Ideas for dealing with the J's Witnesses [Archive]

AlphaScorpious

26th October 2006, 08:55 PM

money

26th October 2006, 08:57 PM

*sigh*

Must I repeat my father's methods .....again?

It involves complete nudity and shotgun.

(My therapist says talking about it helps....)

Clarsct, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you 6'7'' and 300 lbs.?

Ducky

26th October 2006, 09:00 PM

I go for the "Answering the door completely nude with erect penis in hand" way of dealing with them. Usually they turn bright red and run away.

Though one time I did have one start trying to talk to me. She turned around and walked away when I suggested we continue this conversation while I finish my video...

pipelineaudio

26th October 2006, 11:31 PM

Puggy

27th October 2006, 12:16 AM

I enjoy mine

A LOT

I just moved and now have to start all over again. You argue good, theyll send someone better and better until you can get real stumpers going back and forth. I had a table and a chair out front in the yard for their wednsday visits. Sure made me learn the bible a lot better than I had.

That's what's been happening to me. Each saturday I'm getting older and older JWs. Each much more confident and they seem to have info on me.

I love talking to them about evolution. The have pretty weak arguments since they get theirs from their pamphlets and awful books.

I know I wont get them to concede anything, but I do get lots of laughs and learn lots from the bible.

But then again, if You treat them badly, they'll just come back six months later, so maybe that bloody chicken legs thing will get me a good JW vacation.

Kopji

27th October 2006, 12:20 AM

Bake them some anatomically correct gingerbread man cookies.

Rufo

27th October 2006, 12:28 AM

I've said it before and I'll say it again: They are working hard for what they believe will save you from eternal damnation. That's pretty nice. Try to be reasonably nice back.

clarsct

27th October 2006, 12:42 AM

Clarsct, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you 6'7'' and 300 lbs.?
Yes.

My father's methods and Fowlsound's methods are surprisingly similiar, except my father also had a 12 gauge shotgun in his hand. He invited them inside. They declined....for some reason. Mind you this was about 5 miles outside a town of 900...near a creek....though we didn't have banjos, the setting was pretty similiar to an old movie....

I was about 10 or so, and really probably didn't need to see my father naked. It was slightly uncomfortable. The therapist part was hyperbole for comedic effect....

But it did happen. What was probably most disturbing was that, for some odd reason, this happy young couple took their kid with them. She had to be about 7. I'm sure this lead to some interesting questions on the way home.

They never did return, oddly enough...

Beady

27th October 2006, 12:51 AM

Print up a few of these (http://www.jhuger.com/pamphlets/kha.pdf), and keep them by the front door.

Rufo

27th October 2006, 01:23 AM

Print up a few of these (http://www.jhuger.com/pamphlets/kha.pdf), and keep them by the front door.
The perhaps best thing about that is that if they are offended by it, you can, as Jim Huber pointed out in one of his other pamphlets, ask:

"Why do Christians assume that the parable 'Kissing Hank's Ass' is about them?"

It's the best kind of satire - everyone recognizes it, which makes it very difficult to claim it's not very close to the truth.

pauldmin

27th October 2006, 02:35 AM

This thread could be of interest to me because a JW is soon to move in next door. I have already met her and she seems nice, but she has not yet had chance to try and 'witness' me.

I am hoping that she has the common sense to follow the adage 'do not p**s on your own doorstep' or else there may be a few embarrassing discussions about the benefits of blood transfusions.

My other option will be to direct them to my other neighbour who is a pastor in the Calvary Chapel. They should get along very nicely ( and have nice discussions about the existance of the afterlife ).

DangerousBeliefs

27th October 2006, 05:08 AM

I've said it before and I'll say it again: They are working hard for what they believe will save you from eternal damnation. That's pretty nice. Try to be reasonably nice back.

That's pretty much what I do. These poor folks have to go around knocking on all kinds of doors. How hard is it to say, "Thanks but I'm not in the least bit interested. Have a nice day"?

I usually offer them a bottled water as well, during the summer.

I guess that's the difference between an athiest and a secular humanist. :rolleyes:

Trantor

27th October 2006, 06:34 AM

They have come to my house every saturday for the last month. Each time, I have politely told them(different people each time) that I am not interested in their religion and send them on their way. Amazingly, they keep coming back. I don't want to get nasty with these sheep, but it is getting old.

