for “solicit” in my Random House Dictionary:

so-lic-it [phonetic spelling follows], v., -=it-ed, -it-ing. –v.t. 1. to try to obtain by earnest plea or application: to solicid aid. 2. to entreat; petition; to solicit the committee for funds. 3. to seek to influence or incite to action, esp[ecially] unlawful or wrong action [commission of a murder, for example–D. M.] 4. to offer to have sex with in exchange for money.* --v.i.* 5. to make a petition or request for something desired.** 6.** to solicit orders or trade: No soliciting allowed in this building. 7. To offer to have sex fior money. [1400-50; late ME <MF* solliciter* <L sollicitare to exicte, agitate, der. of sollicitus troubled (soll(us) whole + -i- -I-+* citus,* ptp. of ciere to arouse)]

As for that sign “NO LURING ME INTO EVIL,” the Witnesses probably quit coming because they decided that the attitude that created that message was not one worth bothering about.–Matthew 10:14.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

At any point you going to apologize to this board for assuming we’d delight in the murders of Jehovah’s Witnesses?

[Boyo_Jim]

@IvoryTowerDenizen

At any point you going to apologize to this board for assuming we’d delight in the murders of Jehovah’s Witnesses?

I dunno – perhaps we weren’t delighted enough to make doughie happy.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

@Boyo_Jim

I dunno – perhaps we weren’t delighted enough to make doughie happy.

Ah, good point.

[dougie_monty]

@IvoryTowerDenizen

At any point you going to apologize to this board for assuming we’d delight in the murders of Jehovah’s Witnesses?

Certainly…I never posted on this Message Board assuming that the other Dopers were a bunch of sadists. I was furious when I read that item (in the Huffington Post, about the gunman) and, combined with other Dopers’ general anti-Witness attitude, it made me sarcastic–obviously I overplayed my hand, which I see was the wrong thing to do. The saving grace is that you have played your hand fully, giving me a fuller understanding of your side of the issue, however much I disagree with it. Tant pis, tant mieux.

[simster]

dougie_monty - in all of that bluster - you still did not answer the question -

“If its not soliciting, what is it the JW are doing when they come a knocking?”

Using your own definition - it easily fits (1) and (2) and (3) - you ask for our time (in the past, you openly asked for donations for literature, that changed to avoid taxes) , you hope to gain converts, and you attempt to incite to action - further discussion, bible studies, attendance at your kingdom halls, etc.

Its soliciting - plain and simple - even if nothing is for sale (for money) - even though in truth, you are selling (or attempting to sell) your beliefs.

[Miller]

@dougie_monty

Certainly…I never posted on this Message Board assuming that the other Dopers were a bunch of sadists. I was furious when I read that item (in the Huffington Post, about the gunman) and, combined with other Dopers’ general anti-Witness attitude, it made me sarcastic–obviously I overplayed my hand, which I see was the wrong thing to do. The saving grace is that you have played your hand fully, giving me a fuller understanding of your side of the issue, however much I disagree with it. Tant pis, tant mieux.

So, I guess that’s a “no?”