Any X Jehovah's Witnesses Here?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MrZetterlund
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MrZetterlund

Guest
I’ve got a date to attend a Jehovah’s Witness church, and was wondering if there are any key points that I should attack. It would be most helpful if there are any former Jehovah’s Witnesses who can tell me why they left.

I shall strike them at their foundation! :knight2:
 
MrZetterlund said:
I’ve got a date to attend a Jehovah’s Witness church, and was wondering if there are any key points that I should attack. It would be most helpful if there are any former Jehovah’s Witnesses who can tell me why they left.

I shall strike them at their foundation! :knight2:
Click to expand...
You can meet a ton of them on atheist forums. Many of them end up leaving faith entirely.
What is their foundation that you will strike? They make magazines. Just put them in the shredder.
 
StrawberryJam said:
You can meet a ton of them on atheist forums. Many of them end up leaving faith entirely.
What is their foundation that you will strike? They make magazines. Just put them in the shredder.
Click to expand...
Hm, my dad who was/is (idk) a JW was(is) a(n) atheist for the longest time. If they any false doctrine, I plan on refuting it and saving as many as I can. Charitibly of course. 😃
 
MrZetterlund said:
Hm, my dad who was/is (idk) a JW was(is) a(n) atheist for the longest time. If they any false doctrine, I plan on refuting it and saving as many as I can. Charitibly of course. 😃
Click to expand...
Things a catholic may find to be false doctrine that they believe:

Jesus was the archangel Michael. Not God.
They deny the trinity
They believe only 144,000 select ones will go to heaven the rest will be on earth that they will somehow clean up and yet it will still be paradise… LOL
They believe in annihilation
They believe in using artificial contraception
They believe catholics use pagan practices of worship
They dont celebrate birthdays
Men cant have beards

There’s a ton more hope that gets you started.
 
Whether you agree with JW theology or not, if you are in their meeting house, church, or whatever they call it, you should be respectful.

You are a guest there, and should conduct yourself appropriately. With that being said, if they should start attacking another faith, whether it be Catholic or not, then I would repectfully excuse myself and leave. You can make a simple, respectful statement of ,“I’m sorry, those are not my beliefs”, and excuse yourself.

As Catholics, we expect visitors to a Mass to be respectful of where they are at, and what is going on. We don’t require they believe it, we simply ask that they respect it while they are there.

We should offer that same respect to individuals of another faith whether we agree with it or not, especially in their house of worship.

If you are so eager to attack them in their house of worship, my recommendation would be not to go. Simply explain to the individual(s) that invited you that you cannot attend in good concience, based on what you know about their theology. Of course, do this before you enter their hall.

Kindness and respect will get you much further than anger and attacks.
 
Garyjohn2 said:
Really? Men can’t have beards??
Click to expand...
Yep. And, you will NEVER see a woman in pants in their meetings or going door to door. That’s what I hear from former JW’s who are now athiests.

Oh, and they forbid blood transfusions even if life depends on one.

There are more doozies, but this should get the study rolling.
 
twopekinguys said:
Whether you agree with JW theology or not, if you are in their meeting house, church, or whatever they call it, you should be respectful.

As Catholics, we expect visitors to a Mass to be respectful of where they are at, and what is going on. We don’t require they believe it, we simply ask that they respect it while they are there.

We should offer that same respect to individuals of another faith whether we agree with it or not, especially in their house of worship.
Click to expand...
I agree with these statements. Do unto others, right?

I’m also ok with women never wearing pants. Does this make me sexist? 😦
 
Garyjohn2 said:
I agree with these statements. Do unto others, right?

I’m also ok with women never wearing pants. Does this make me sexist? 😦
Click to expand...
Being ok with women never wearing pants is not sexist if the women chose not to wear pants. But, having a dogma about women wearing or not wearing them is where the rubber meets the road.
 
StrawberryJam said:
Being ok with women never wearing pants is not sexist if the women chose not to wear pants. But, having a dogma about women wearing or not wearing them is where the rubber meets the road.
Click to expand...
:yup:

Also, in addition to the no beards on men, men also can’t have their hair longer than their shirt collars, lest they appear spiritually weak. They must wear a shirt and tie to all meetings. Suit jackets indicate spiritual strength.