Genesius

27th October 2006, 11:08 AM

Seems as if a couple of these will come around once a month or so. Ironicly the last one dropped off a pamphlet about "Identifying the false religions" lol, I would like some ways to humorously mess with them when they come around. A couple of rules. 1) I don't want them to come inside. 2) I don't want them to stick around long. 3) Nothing that will have me arrested.

Yeah, I had one show up last weekend with the same pamphlet. I just said "Sorry, I'm an atheist so I think all religions are false." and she left.

Kind of a shame - cute young thing, nice bod, wearing something lower-cut than one usually sees on a JW. Would have been worth the time to invite her in for the view, but it would have been too hard coming up with a cover story for the wife to explain just why I was talking to a JW.

zizzybaluba

27th October 2006, 11:27 AM

That's pretty much what I do. These poor folks have to go around knocking on all kinds of doors. How hard is it to say, "Thanks but I'm not in the least bit interested. Have a nice day"?

I usually offer them a bottled water as well, during the summer.

I guess that's the difference between an athiest and a secular humanist. :rolleyes:

While this is a good hearted idea in principle, I've seen it backfire.

Growing up, I had a good friend who was a devout JW. One day, he and his mother stopped to proselytize at my Grandmother's house. My Grammy, recognizing my buddy and being the kind lady she always was, politely explained that she had no interest in what they were offering, but since it was a bit cold out, invited them in for a cup of coffee.
Apparently, they keep a list of anyone who has been willing to speak to them at all, whether it be about their religious leanings or their vegetable garden. My Grammy began to get many, many more visits from the JW's than before, and the others weren't interested in coffee.

On a positive note, if I recall correctly, she found that the watchtower magazines made pretty good garden mulch.

icantlogoff

27th October 2006, 11:33 AM

Print up a few of these (http://www.jhuger.com/pamphlets/kha.pdf), and keep them by the front door.

That is real good. I have never seen these before.
Just printed some off

RenaissanceBiker

27th October 2006, 12:27 PM

I usually try to convert them to atheism. Doesn't really work, but it can be fun.

Me too. I try to be polite and present rational, logical arguements for my point of view, rather than point out errors in theirs. I once had a JW woman return with her husband twice to discuss things further on their own time. Finally the husband returned once more with their preacher who just smiled and nodded. After that they would skip my house.

Recently they came to my new house as I was in the garage building a bookcase. I told them I was an atheist. The woman asked if I had ever believed in God. I replied, "No." I then presented the arguement against faith-based beliefs in my sig. I said, "The famous 4th century christian philosopher St. Augustine once said, 'Truth does not contradict the truth.' Do you agree with that statement?" I then looked the younger woman in the eye and asked, "Do you agree that truth does not contradict truth?" She did a hard blink because she was not expecting to be addressed directly. She said, "Yeah." I then said, "Faith often contradicts faith. For that reason faith cannot be an indication of truth. Mormons have faith that they are the only ones going to Heaven. You have faith that you are going to Heaven. You can't both be right. One of you must be wrong. If one can have faith in something that is wrong then faith itself is shown to be unreliable. Without faith, there is no evidence that gods exist at all." They left and continued knocking on doors, but I'll bet that the younger woman thought about it later on.

CriticalThanking

27th October 2006, 01:38 PM

That's pretty much what I do. These poor folks have to go around knocking on all kinds of doors. How hard is it to say, "Thanks but I'm not in the least bit interested. Have a nice day"?

I usually offer them a bottled water as well, during the summer.

I guess that's the difference between an athiest and a secular humanist. :rolleyes:Easy to say, but often without effect. The US supreme court allows relgions and politicians to get around all the "do not call" and "no soliciting" laws here. I cannot legally stop them from calling/knocking. All I can do is get less and less polite or more and more devious in my methods and hope that they get the hint. I consider that highly unlikely as politely asking them not to return has not worked.

And maybe it's the midafternoon snack sugar high talking, but howzabout you give me your phone number and I'll keep calling you every night during dinner to see if you want to believe in the IPU, regardless of what you say to me. IMO it has nothing to do with atheist vs secular humanist.

Kudos for offering them water. If it is the first time I have seen a particular JW/LDS, I offer it in bottle form. If the third time or greater, I give it from the high pressure hose in my hand.

CT

Moochie

27th October 2006, 01:54 PM

An acquaintance once told me how he dealt with JWs. He'd go to the door in a dressing gown, and casually allow it to fall open at an appropriate time.

Around his area the JWs were usually mothers and juvenile daughters.

There are many young JWs who still remember, hopefully without trauma, their first ever sight of mature male genitalia.

