Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To refuse to take the Watchtower and send Jehova's Witnesses away with parish magazine?

378 replies

Elasticwoman · 05/09/2007 22:34

They said: hey, you've got to take a Watchtower, it was a deal!

But I welshed on it.

Was I unreasonable, and what do other people do when the God Squad come to their door trying to sell God to them?

OP posts:
3andnomore · 06/09/2007 21:38

to the op...well, I always feel so so sorry for them...theytend to send the old cute grannies round to my door, and I just smile and take it and say thank you....
I am usually the same with telesales people, dispite the fact that tehy really annoy me, but I always try to be polite....am to good for this world, me thinks....

scienceteacher · 06/09/2007 21:40

I usually say, "no thanks, we're Christian". I think it is good to be polite - they always are - haven't had a problem.

MrsSpoon · 06/09/2007 22:33

UnquietDad, one piece of advice I have for you and your list of questions is if you want to see if JWs can answer them, next time they call ask them for a free 'home bible study' and I promise you they will answer all your questions (there is no obligation with this, it can be done in 10/15 min time slots standing at your front door if you so wish). Have a look round the Official Website you will find many of the questions discussed there.

Also for anyone interested in the blood issue have a look here. The blood transfusion think isn't cut and dried, it isn't always a case of 'no blood transfusion' = 'certain death' even in the case of an accident.

3andnomore · 06/09/2007 22:38

Mrs, Spoon, sadly my Jehova and their Blood transfusion rule experience is not a media read one, but one I experienced when working as a Nurse ,, and this patiend had cancer and never mind the whole bloodissue, due to his cancer, he had to self-catheter through an "entrance site" in the bellybutton, to even let water....and he had to do this in secret, because if he had done it infront of his family and friends, all also JHW, they would have tried to stop him, etc...now, so, you can imagine how they felt about the whole bloodtransfusion thing...it was heartbreaking to watch his own inner fight agaisnt his own conviction, him trying to do the right thing...
obviously there is the chance they all misinterpreteed it, but we had many lectures by his family and their priest, or whatever they call them, and well, then they were sadly all under the same misconception

3andnomore · 06/09/2007 22:40

and I didn't mean literally that otherwise he would just have cathetered himself infront of people, I meant he had to do this without their knowledge...

MrsSpoon · 06/09/2007 22:50

3andnomore, "self catheter"? Is that simply a tube to remove water, no blood involved? If there was no blood involved there is absolutely no scriptural reason for your patient's actions (even if there was blood involved you can hide from mere mortals all you want but if you believe in a God then surely you believe that he can see what you are doing anyway?). Jehovah's Witnesses are not against medical procedure.

3andnomore · 06/09/2007 22:56

yes, basically that is what it boils down, a catheter down a hole/tube, that was made by surgery to let water in a kind of artifical way.
He, obvioulsy also did need to have blood, due to his cancer....but honestly he never told his family etc...that he was self cathretising ( I suppose that is what it is called over here) and it was due to their beliefe because he was obviously asked and observed, etc....

MrsSpoon · 06/09/2007 23:04

Certainly everyone has their own personal preferences (some people, JWs or not would try every procedure if they were seriously ill, others may decide that there is only so far they will go) but a procedure like that, when it doesn't involve blood, there is no scriptural reason why it shouldn't have been done. It does sound odd though, especially as he felt it was something he had to hide from others.

3andnomore · 06/09/2007 23:30

exactly...obviously I don't know if maybe jhw community to community is maybe different or if they are culturally different...this happened in germany, but they were of mediteranea heritage....

UnquietDad · 07/09/2007 09:21

Mostb of that website is just Intelligent Design propaganda. It doesn't answer any questions - it just (quite cleverly) uses selected examples from science and bends them to fit the theory. It's much the same stuff that I've seen in JW pamphlets.

squeakybrushes · 07/09/2007 09:33

elasticwoman - i like your style, it's nice to know middle england's fighting back, parish magazine in hand!!

i respect anyone's right to any darn religion they choose, what really irks me is the jw style of foisting it on others mercilessly.

and i hate the doom and gloom end of the world stuff. i mean no-one wants to hear that crap on a friday morning.

i also can't abide the london trend of more people standing on street corners calling for 'sharia law in the uk' or fervent christians calling for us all to repent as 'the hour is nigh' particularly that ginger guy with the loud hailer (go to oxford st on a sat, you'll see who i mean)

for gods sake, live your life, be good to each other, don't destroy the planet, who gives a shit about anything else???

slightly irrelevant rant over.