This is one that I find amusing: No Christian music… listening to Led Zepplin is fine, but Amazing Grace or How Great Thou Art is a big :tsktsk:

No voting, No military, No working as a police officer, Higher education had always been a big no-no… they may have changed that in very recent years… not sure how well that sits with the JWs who received full scholarships to Universities but had to turn them down because going to college showed you were into worldly pursuits and Armageddon was JUST around the corner.

No charitable giving… that include red cross, the food bank, salvation army, goodwill…

No birthdays, no valentines day, no thanksgiving, mother’s day or father’s day. No smoking but alcohol is fine. No R rated movies, no dating without a chaperone (now that I have teenagers, this one sounds more reasonable - lol!)

No sports for kids… or cheerleading… or boyscouts… or any afterschool clubs. They have a saying, “Bad association spoils useful habits.” Bad association = anyone who isn’t a JW in good standing. JWs size each other up and avoid the ones who fall short.

No speaking to former JWs who have left the oraganization and joined other churches even if they are your mother, your daughter or your son. No communication whatsoever. No attending their weddings or funerals.

No reading any religious material not published by the Watchtower. No disagreeing with anything they publish. Ever. Remember, they speak for Jehovah so disagreeing with the Watchtower = disagreeing w/ God.
 
yellowbird said:
:yup:

Also, in addition to the no beards on men, men also can’t have their hair longer than their shirt collars, lest they appear spiritually weak. They must wear a shirt and tie to all meetings. Suit jackets indicate spiritual strength.

This is one that I find amusing: No Christian music… listening to Led Zepplin is fine, but Amazing Grace or How Great Thou Art is a big :tsktsk:

No voting, No military, No working as a police officer, Higher education had always been a big no-no… they may have changed that in very recent years… not sure how well that sits with the JWs who received full scholarships to Universities but had to turn them down because going to college showed you were into worldly pursuits and Armageddon was JUST around the corner.

No charitable giving… that include red cross, the food bank, salvation army, goodwill…

No birthdays, no valentines day, no thanksgiving, mother’s day or father’s day. No smoking but alcohol is fine. No R rated movies, no dating without a chaperone (now that I have teenagers, this one sounds more reasonable - lol!)

No sports for kids… or cheerleading… or boyscouts… or any afterschool clubs. They have a saying, “Bad association spoils useful habits.” Bad association = anyone who isn’t a JW in good standing. JWs size each other up and avoid the ones who fall short.

No speaking to former JWs who have left the oraganization and joined other churches even if they are your mother, your daughter or your son. No communication whatsoever. No attending their weddings or funerals.

No reading any religious material not published by the Watchtower. No disagreeing with anything they publish. Ever. Remember, they speak for Jehovah so disagreeing with the Watchtower = disagreeing w/ God.
Click to expand...
Yellowbird,

Thanks for saving my fingers from having to type all that out! I went over to pop in on the athiest agnostic forum where there are many former JW’s, and was tempted to ask them to give me a full list. I decided not to, because I think it is rather painful for them to have to recall these things.

They have mentioned celebrating anniversaries and in recent times graduations are okay now, but were not in the very early days.

What I would like to know is why they dislike children so much? It seems to be the most child unfriendly faith of christianity. Yes, I realize most don’t consider it christianity at all, but I use that term to be polite to those who believe in the JW stuff.
 
Excaliber, who posts on here from time to time, is an ex-JW. T More, Marilena, Carol Marie, and jw2lds2catholic are former JW’s as well, although T More is new and still determining a future spiritual path. Regardless is an actual JW that posts on here. Jschwehm, a former
JW who is now Catholic and posts on here, actually runs the website catholicxjw.com, the best place to find Catholic resources on the Jehovah’s Witnesses and to help those who leave the Watchtower.
 
Oh… JW’s don’t believe that Jesus died on a cross. Instead, he was executed on a “torture stake.”
 
Let me repost my “History of the Jehovah’s Witnesses” discussion from a recent thread. It should be helpful:

I work as a professional historian. Maybe it would help to take a look at the history of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. I’ll be taking this information and the quotes from the Catholic Answers (CA) article and the Wikipedia (W) article on the JW’s. My commentary is in bold.