M.

malha111

27th October 2006, 02:41 PM

I've only dealt with 'em two times. The first time I just told them to go and shut my door. The second time I told them to wait outside and got my copy of Chairman Mao's Little Red and tried to win them for the marxism-leninism-maoism (mostly maoism). That was just as effective as the first method I tried.

Tanstaafl

27th October 2006, 02:47 PM

I actually have a copy of the Little Red Book. Maybe I should try that. I generally don't get JWs, but often get Mormons.

The Atheist

27th October 2006, 03:00 PM

I actually have a copy of the Little Red Book. Maybe I should try that. I generally don't get JWs, but often get Mormons.Strangely, Mormons; I can handle. I used to own a block of flats with all Mormon tenants and they never once mentioned their religion and were always up to date with their rent!

JWs; I cannot abide. The blood transfusion/medical thing really eats me up and I get deliberately very angry and threaten to put them in need of blood transfusions. They usually go away at a fast trot while my kids and I fall over laughing at them. Great sport.

Kochanski

27th October 2006, 05:24 PM

Everyone seems to have found some fun ways to deal with them.

I am don't usually encounter them, they don't seem to wander my neighborhood. I am, however, disinclined to be nice to them. That just seems to be an invitation to standing there and listening to their twaddle longer and more often. If you can make good sport of it and are having a good laugh, then go for it. Hard for a female to answer the door naked and get the type of response the guys will, so I am not likely to choose that one ;)

My friend has an approach with all unwanted people at her door. She answers the door with her dog. He is big and part pit bull. She opens the door just enough for him to stick his head out and then says "I'd open the door more, but this is my brother's dog and I can't control him" that sends most people packing and gives her a good giggle, cause the dog is a big mush :D Wouldn't work with my dog, he is too goofy looking and could only really scare people who are afraid of dogs.

My approach would be an honest one. Tell them I am happy to respect their right to religion, as long as they respect my right to NOT have one, then close the door.

Dogdoctor

27th October 2006, 05:38 PM

When I was a kid they would come to my parents house on saturday morning and I would answer the door, then get involved in a debate with them about religion. This would go on for hours sometimes. I learned much about the debating religious people from these debates. I found out later that they sent all the new people to talk to me since I would test them :) Anyway they have not found my current home so far but I would probably offer them some vegetables from my garden and a soda if they did come by and debate with them if they wished to.

Godmode

28th October 2006, 02:29 AM

Haven't had any yet in the new village, but I used to get quite a few JW's in my old village. In fact I got so many I finally asked why, and it turned out that my tiny village was actually infested with them, there were something like 200 of them living there and I never knew!

I usually got a pair of ladies, and they always came weekday mornings, never on the weekend. Well, we're usually gone weekends so maybe they did and we just missed them. Anyways, I always took the angle that the bible is very anti-woman, eventually they stopped sending the women and sending 3 men. Not sure what that was about, but I like to think I was making some good points and they didn't want their women talking to me anymore, LOL!

Antiquehunter

28th October 2006, 04:12 AM

I find that answering the door in a loosely / poorly tied bathrobe works very well. They have knocked once on my door wherever I have lived in Canada. Once only.

Moochie

28th October 2006, 12:33 PM

My approach would be an honest one. Tell them I am happy to respect their right to religion, as long as they respect my right to NOT have one, then close the door.

I've found that doesn't work. They're persistent bustards...

M.

Elizabeth I

28th October 2006, 12:42 PM

Print up a few of these (http://www.jhuger.com/pamphlets/kha.pdf), and keep them by the front door.
Too subtle.

I have heard that if you declare yourself to be a devout Catholic they will go away. Myself, I just close the door. (Although the ones around here - San Antonio - have taken to bringing small doe-eyed children with them, I guess on the theory that you wouldn't break a child's heart by slamming the door on him or her. I don't SLAM it.)

grayman

28th October 2006, 12:53 PM

Myself, I just close the door. (Although the ones around here - San Antonio - have taken to bringing small doe-eyed children with them, I guess on the theory that you wouldn't break a child's heart by slamming the door on him or her. I don't SLAM it.)

Do your best Jake Blues impersonation, "How much for the little girl...?" (http://www.wavsource.com/movies/blues_brothers.htm)

Pyrrho

28th October 2006, 01:01 PM

Seems as if a couple of these will come around once a month or so. Ironicly the last one dropped off a pamphlet about "Identifying the false religions" lol, I would like some ways to humorously mess with them when they come around. A couple of rules. 1) I don't want them to come inside. 2) I don't want them to stick around long. 3) Nothing that will have me arrested.
Tell them you don't want them or any of their friends to visit you anymore. You never have to let them in, they will go away, and nobody will arrest you.

