So, a YouTube member by the name of CRACKMEDIA (you can visit his page here: http://www.youtube.com/user/CRACKMEDIA) sent me a message this morning.  It read:

“‘I make my livelihood in a different field’. move on get over it. If you don’t want to worship Jah anymore why do you wast your time doing things like this. What good will it do for you. One thing you do know the organization will always more on. That you can’t stop. Move on have a nice day.”

Though most people that write to me know when to use a question mark, messages like CRACKMEDIA’s arrive in my inbox a few times a year.  I always respond.  I’m always polite, and sometimes I even encourage them to go confess their ‘sin’ (of visiting an ‘apostate’ website) to their elders.  Anyway, I decided that, this time, I would concoct a very thorough response, send it to CRACKMEDIA, and save it for future use.  That way, when I (inevitably) get a message akin to this one again, I can just copy and paste.

Here’s my response…

Thanks for your comments. I appreciate getting feedback – it let’s me know that people are interested in the things I’ve made!

I receive comments like yours quite often; wherein people (usually active Witnesses) indicate that I should just “move on”. When I was a Witness, I felt the same way, too. However, I find that such comments are made, not so much due to a person genuinely concerned for the use of my time, as they are uncomfortable to see such information available online.

I’m sure you would agree that the religion dominates everything in a Witnesses’ life. So, leaving the religion is a major decision. I have moved on (or, perhaps, more correctly, I am trying to move on), but the enormous ramifications – including the knowledge that I wasted much of my life in a fruitless endeavor, am now shunned by many of my relatives, and must now live in a world which I was taught would be gone by now – mean that moving on is a long process of healing. I would compare it to divorcing a mate to whom I was married to for decades, while simultaneously being demonized by persons who claimed to love me.

As a Witness, I was always taught to make known the truth. I was taught to never let an opportunity go by to tell others about the ‘truth’ that I knew. Indeed, I was even expected to go, uninvited, to people’s doors, and share my beliefs with them. Weekly, I received training on various means and methods to do this (primarily in the Service Meeting). Unfortunately, I discovered that the Witnesses do not have the truth. Worse, the religion has caused great harm to many members, including some quite close to me. This caused me great vexation, as I did not wish the religion to not be the truth – particularly since I knew that those who no longer believe the religion are shunned by all their friends and family who do! Nevertheless, much as a person may not wish to believe they have a terminal disease, my desire for what was true or not true had no effect on what was actually true or not true.

I realize that the Watchtower Society likes to paint ex-Witnesses in a negative light. For example, when I was a Witness, if I saw an ex-Witness at a store, and that person said hi to me, I would think “Oh, the nerve of that person, thinking that I want to talk to them!” Conversely, if they ignored me, or walked the other way, I would think “Ah, see, they know they’re in the wrong, they’re too ashamed to even say a greeting!” My thinking was, as you know, in perfect harmony with the Society’s teachings. So, I know Witnesses desire to spin my videos and website in an evil way even though it is fallacious to discredit a perfectly valid argument by making an irrelevant attack on the person presenting it .

Still, I’d like to point out that, as a Witness, and as I cited above, I was always taught to champion truth, and to make the facts known to as wide an audience as possible. Unlike my days as a Witness, however, I do not aggressively proselytize door-to-door, but instead passively make information available online. In a way, it’s a healing for me, but also, it helps others who are looking to uncover the facts about the religion. It also gives non-Witnesses a glimpse into the Witnesses’ organization. Since Witnesses pride themselves in doing research and making their beliefs known to others, this shouldn’t be a problem.

As an illustration, compare my story to the woman who founded Mothers Against Drunk Driving, or the woman who started the Susan G. Koman for the Cure foundation. Those women lost a son to drunk driving and a sister to breast cancer, respectively. But why did they then use their energies to engage in the activities they did? Why didn’t they just “move on”? Wasn’t it to raise awareness, as well as to find healing themselves? Also, let’s face it…it’s what they knew. I’m sure there are worse problems in the world than drunk driving, so why did that woman use her time on that particular issue? Because that was what she knew. Likewise, if you work for a company that you subsequently discover to be engaged in fraudulent acts, do you stay with them? Do you quit the company but then just shut up about it?

Finally, yes, I do know that the Organization will move on. Like all religions, the Witnesses are a robust entity. Though their yearly increase has slowed in recent years, they will likely exist as long as they can change and adapt to the world around them. But to use yet another illustration, if I experience bad service at a restaurant, should I complain? I mean, after all, my complaint is unlikely to close the establishment.

Again, thanks for the feedback. I hope my response helps explain matters.

While hosting a cable show last week, I asked the following question:

It seems that the only arguments against gay marriage are on religious grounds.  Is that fair to say?

One of my interviewees, an atheist with a doctorate in theology, readily agreed.  The other interviewee, an employee of Christian organization with a seminary degree, said something like this: “That’s a great question; a lot of people make that assumption.  However, there are other reasons for not legalizing same-sex marriage: some have argued that it’s simply not natural; animals do not engage in homosexuality.”

