Comments on: Jehovah’s Witnesses Continue to Be Banned in Parts of Russia; Part Three: Oh, the Hypocrisy!

By: JimmyG

JimmyG — Tue, 09 Aug 2016 09:17:56 +0000

To quote Richard Dawkins (from ‘The God Delusion’):

“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

Watchtower draws almost exclusively from the Old Testament for its damnations of everyone outside itself. It likes Revelation too, a New Testament extension of the Old. The angry, bloodthirsty Yahweh is reflected in the leadership of the Watchtower who keep churning out this message of brutality. Unfortunately this attitude filters down to many rank and file JWs.

By: MJ Bachman

MJ Bachman — Tue, 09 Aug 2016 01:59:47 +0000

I dont beleive people should be persecuted based on religious beleives. So as far as that is concerned Putting is a p.o.s. now with that said having religious freedom should not give anyone or a group the right to persecute others. JW do persecute others. I saw exactly how JWs treat homosexuals, free thinkers, and anyone who contradicts them. The very prayer yoyr will be done on earth is an invitation to destruction of oyr world as it us and it is not only prayed by jws but by a lot of religions. JW are amoral and hypocritical. Too many double standards.

By: Joy

Joy — Mon, 08 Aug 2016 18:49:58 +0000

JW’s don’t have any sympathy for others, believe me. I have seen JW widows in need of things, but the one thing I personally witnessed for many months was a handicapped JW with a service dog who was made to sit in the hallway by the literature. They said it was because of people with allergies. Even though people would pass her going in and exiting. Her father tried calling watchtower and was told they let things like that up to each individual KH. Someone said they should go to the association that helps a disabled person who feels discriminated against and it must have gotten back to the “right” person because she was then allowed to sit in the back of the meeting room and was given an apology. It totally disgusted me to say the least.

By: Alexandra James

Alexandra James — Mon, 08 Aug 2016 17:42:15 +0000

No, that’s not what I mean at all. I mean exactly what I said; to offer them sympathy when they have no sympathy for others and stubbornly dig their heels in when questioned about their abusive policies, is hypocritical. If you want to have compassion for these elders who break up families, grill child rape victims, blame child rape victims, turn their backs on domestic violence victims, and have no problem slandering other people, that’s your choice. It’s also why those practices continue to flourish.

As for the “eye for an eye,” I cannot endorse giving these angry, belittling, abusing, horrific elders compassion. They were told not to defame other religions and teach their members to shun their own families, they ignored that direction, and now they need to face the music. Children get punished for misbehaving and it’s not a “level” to “grow beyond.” Crime, hurtful behavior, misbehavior, and the like deserve punishment; that’s how you build civilized societies. JWs are free to think all they want about who goes to heaven and if the soul actually dies; they are not free to call me “mentally diseased” or to say someone is “blood guilty.” To let them have free reign to say anything and do anything is a mistake, and why pedophilia, violence, and these hurtful policies exist in their religion.

By: Gareth

Gareth — Mon, 08 Aug 2016 15:25:25 +0000

You have some valid points, but on the whole I don’t agree. You say:

“To offer them sympathy for prison terms that are the result of outright defamation and because of their harsh shunning practices, when they themselves have no sympathy for people they expect to be burned to death any minute now, is a bit hypocritical, to say the least.”

Offering sympathy is never hypocritical I think, it’s a form of compassion. Maybe you mean that it would be hypocritical for JWs to complain about any suffering caused by the prison sentences?

Likewise, activists expressing JWs deserve sympathy has to do with the balance between freedom of religion/opinion versus defaming and other infringement on other human beings’ rights. This is a hard subject, and your article seems to have the “eye for an eye” kind of mentality. I think the human race has grown beyond that level.