They visit my home on a regular basis, we have nice little chats on the porch, and I don't let them in. On days when I don't feel like talking to them, I just say so, as in "I can't talk to you today." They leave their literature and they go.

I have had a person from a different Christian sect attempt to force his way past me into the house. The door slamming in his face had all the hallmarks of infinite finality.

RandFan

28th October 2006, 01:05 PM

Having read The God Delusion I relished the opportunity to speak to anyone proselytizing. My opportunity came this morning with a knock at the door by two Jehovah's Witnesses.

I served a 2 year missionary for the Mormon Church and I graduated seminary and the Missionary Training Center. I thought I was well educated for dealing with religious salesman. No, not really. I always got bogged down in dogma. The best preparation you can have are books by Dawkinsa and I would also say Dennett.

Today I responded to every thing they said with simple arguments. The Bible is a poor source of moral guidance. You must pick and choose what is good and what is bad I told them. They were puzzled so I laid out the points presented by Dawkins. They agreed that many of the morals in the bible were not good ones and that one would have to know first what is and is not good.

We are all atheists I told them. That they didn't agree with, at first. "But you don't believe in Vishnu or Zeus?" I queried. No they didn't. "So you are atheists of all gods but one, right?" They agreed. "Well then, I just go one god further".

I won't go into it all. I got both to agree on some things and to think on some of my points, though I'm sure it was all academic.

I don't think people should engage the blind faith religious types if you are not confident and have a good grasp of the issues. A polite and insistent no is the best bet but I do think we all need to read Dawkins book and we need to take a more affirmative approach to responding to religion. You are very unlikely to get those who are very religious to even consider these things so you might want to factor the very real possibility that you are just wasting your time with them as I likely was this morning.

Concentrate on the fence sitters.

Sorry for the derail.

http://richarddawkins.net/images/ImagineBlackThumb3.jpg (http://richarddawkins.net/home)

I have become evangelical in my opposition to the rising tide or religiosity.

grayman

28th October 2006, 01:21 PM

Randfan, where did you get the photo of the towers?

RandFan

28th October 2006, 01:29 PM

RandFan, where did you get the photo of the towers? http://richarddawkins.net/home (scroll to the bottom of the page).

Please also visit http://richarddawkins.net/foundation and watch the video.

The reason for the two different websites is explained at http://www.richarddawkins.net/

And buy the book, now! :)

grayman

28th October 2006, 02:07 PM

And buy the book, now! :)

Okay! Okay! Sheesh.

I was planning on picking up The End of Faith by Sam Harris anyway. Might as well buy a second book as well.

RandFan

28th October 2006, 02:23 PM

Okay! Okay! Sheesh.

I was planning on picking up The End of Faith by Sam Harris anyway. Might as well buy a second book as well. I'm not familiar with him. I've noticed his name a couple of times in my journeys. I'll google him now. I've got a growing list of books to buy what with Shermer, Dawkins and Dennett cranking the things out every few months. One more author can't hurt. :)

ETA: Oh yeah, I've read about Letter to a Christian Nation. It's now on the list.

Damn, how do you prioritize these things?

Skeptic

28th October 2006, 02:29 PM

One thing to do is to say, simply, "I'm sorry, but I just don't give a damn about Jesus." They just stare and leave with bug-eyed, slack-jawed disbelief.

Beady

29th October 2006, 01:46 AM

http://richarddawkins.net/home (scroll to the bottom of the page).

:piconfused:

Is it a premium for a donation? It says "bookcover? Am I missing something?

Beady

29th October 2006, 03:06 AM

(Too late to edit the original)

OK, found it. I did a little editing to take out the ad and turned the image into a poster. It prints up just fine as an 8.5 X 11 borderless print.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_189445448a4cc8364.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=2272)

RandFan

29th October 2006, 07:33 AM

Charlie Monoxide

29th October 2006, 08:17 AM

I would also like to recommend this months Wired magazine. There's a great article on "The New Atheism" and talks about Dawkins and others.

I always thought I was "hard core" with my atheistic views, but after reading the Wired article, I'm a major light-weight girly-boy. Gotta work on those naturalistic talking points when dealing with the delusionals ...

Charlie (my non-god can beatup your god any day) Monoxide

RandFan

29th October 2006, 08:51 AM

Beady

29th October 2006, 09:46 AM

Cool. I just printed it out.