I was going to move on to the next topic for discussion, but the atheist intervened and politely pointed out that there is homosexual behavior in animals.  He even pointed out my all-time favorite study in this area – a study that appeared in a 2003 issue of Endocrinology finding that 8% of domestic rams prefer other rams over ewes.  (Give a whole new meaning to the term “sheep-like”, doesn’t it?)  And, though I did not mention this during the show, I have owned more than one pair of lesbian birds.

But my point here is not whether or not same-sex marriage should be legalized; my point is this: It is my finding that people will attempt to prop up tenuous beliefs with secular supporting arguments.  In this way, it helps to validate a position which lacks inherent ‘truthfulness’ or even logic and, perhaps, win over non-believers.

Apart from the above, a case in point is an issue my former religion took with blood transfusions.  Of course, their main argument for shunning blood was their interpretation of a verse in Acts. But they often cited the risk of HIV from tainted blood.  In this way, the HIV-risk served as a validation for their unique (and occasionally fatal) stance on blood.

A better example is birthdays.  Last night, I had another enjoyable phone conversation with a relative who, among other things, told me that if, indeed, I had done all the research I claim to have done, then I should know birthdays are wrong – “You know candles on cakes are of pagan origin, and no Christians in the first-century celebrated their birthday and if it was so important to celebrate birthdays, why doesn’t the bible say when Jesus was born?”

In the fluster of the exchange, I tried to quickly dispel these ‘supports’ for what is quite possibly the Witnesses’ most arbitrary policy.  I pointed out that no one is claiming that birthday celebrations are “important”, and that, if we are to use the first century Christians as examples, where is the record of them reporting their time, attending five meetings a week, shaving, celebrating graduations, wedding anniversaries, and baby showers (a birthday party if there ever was one!)?  These are all practiced by Witnesses today…though each item lacks a first-century precedent.  On the matter of candles, I noted that my wife and I had been the frequent recipient of candle-topped cakes for our wedding anniversaries, and that these cakes were often the gift of Witness family members.

This caused my relative to become quite agitated.  The subject was abruptly changed: “That’s not why I called,” was the scathing bit of logic that brought an end to that discussion.

Anyway… what I’m trying to say is that those ‘supporting rationales’ lend credence to a policy/belief/desire that has no fundamentally sound premise.  For example, I might say: “Yummy, I like to drink this Pepsi.  And you know what; it’s also good for me!”  Then someone might respond: “Um, actually, it’s not good for you.”  I could either abandon my soft drink consumption, or confess the reality: “Yeah, I know.  The thing is, I just love the taste.  Is that so bad?”

No, in the case of Pepsi drinking (and I do not drink Pepsi), perhaps it’s not so bad.  But when it comes to forcing a wedge between family members, or denying sheep-like people their civil rights, then I want some valid rationales.

So I ask: What are the (valid) reasons for not legalizing gay marriage? 