Also before we begin, a definition:
Eschatology: a part of theology and philosophy concerned with the final events in the history of the world or the ultimate destiny of human kind, commonly phrased as the end of the world.
**
Here is what the two articles state, in summary, with my own commentary added:**
  1. Charles Taze Russell has a crisis of faith as a Congregationalist at age 17, and becomes an agnostic. (He doesn’t believe in God, but doesn’t deny the possibility of God.) This is a young man who is having a crisis of faith, and struggling to find out what he believes.
  2. After a few years, he goes to an Adventist meeting. This group, led by William Miller, believed that the world would end in 1843, but it doesn’t So, they mysteriously “find” an error in their calculations and repredict the end of the world in 1844. Again, it doesn’t happen (obviously). Most people leave this movement, believing it to be a fraud, although a few, led by Ellen G. White, go on to found the Seventh-Day Adventists. In other words, the Adventists have TWICE incorrectly predicted the end of the world, causing most (but not all) followers to abandon their ideas.
  3. Jonas Wendell gets Russell interested in Bible prophecy again. In 1876, Russell met Nelson H. Barbour and subsequently adopted Barbour’s eschatology. Barbour had predicted a visible return of Christ for 1873, and when that failed to occur, he revised the prediction to 1874. In other words, Russell hooks up with Nelson Barbour, who also incorrectly predicts a visible return for Christ (the end of the world)… twice!
  4. Soon after the second disappointment, Barbour’s group decided Christ had returned to the earth in 1874, but invisibly. They differed from most Second Adventists by teaching that all of humankind descended from Adam would be given a chance to live in a paradise Earth. The year 1914 was seen as the final end, marking a forty-year period from 1874. So, his predictions did not come true, and changes his story to claim that Jesus came to Earth “invisibly” in 1874. After forty years on Earth, the world would then finally end in 1914. This is a skeptical claim from someone who had so clearly failed to predict the future. (I’d also like to point out at this point that are several apparations and miracles that Catholics believe, such as Fatima, that did correctly predict the future.)
  5. It was this diminished Adventism which influenced Russell. In July 1879, Russell broke with Barbour over the concept of substitutionary atonement and he soon began publishing his own magazine, Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence (now known as The Watchtower). After the break, Russell retained the bulk of Barbour’s eschatological views. He was known as “Pastor Russell” (who took the title “Pastor” even though he never got through high school), and in 1881 formed the legal entity which developed into the non-profit organization: The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania (currently headquartered in New York City). In 1884, it was incorporated with Russell as president. He authored the six-volume series, Studies in the Scriptures. Now, we have Russell breaking with Barbour, but keeping his views about the end of the world (the one thing that he’s clearly been wrong about in the past!). It’s also important to note that Russell doesn’t even have a high school education. Now, this isn’t necessarily bad or uncommon for that day and age, but the less educated are far more susceptible to having people who know more than them talk them into an idea that may be incorrect. They won’t have the knowledge to refute it.
  6. Before he got his religious career well underway, Russell promoted what he called “miracle wheat,” which he sold at sixty dollars per bushel. He claimed it would grow five times as well as regular wheat. In fact, it grew slightly less well than regular wheat, as was established in court when Russell was sued. Later he marketed a fake cancer cure and what he termed a “millennial bean”. **At first, it might seem like this doesn’t have anything directly to do with his faith, but it demonstrates a pattern. Whether he was actively conning people, or whether he was just gullible (possibly due to his lack of education), he was involved in at least three other false, and possibly corrupt, schemes in his early life.
    **
  7. Russell taught his followers the non-existence of hell and the annihilation of unsaved people (a doctrine he picked up from the Adventists), the non-existence of the Trinity (he said only the Father, Jehovah, is God), the identification of Jesus with Michael the Archangel, the reduction of the Holy Spirit from a person to a force, the mortality (not immortality) of the soul, and the return of Jesus in 1914. Important here is the idea that Russell is picking up some of his doctrine (including the imminent end of the world) from the Adventists, which were wrong time and time again. If their denomination is wrong, why did Russell adopt ideas from it? If they are right, why isn’t everyone Adventist today?
continued…
 