A larger version is in my Gallery (http://forums.randi.org/http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_189445448a4cc8364.jpg); definition should be better.

ETA: I've never been able to get the Gallery links to work. :piangry: It's on Page 3.

ETA: Nope, that won't work, either. Here's the biggie:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/189445448a4cc8364.jpg

Victor Meldrew

29th October 2006, 10:48 AM

Had a chat to one of my friends the other week, who is an ex JV (she left because she was pushed - she married a man who was not a JV. All the "friends" she had who are JV's will have nothing more to do with her.)

I asked her if one of her kids needed a blood transfusion - would she let them? (She has 2 lovely young children). She thought about it for 10 seconds, then said no - she would rather let them die.

How sad, how deluded. Letting your kids die because of your belief in a fairy tale.

(I did tell her that if ever it happened, I would be witness against her in court - I would expect her to serve life imprisonment. She thinks I'M loony!)

Skeptical Greg

29th October 2006, 01:18 PM

I've said it before and I'll say it again: They are working hard for what they believe will save you from eternal damnation. That's pretty nice. Try to be reasonably nice back.

Of course, just being nice would be the right thing to do, but JW's don't really
believe in eternal damnation, so that is not why they are working hard.

It's not about you, it's about doing what they believe will win them points; by
signing up as many new members as possible.. " Witnessing "... ( DOH! )

If they can't put you on their ' A ' list they won't waste much time on you ..

Usually , telling them you are not interested will keep them away ..

clarsct

29th October 2006, 04:26 PM

Of course, just being nice would be the right thing to do, but JW's don't really
believe in eternal damnation, so that is not why they are working hard.

It's not about you, it's about doing what they believe will win them points; by
signing up as many new members as possible.. " Witnessing "... ( DOH! )

If they can't put you on their ' A ' list they won't waste much time on you ..

Usually , telling them you are not interested will keep them away ..
Hmmmmmm.

I've run into a more persistent sort than you. Maybe it's because I live in a relatively medium-sized city and there just ain't many to witness to.

I've found that accusing them of criminal trespass and trying to get into my secret laboratory usually sends them packing.

Liken

30th October 2006, 03:59 AM

That is a great image, Beady, thanks. It's what kept me following this thread, where I then found a link to an article from Wired that I'd considered posting as well--alas, but I can't yet!

Anyway, it's way off topic for this thread, but I was personally incredibely dissappointed by Wired, or at least Gary whatever-his-name who wrote the piece:
irony of the New Atheism – this prophetic attack on prophecy, this extremism in opposition to extremism – is too much for me....The New Atheists have castigated fundamentalism and branded even the mildest religious liberals as enablers of a vengeful mob. Everybody who does not join them is an ally of the Taliban. But, so far, their provocation has failed to take hold. Given all the religious trauma in the world, I take this as good news....

What a copout!

Perhaps somebody who agrees or disagrees could start a new thread on that one?

Liken

Beady

30th October 2006, 05:46 AM

Anyway, it's way off topic for this thread, but I was personally incredibely dissappointed by Wired, or at least Gary whatever-his-name who wrote the piece:

What a copout!

I haven't read the entire article, but I have no problem with the piece you quoted. It sounds like you are more of the Barry Goldwater school: "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."

People who think like that, scare me.

Moochie

30th October 2006, 06:50 AM

T
Anyway, it's way off topic for this thread, but I was personally incredibely dissappointed by Wired, or at least Gary whatever-his-name who wrote the piece:

What a copout!

Perhaps somebody who agrees or disagrees could start a new thread on that one?

Liken

I don't think you have any idea of just how darkly some of us view woo thinking.

That some numbskull, whether Ratzinger or a Ted Haggart, thinks he or she has some special dispensation from their imaginary friend to control the lives of others defies any logic known to me.

These people must be exposed for what they are using all means available, as it's abundantly clear to me that a softly-softly approach only serves to confirm them in their delusions.

M.

ETA: The above is actually a response to post #52, by Beady.

Beady

30th October 2006, 07:16 AM

These people must be exposed for what they are using all means available, as it's abundantly clear to me that a softly-softly approach only serves to confirm them in their delusions.

ETA: The above is actually a response to post #52, by Beady.

Yes, it does make more sense that way. :piwink:

So, what you're saying is, "Thou shalt not suffer a believer to live"? And thus we become the very thing we would hope to destroy.

Moochie

30th October 2006, 07:23 AM

So, what you're saying is, "Thou shalt not suffer a believer to live"? And thus we become the very thing we would hope to destroy.