I received a phone call from my mother on Thursday (thoughtfully calling on my son’s birthday) in which she re-invited me to her wedding. Now I have to make a decision as to if I will attend or not.
If that first paragraph sounds crazy to you, it’s because religion is involved. Let me explain: In late February, after dating a man for a month, my mom announced she was engaged. Two weeks later, she invited us to her house where, for the first time, I met my future step-father. She spoke of her desire for a small wedding, in her fiancé’s backyard, with only a dozen or so family members in attendance. She was excited to have me, my wife, and son there, and told us to set the date aside. She even asked my wife to be the photographer.
So far so good…
A week later, however, she called, nearly in tears, informing me that I was now un-invited. The reason was because a couple of elders from her congregation (she’s a Jehovah’s Witness) corralled her fiancé into a meeting and told him that I was a disassociated ex-Witness and thus my presence at the wedding would be offensive to the Witnesses in the audience.
Incidentally, I am flabbergasted (God, I love that word) that elders from the congregation have a say in who my mom’s invites over to her house. It’s kind of like if my boss called me into his office and sternly charged me not to have any ex-employees over for dinner.
First my mom was shocked and appalled that I was disassociated. When I told her I had not disassociated myself, she said: “But they said that you sent a letter to the elders.” “Yes,” I explained, “I did send them a letter, but it was in response to their desire to meet with me. I told them I would meet with them, but they never responded.” My mom insisted that I must have disassociated myself, but when I offered to read the letter, she refused to listen. I tried pointing out to her that the Witnesses at her wedding would have nothing to worry about – I had no desire to expose their religion at my mom’s wedding – and, if anything, I should be afraid of them, as they are the ones who pride themselves in aggressive proselytizing. “But they’re good people,” she argued, implying that I was not.
After hanging up on me, my mom called a few days later admitting that perhaps I was being honest when I said I’d never disassociated myself but that, regardless, a person can be considered disassociated by their actions. This is complete bullshit. I mean, yes, the Watchtower Society does teach that if a former member disagrees with the current official doctrine on any point, than that person is defaulted as disassociated, but the bullshit stems from the fact that my sister and wife were both still invited. I’m not gonna expose their lives here, but, needless to say, both of them have done many many many many things contrary to Witness doctrine. Indeed, when my mom mentioned the existence of my website as sufficient reason to expel me from her wedding, I pointed out that it was my wife who loaded all the information onto the web. My mom did not know how to respond to this, and attempted to discuss the possibility of my uncle and aunt being allowed to pick my son up on the day of her marriage so that he may attend her wedding. “But you probably wouldn’t allow that,” she said in an accusatory manner. “Mom,” I asked, “when I was a little boy, would you have wanted me to go somewhere that you were not allowed to go to, especially if you knew all the people in attendance hated you and Dad?” After expressing her continued sorrow that I was hurt (“I didn’t think you’d be hurt by this,” she cried, “I thought you’d be happy for me”), we ended our conversation.
I called my sister and told her the whole tale. My sister decided that if I was prohibited from attending, then she would not go either, preferring instead the solidarity of our position. She was relieved, too, as she’s had a long history of not enjoying the company of Witnesses. She also works as a hair stylist and had only, with great finagling, gotten the day off. She said she’d now go to work on that day.
Then on Thursday came the aforementioned phone call. I laughed when my mom explained that an elder stopped by her house and decreed that, since she is now getting married at a community center, the elders can not stop me from attending. When my mom said “Please don’t laugh at me,” I felt bad for acting so flippant (I still do), but I had to point out the absurdity: why does switching the event from her home to a community center make a difference? “Well,” she said, “the community is a public place; they can’t stop people from attending, just like they can’t stop people from attending the Kingdom Hall.” (This statement is erroneous as well, but that’s another story.)
“But they can tell you who you can have at your own home?” I asked.
The conversation devolved from there. My mom started crying when she said how scared she was that I was against Jehovah, and when she asked if I was happier now than I was as a Witness, she became upset when I said that I was. (Man, only a religion can play with people’s heads like that.) After implying that I lacked both rules and a conscience, my mom attempted to counter my happiness by pointing out all the trials she’s had in the religion and, when I said “Yeah, see, right there – you just pointed out three reasons why the religion causes unhappiness,” she got frustrated that her ‘encouragement’ had back-fired.
When I asked her if the people in attendance would act like Christians or shun me, she refused to answer, instead saying: “Well don’t worry about them, right? Just care about me – your mother. It would mean a lot to me.” This struck me as highly hypocritical, as only weeks earlier she had kowtowed to the (supposed) desires of her guests by un-inviting me (a violating of Matthew 5:37, but that, too, is another story). But instead of pointing this out, I asked her: “Are you coming to Owen’s birthday party on Sunday?”
“Oh, honey, you know I can’t do that,” she said, and she went on to complain of the materialism and cake-eating that take place at such parties.
“Well,” I said, “don’t worry about all that, right? Just care about Owen – your grandson. It would mean a lot to him.”
There was silence, and then my mom repeated that she could not attend.
Her arguments against Owen’s birthday party, incidentally, are completely spurious. True, there would be cake…but there will also be cake at my mom’s wedding.  In the matter of gift giving, we indicated on Owen’s invitations that no gift was necessary.  Besides, my mom is undoubtedly Owen’s primary gift-giver. Indeed, she has given Owen so many gifts through the years that we have (more than once), requested she curtail this behavior.  Why is materialism acceptable on the 364 days a year that are not Owen’s birthday?  Additionally, I would bet good money (betting is also a sin) that my mom will receive more gifts on the day of her wedding than Owen received at his birthday party.
Anyway…
Do I go to her wedding? I’m not sure. She lacked the decency to show up at her grandson’s birthday party. Additionally, my sister, who decided to stand by me, now has to work on Saturday…so it seems kind of odd that I would now go without her. I had originally wanted to go to the wedding when my wife and I were guests that my mom desired to have in her company; now we are persona non grata that some elder is allowing to attend. My mom also made it clear that we would be expected to leave after the ceremony, lest our presence sully the cake-eating and gift-giving.
We recently attended another wedding and reception. The wedding was upstairs in a church, and the reception was downstairs. Owen had a good time. Last weekend, I asked him: “Would you like to go to another wedding?” He said: “Only the downstairs part.” So, if we do go, how do I explain to a four year old that one of his best friends – who refused attendance at his birthday party – demands that he leave prior to the “downstairs part”? I don’t know.
Whether or not I go, I will long view this as the strongest evidence yet that the Witnesses, apart from being theologically and scientifically wrong, are just plain unloving. Or rather, in the case of my mom, they are loving people who are forced to perform unloving acts in the name of their precious book publishing company.