Here is part 2, still discussing the history of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Another comment before we get started. Isn’t it interesting how so far, the major ideas of the Jehovah’s Witnesses seem to have nothing to do with the Bible, but the personal opinions of two individuals who clearly have major theological problems of their own?
  1. When 1914 had come and gone, with no Jesus in sight, Russell modified his teachings and claimed Jesus had, in fact, returned to Earth, but that his return was invisible. His visible return would come later, but still very soon. It would result in the final conflict between God and the Devil—the forces of good and the forces of evil—in which God would be victorious. This conflict is known to Witnesses as the battle of Armageddon, and just about everything the Witnesses teach centers around this doctrine. Here we have a FIFTH incorrect prediction in the life of Russell. He didn’t make the first four, but he believed in them. Now he becomes more vague, saying that Jesus is still here invisibly, and that the visible return would be “soon”. For someone who is supposedly guided by Jehovah in things like scriptural interpretation, he is making (and following people that are making) a tremendous amount of errors.
  2. Russell died on October 31, 1916, and following his death, an editorial committee of five was set up to supervise the writing of the Watch Tower magazine, as set forth in Russell’s Last Will and Testament. On January 6, 1917, Joseph Franklin Rutherford (also known as “Judge Rutherford”) was elected second President of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. New by-laws were passed at the same business meeting that strengthened the President’s authority. Initially, the board of directors for the Watch Tower Society accepted this change, but four of the board members withdrew their support. The June 20, 1917 meeting of the full board of directors tabled, for one month, a proposal to return control of the Society to the board, but Rutherford prevented their attempt. Matters came to a head on July 17, 1917 when the book The Finished Mystery was published. Rutherford announced that he was dismissing the four directors and replacing them with new members. Dissension and schisms ensued in congregations worldwide as a result of these events, and of the consequences of new predictions made for the years 1918, 1920 and 1925. At one time Rutherford claimed Russell was next to Paul as an expounder of the gospel, but later, in an effort to have his writings supplant Russell’s, he let Russell’s books go out of print. It was Rutherford who coined the slogan, “Millions now living will never die.” By it he meant that some people alive in 1914 would still be alive when Armageddon came and the world was restored to a paradise state. The death of Russell causes dissent and schism. The organization itself can’t even keep control of its beliefs. THREE more failed predictions occur, bringing the total to eight (if you include the Adventist predictions). Rutherford tries to seize control and impose his own beliefs on the group. He even has his own books replace those of Russell! All of this causes many people to become disillusioned and leave.
  3. In the 1925 prophecy, Rutherford stated that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the prophets would return to Earth, and so he prepared for them a mansion named Beth Sarim in San Diego, California. He moved into this mansion (where he died in 1942) and bought an automobile with which to drive the resurrected patriarchs around. The Watch Tower Society quietly sold Beth Sarim years later to cover up an embarrassing moment in their history, namely another failed prophecy. This paragraph pretty much speaks for itself. Try searching for Beth Sarim on the internet and see what you find. I can provide you with links, articles, and pictures if necessary. Also note that Watchtower Publications have continuously changed their story regarding Beth Sarim over the years (to cover up their mistaken prophecy), and this can be historically documented.
Part 3 to follow…
 
  1. An emphasis on preaching house-to-house began in 1922. By 1928, attendance at their yearly Memorial dropped nearly 75% from 1922, due to the previous power struggle, the failed predictions for the year 1925, and the evolving doctrinal changes which alienated those who sided with Russell’s views.
From 1925 to 1933, their eschatological beliefs underwent radical changes. In 1931, the name “Jehovah’s Witnesses” was adopted. By 1933, 1914 was seen as the beginning of Christ’s presence, his enthronement as king, and the start of the last days instead of being considered the terminal date in their chronology.

Under Rutherford, membership grew from about 44,000 in 1928 to about 115,000 at the time of his death in 1942.
**
So, the doctrine changed SO MUCH by 1928, that over 75% of the organization simply quit. They officially adopt the name "Jehovah’s Witnesses, and, as seen in point #9, adopt the idea that some of the people alive in 1914 WILL be alive at the time of the Second Coming. They also begin house-to-house preaching. They really almost had to, since their numbers were declining so severely.**
  1. Nathan Homer Knorr succeeded Rutherford as president of the Watch Tower Society. Known as an efficient administrator, Knorr founded the Watchtower Bible School of Gilead to train missionaries, as well as the Theocratic Ministry School to train preaching and teaching at the congregational level. (It is under Knorr that the Jehovah’s Witnesses earn their reputation as skillful deliverers of “personal testimonies.”
Knorr’s vice-president Frederick William Franz became the leading theologian, and is believed to have been the principal translator of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures. Also produced were a Greek-English New Testament interlinear (The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures) and a Bible dictionary (Aid to Bible Understanding). Since the Bible, as preserved through the centuries, did not support the peculiar doctrines of the Witnesses, Knorr chose an anonymous committee to produce the New World Translation, which is used by no sect other than the Witnesses. By means of former Witnesses, the names of the five members of the translation committee eventually came to light. Four of the five members completely lack credentials to qualify them as Bible translators, and the fifth member studied non-biblical Greek for only about two years.