No, I'm saying I will not suffer a believer gladly. In fact, not at all.

M.

Beady

30th October 2006, 07:37 AM

No, I'm saying I will not suffer a believer gladly. In fact, not at all.

Do we take you at your word, or will you find a weasel argument when your word becomes inconvenient (such as doing business with a believer)?

Moochie

30th October 2006, 07:49 AM

I don't give a rat's what you "take" or not. Leave me alone.

M.

icantlogoff

30th October 2006, 07:55 AM

Jw's will keep knocking your door because,

The good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come. - ( its scary how easy that came back to me)

So once EVERYONE has heard their message they believe then the end will come. What i don't understand and never did is why they cover the same saturated areas when their is still so many areas they don't door knock in?

Normally a comment like, "Satan told me your were coming" is enough for them to leave and NOT call again.

btw the wired acticle was pretty good, anything that gets the message out there that it is alright not to belive is a good thing

Beady

30th October 2006, 07:56 AM

I don't give a rat's what you "take" or not. Leave me alone.

I've been responding to your posts on a public forum. If you find that annoying, you have several courses open to you. OTOH, I am under no obligation to "leave you alone."

Tanstaafl

30th October 2006, 08:57 AM

I'm working my way through The End of Faith myself now. I think it's very good, but depressing. I've been saying for years that religion will be the death of us all, and Harris fairly convincingly argues that I may be right. Not really what I wanted to hear, this is one time I want to be wrong.

I'll have to get The God Delusion soon, sounds like it's a great one.

rustypouch

30th October 2006, 09:13 AM

I just talk to them, and keep asking 'why?' It eventualy boils down to 'because that's they way it is!' They get frustrated and leave.

Something I would like to do, but have never done, is invite the Mormons and JWs over to my house at the same time for a deathmatch.

grayman

30th October 2006, 03:43 PM

Piscivore

30th October 2006, 04:30 PM

I haven't had any missionaries come to our house in ten years.

I take that back, there were a couple, but they were local small non-denom start-ups.

Liken

30th October 2006, 05:38 PM

Finish the article Beady. The author sets his own moderate anti-wooism in opposition to Dawkins et al.'s uncomprimising, hardlined approach to fighting woo--which he views as dangerous. Sorry, I'm on Dawkins' side on this one.

The author sums his side in the last paragraph,
...if we continue to have respectful conversations even about things we find ridiculous, this doesn't necessarily mean we've lost our convictions or our sanity.

Again, I disagree.

Anyway, most of the responses to the original question in this thread are void of respect for door-knocking JWs and Mormons. Bravo! The best response for me was the guy who will debate these nuts on his porch, but not invite them in to his home--that's polite, but no shows respect or validations for their ridiculous beliefs. Nice.

Liken

Beady

31st October 2006, 01:08 AM

...in opposition to Dawkins et al.'s uncomprimising, hardlined approach to fighting woo--which he views as dangerous. Sorry, I'm on Dawkins' side on this one.

Now, that's something I've never been sure of. Just exactly what is "Dawkins et al.'s uncomprimising, hardlined approach to fighting woo"? What is his ultimate objective, is it realistic, and are his tactics a good match for his objective?

Like it or not, we have to share the world with these people and that is not going to change, even if Dawkins, Moochie, et al, match actions to words. Seems to me, you either come to some sort of pragmatic political/social compromise with your own avowed principles, or you start shooting. If there's something in between, where you can be "uncompromising" yet allow the other side to exist and operate, someone will have to explain it to me in very simple words.

Antiquehunter

31st October 2006, 01:53 AM

Why can't we all just.... get along...

-uncompromising and hardlined.

Liken

31st October 2006, 03:12 AM

Dawkins' method for engaging with religious fundamentalism is science. While science evolves and compromises with itself based on observation, it is uncompromising with idiocy.

Beady, how do you feel about blood transfusions? If I was discussing the subject with a JW, I wouldn't hesitate to say "your faith based disinclination with reguards to blood transfusions is medially dangerous and therefore stupid, here's why I think so...." I base my opinion on the assumption that the preservation of life on this planet is the primary concern in medical situations, while The JW throws it out there that an unproven afterlife takes precedence.

If what the WIRED guy calls "the New Atheist" would refuse to yield or compromise on a point like that, then I'm proud to wear the label. Harris calls it something like "conversational intolerance" (but I could be wrong?).