SueBaroo · 07/09/2007 10:00

MrsSpoon, yes, I've got quite a bit of the literature, I studied for a little while before Dh put his foot down and said no more. I always thought the pictures were kind of funny. I don't think I've misrepresented Witness beliefs on here, and I'm still in touch with quite a few witnesses.

I just always taken the approach, even when I was actively studying, that if something is true, it can stand up to an honest question, or even some mockery. Truth is truth, after all, by very definition, it's not an opinion.

Howdydoody · 07/09/2007 12:01

Unquietdad are you up for a question that I have never found evolutionists able to answer? Not labelling you or anything!

Maybe a bit deep for a friday afternoon - but would love an answer
If you believe that we can from animals when did instinct become conscience?

krang · 07/09/2007 12:28

When did instinct become consciousness?

Well, to try and answer that, first we have to ensure that we're working from the same definition of 'consciousness'.
What would yours be?

(Though the off-the-top-of-my-head answer would be: over periods of time so great that we can barely comprehend them, the idea of pinning an evolutionary change down to a very small point in time being virtually impossible. We're talking here about millions and millions of years. Though this is hard for people who believe the world was made in seven days to comprehend.)

Another question from me: why do religions cherry-pick parts of scripture? Like, if you live by Leviticus 17:14 and 7:26, why not also live by Leviticus 12.6?

SueBaroo · 07/09/2007 12:33

Krang, I would hazard a guess that it's because there is no longer any temple or tabernacle of the Lord's presence in which to offer sacrifices.

UnquietDad · 07/09/2007 12:38

I'm not an evolutionist or scientist of any sort! Poor old arts grad here. Just to clarify, are you asking about "consciousness" (as krang has interpreted it) or "conscience"?

Howdydoody · 07/09/2007 12:38

Hi Krang - not consciousness, but conscience, have i spelt it right? Knowing right from wrong (yes i know dogs can be taught that to take the sausages on the counter is "bad" , but I mean the natural conscience us humans have that animals dont)

Caroline1852 · 07/09/2007 12:39

The question was asked of "conscience" not consciousness.

UnquietDad · 07/09/2007 12:40

Ah, it is conscience then.
Speaking for myself,I can't say one can isolate a point "when" it happened. After all, some human beings act without conscience. As parents, we teach our children that certain things are wrong - I try to act by certain guidelines, usually based on the idea that "would I want someone to do this to me?"

It's certainly no indication of any creator or higher power.

Howdydoody · 07/09/2007 12:41

Because to me to say "well in was some time in the millions of years of the evolution process" is far more woolly than believing in creation.

And while I'm at it why dont we see mid state human/monkeys, why has the process just stopped?

gobledegook · 07/09/2007 12:53

The JWs who've knocked on my door always go away with a "no thanks - I'm happy with my faith" which tells them nothing - just how I want it. One JW had children at the same c of e school - so don't know how she resolved that contradiction.

I did hear of a vicar (now retired) who invited a pair in and spent and hour undermining the JW position. They didn't bother him again.

but most worryingly I know an adult girl (21 who had left home and fell in with JWs through work - she almost died because she needed an operation - and under JW laws you cant have a blood transfusion. In the end an NHS nurse managed to unbrainwash her - but this powerful influence is a worry. ... but don't what ever you do mention Harry Potter - it's red rag to a bull for JPs and 7th day adventists!

UnquietDad · 07/09/2007 12:57

Who says that, though. howdydoody? Is there any evolutionary scientist or other expert who gives that woolly an answer?

UnquietDad · 07/09/2007 12:58

"don't what ever you do mention Harry Potter - it's red rag to a bull for JPs and 7th day adventists!"

EXCELLENT!

I assume they don't take issue with it on literary merit?

SueBaroo · 07/09/2007 13:03

he he, the HP thing is a delightful merry-go-round for quite a few people. Having said that, one of my very bestest fundamentalist friends thinks it's fabulous.

UnquietDad · 07/09/2007 13:04

What exactly are people's religious objections to HP (in a nutshell), given that it is quite obviously fiction?

Swipe left for the next trending thread