The offices of elder and ministerial servant (deacon) were restored to Witness congregations in 1972, with appointments being made from headquarters. Membership rose from 115,000 to over 2 million under Knorr’s leadership.

What seems to be the conclusion, based on what we’ve learned so far? The Jehovah’s Witnesses, having changed doctrine so many times and with so many failed predictions, were forced to alter the Bible to support their beliefs. Four of the five translators couldn’t even translate Greek! Now, this next quote came from the Catholic Answers article, but it indicates the types of things other religions accuse the New World Translation of changing:

**“The New World Translation was produced because it buttresses Witnesses’ beliefs through obscure or inaccurate renderings. For example, to prove that Jesus was only a creature, not God, the New World Translation’s rendering of John 1:1 concludes this way: “and the Word was a god” [italics added]. Every other translation, Catholic and Protestant—not to mention the Greek original—has “and the Word was God.””

IF this is true, you can see that such a rendering would eliminate the references to the divinity of Jesus and his equality with God. Such a change would undermine Trinitarian religions. Mind you, I’m NOT telling you to automatically accept that is what happened. You can decide for yourself. But, you can at least acknowledge that if such a change DID occur, it would change the entire interpretation of the Bible. Catholics and Protestants argue that similar subtle changes were made throughout the Bible.**

Part 4 to follow…
 
Here is part 4, still discussing the history of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
  1. Knorr was succeeded as head of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, by Frederick Franz. He had been the Witnesses’ leading theologian, and his services were often called upon. During the 1960s and early 1970s, various references appeared in Witnesses’ literature and assemblies, implying that Christ’s thousand-year millennial reign might begin by 1975. The chronology pointing to 1975 was noted in the secular media at the time. When it didn’t, Franz had to find an explanation.
Witnesses believe that Adam was created in 4026 B.C. and that human beings have been allotted 6000 years of existence until Armageddon and the beginning of the millennium. This figure is based on a “creative week” in which each of six days is equal to 1,000 years, with the Sabbath or seventh day being the beginning of the millennium. Simple arithmetic gives 1975 as the year Armageddon would arrive. Franz explained that Armageddon would actually come 6000 years after Eve’s creation. But when 1975 came and went, the Witnesses had to “adjust” their chronology to cover up a failed prediction. They accomplished this by maintaining that no one knew exactly how long after Adam’s creation Eve came on the scene. Franz said that it was months—even years. Hence he was able to “stretch” the 1975 date to some indeterminate time in the future. In any case, Franz said that Witnesses would just have to wait, knowing the end is right around the corner.