Is cold hard science the most appropriate way to change a faither's mind? Very good question. In Dawkin's recent interview with Penn Jillette Dawkins tries to answer a similar one. I'd paraphrase what he says, but he says it much better than I could...

Liken

Antiquehunter

31st October 2006, 03:23 AM

Is it necessary to change every faither's mind?

I'm prepared to relegate a large proportion of die-hard 'faithers' to the write-off bin. What I object to is the 'faithers' imposition of their beliefs that affect my day to day activity and/or security.

I couldn't care less if JW's refuse to give their children blood transfusions. Honestly. I feel bad that a child dies needlessly, but I can't be bothered trying to change their mind. I can't feed all of Africa either. However, the moment JW's try to legislate against blood transfusions, I'm fired up and ready to go.

The missing link seems to be the imposition of people's beliefs on people with different beliefs.

I know that Sam Harris and others speak to religious moderation being a very slippery slope, because (essentially) by virtue of being moderate, immoderate behaviours are tolerated.

But IF the US Senate was filled with atheists - would we try and legislate away religion?

Beady

31st October 2006, 05:12 AM

But IF the US Senate was filled with atheists - would we try and legislate away religion?

That is probably the ultimate question, for an American. Seems to me that an atheist committed to non-comprimise with believers is inherently committed to amending the 1st Amendment, or even repealing it altogether. If you remove Constitutional protection from religion, per se, but leave it for free speech and right of assembly, for example, you are still lending a de facto protection to believers and allowing them to conduct all the activities they presently conduct.

Antiquehunter

31st October 2006, 05:23 AM

An interesting legal argument would be whether or not a child has 1st Amendment rights to freedom of religion to NOT be held to its family's religious beliefs contra-blood infusion.

Its a really tough question - the issue of politicians who are 'Dawkins/Harris' atheists. I AGREE with their books. I CONCUR with their positions. And - my dad is an avowed, devout theist. Do I need to change his mind? Not really. We disagree about a lot of things. He thinks I'm going to hell. I think I know where both he and I will end up when we're dead (he'll be on my mantelpiece in a nice Art Deco period urn until I get around to interring him. I'll end up as ashes put...somewhere.)

But - he's also not trying to legislate away my freedoms. I'd like to think that if I was king of the world, I would not legislate away his freedom to believe in his god.

Liken

31st October 2006, 05:37 AM

Antique:
Asking if it's "necessary" to change "everyone's" mind is a silly question. I never said that was my goal, and I don't think it's Dawkins', Harris', or any one else here. What's the point of the question? That small differences don't matter...unless they matter to you?

If you're okay dismissing the lives of innocents because you "can't be bothered" go change somebody's mind, what in are you doing here? Getting pats on the back from like minded skeptics who already agree with your point of view? The JWs may not be trying to legislate against blood transfusions, but other religious groups are trying to legislate ALL KINDS OF THINGS based on religion. Seen the news this week? Check out what's goin' down in South Dakota.

The ironic thing is that the religious side is VERY committed to changing the our minds, "imposing" to use your words. After all, they're the ones knocking on our doors. I'm only suggest we impose back without fear that we're somehow in the wrong just for aggressively questioning someone's beliefs.

Again, if you accept without a fight that a few JW kids dying because their parents' beliefs don't allow it, how do you feel about the real preventable crisis in Africa (since you brought it up)? Generations of young people dying, and one of the most dogmatic and powerful institutions to come out of the technologically advanced West (The Catholic church) imposing its anti-condom rhetoric to people with little or no formal schooling? Yeah, We can't get feed 'em all, can't get 'em all to wear condoms, so what's the point of even trying, right?

Your second question makes even less sense than the first. What does legislation have to do with having a discussion, with trying to get people to think reasonably? Legislation pales in comparison to popular ideas. How many people speed even though it's against the law?

Antiquehunter

31st October 2006, 06:03 AM

Its a question more of picking my battles, Liken.

I find there to be a disconnect between me convincing one 'faither' to join me in my understanding of the universe and accomplishing a victory over refusal of blood transfusions, freedom of abortion, the AIDS crisis (in Africa or North America or anywhere else for that matter), third world hunger etc...

America protects freedom of religion. I definitely agree it needs to protect freedom FROM religion in the same light. But does that necessarily mean I need to concern myself with the beliefs of an individual on the street?

I'm currently overseas, so I'm afraid I don't pick up on your South Dakota reference. One issue that I am passionate about is gay marriage. I am passionnate about debating 'faithers' on this topic. But from my perspective you need to bring down these sorts of beliefs one brick at a time. Going immediately for the jugular and going for the 'you believe in god - you're WRONG' doesn't seem overly productive to me. Anecdotal evidence is all I can offer here.