From 1975 to 1980, there was a drop in membership following the failure of this prediction to materialize. In 1980, the Watchtower Society admitted its responsibility in building up hope regarding the year 1975.
**
HOW many times is this now that the organization failed to predict the Second Coming? This time, even the secular media picked up the story. In this case, the Watchtower Society even admitted some responsibility that it was at fault, and that their over-enthusiasm over certain writings about 1975 were misleading. Again, membership drops. Note that Franz is resorting to having to “recalculate” the date yet again, just as was done in 1874 and 1914.**
  1. The leadership of Jehovah’s Witnesses was reorganized in 1976 and the power of the presidency passed on to the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Subsequent presidents of the Watch Tower Society after Knorr’s death in 1977 have been Frederick William Franz, Milton George Henschel (1993) and Don A. Adams. However, since 1976, doctrinal and organizational decisions have been made by the Governing Body. In 1995 the Watchtower quietly changed one of its major prophetic doctrines. Until this point, they had maintained that the generation alive in 1914 would not pass from the scene until Armageddon occurred. Now that this generation has almost entirely died out—and Armageddon has not occurred and does not seem like it will happen immediately—they had to change their doctrine. Now, the Watchtower says that Armageddon will simply occur “soon,” and it is no longer tied to a particular, literal generation of people.
**And so as recently as 15 years ago… yet another change in doctrine! It seems very suspicious that one of the core doctrines of the Jehovah’s Witnesses has been rewritten again, again, and again. Certainly, this is not the only argument against the organization, but it’s the 800 pound elephant in the room. (In other words, it’s such a glaring error, it can’t be ignored.) **
  1. As of August 2005, Jehovah’s Witnesses have a membership of more than 6.6 million actively involved in preaching. Jehovah’s Witnesses have an active presence in most countries. In no country are they a large part of the population, however. Brazil and Mexico are the only countries other than the U.S. where the number of active Witness publishers exceeds half a million.
    **
    If the Jehovah’s Witnesses are indeed the correct faith, why are so few people across the world in the organization? How are so many fundamental errors explained? Why is it primarily an American phenomenon? Why have SO many people left the group at SO many points during the past?**
This concludes the historical outline of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Part 5 will be a brief analysis.
 
Part 5 - Analysis

Ok, what you’ve just read above is a very long combination of the Catholic Answers article and the Wikipedia article. I encourage you to read it over very closely. Think about the various points. Do you own research. Look up Beth Sarim. Also, when the Watchtower reprints its newsletters and publications, it has been known to go back and change what was said to cover up its poor history of prophecy. This is documented extensively and I can find you the references if you like. In light of all of this evidence, is it at least possible that the Watchtower could have altered the New World Translation to suit it’s needs?

There is a lot of information above, so let me summarize what conclusions I believe it leads to. Let me make it clear that this is no one’s opinion but my own.

**Charles Taze Russell is a good, but uneducated young man. At 17, he has a crisis of faith after getting in over his head in an argument with an athiest. He falls prey to (or actively engages in) a variety of dubious schemes, and finally is drawn toward Adventism. He becomes unhappy. He wants to be a good person in a world that isn’t very good, so he’s drawn toward an organization that believes that this world will pass in the very near future. It would end all of his current problems on Earth and allow him eternal happiness. It fails to occur, but he continues to believe that this world will be over soon. This, above all, influences his beliefs. It’s a psychological and spiritual need, rather than any complex Biblical view.

Russell finds his calling in religion and begins to write. He borrows many ideas from the Adventists, rather than creating them himself. He breaks with Barbour, and makes his own predictions, which fail to materialize. Russell dies having created a belief system that helps to sooth his own troubled spirituality.

Joseph Franklin Rutherford seizes control of the organization in what amounts to a hostile takeover. He throws out many of Russell’s beliefs, and makes three more incorrect prophecies, including the one involving Beth Sarim. Three-fourths of the organization simply leaves the group. To stop these huge losses, new president Nathan Homer Korr institutes door-to-door evangelization.

The doctrine of the Jehovah’s Witnesses is now so far from what the Bible says, that Korr authorizes the New World Translation to force the book to support their views. (Please note that when the NWT came out, almost every single review was highly critical of the translation, pointing out that it was, at best, a transliteration, not a translation. This is where you create a very inaccurate translation that gives the rough idea of what the original says. It often has the effect of making it easier to read, too. That, of course, would be very helpful for someone not very experienced in reading the Bible.) Only one person could even translate Greek, and even he had insufficient background to have the necessary skills for the job.

By 1975, you have yet another failed prophecy that results in more people leading the organization. Even as late as last year, there are only 6.6 million followers of the group. Despite ALL their evangelization, they are rarely successful outside of the United States. Their biggest target group is former Catholics, since most Catholics grow up learning from the Catechism rather than from the Bible. They are not nearly as familiar with Bible study, and so don’t have the necessary skills to point out the many flaws in the doctrine of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.**

So anyway… there’s some things to think about.
 
StrawberryJam said:
Being ok with women never wearing pants is not sexist if the women chose not to wear pants. But, having a dogma about women wearing or not wearing them is where the rubber meets the road.
Click to expand...
Hmm, is that why my neighbor didn’t go door-to-door when it was 20 degrees out? 😉

Why can’t men wear beards, do you know?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top