Maybe I present the most nefarious of apathetic atheists (and skeptics) out there. I'm NOT willing to embark on an atheistic evangelical campaign. I AM willing to support ideas that get our ideas out there - quality books, videos - ideas like www.demonhauntedhotels.com etc... and I'll get behind those ideas.

But going toe to toe with the average 'faither' out there is probably a lost cause. After all - they have 'faith'. As such, it is unquestionable. As pointed out by Harris and Dawkins - if they question it they're going to rot in hell. What kind of incentive do I have to offer in return? A better, more revealing worldview - yep, I agree - I feel FULFILLED in being free of religion. But how do I convey this in a meaningful sense to someone who thinks they're going to live forever, while I suffer the torments of hell?

I'd rather fight the small battles - the LEGAL battles that prevent people of certain beliefs to deny the right to abortion, or to marry their partner who is of the same sex etc...

Liken

31st October 2006, 06:41 AM

It sounds like we agree more than I thought. I'm overseas as well. This month South Dakota will consider a challenge to Roe that does not permit abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

In effect I'm mostly the same as you, in that I don't pick a fight with every religious fanatic I meet on the street. I admit that I probably pick the exact same small battles as you--most of the time. In fact, the issues you mentioned are dear to me too, and I'm sure we're on the same side on those. And you're completely right about how difficult it is to get someone to STOP believing in a god once they start. But that IS the ultimate battle, to get people to question that belief. My problem with what you said is that the one can only claim victory when legislation, or when "everyone" is atheist. I say even small victories count in the big fight against faith.

One of the reasons Dawkins etc. have gotten so popular is that they're really already convinced a lot of people who are already atheists to up the ante... Atheism's been around for as long as religion, but thanks to these intellectuals more and more people are saying "not only is it okay that I'm an atheist, but I don't have to keep my mouth shut at dinner parties anymore. I can be rude about it because the truth really is on my side."

It may be arrogant--and it may not even be effective--but it sure feels good.
As for me, my mom's not going to deconvert any time soon.

Liken

Fizzer

31st October 2006, 11:46 AM

I have heard that if you declare yourself to be a devout Catholic they will go away.

Nope, that won't work.

Fizzer

31st October 2006, 11:54 AM

However, the moment JW's try to legislate against blood transfusions, I'm fired up and ready to go.

You can relax, that will never be attempted.

Trantor

31st October 2006, 12:13 PM

This last weekend was the first time in a month that the JWs did not come to my home on Saturday. They must have been on some sort of crusade to make converts in our area for the last few weeks. Maybe their preachers demanded some kind of quota, because I hadn't seen them for several months before they started coming in force. Got to give the organization some credit for their brainwashing ability; they produce some very devoted and persistent sheep.

Too bad they are not more persistent in their desire to educate themselves on their church's history.

Fizzer

1st November 2006, 09:26 AM

This last weekend was the first time in a month that the JWs did not come to my home on Saturday. They must have been on some sort of crusade to make converts in our area for the last few weeks.

Did you answer the door and talk to them each time? If so, it's likely they'll come back more frequently. If you did not answer the door, your address will be put on a not-at-home list and will be revisited 3 to 4 times in an effort to find you at home. After that, that territory will be set aside for awhile. If you answer the door and say you're not interested, it's most likely they will not come back until that territory is worked again. But it depends on the size of the territory and how many Witnesses are in the local congregation.

Maybe their preachers demanded some kind of quota, because I hadn't seen them for several months before they started coming in force.

There's no quota. Most likely the territory where you live was one of the ones being focused on at the time.

Got to give the organization some credit for their brainwashing ability; they produce some very devoted and persistent sheep.

Too bad they are not more persistent in their desire to educate themselves on their church's history.

You would probably be surprised to learn that the Watchtower publishes a book primarily for Witnesses that has much of the history of the organization, including many things have long been discarded, such as pyramid measurement based dates, etc. It's not all buried in some dark dungeon never to be seen or discussed again.

Marc L

1st November 2006, 10:03 AM

Trantor

1st November 2006, 10:42 AM

You would probably be surprised to learn that the Watchtower publishes a book primarily for Witnesses that has much of the history of the organization, including many things have long been discarded, such as pyramid measurement based dates, etc. It's not all buried in some dark dungeon never to be seen or discussed again.

I'm no expert on the JWs, but I have actually read some of their Watchtower booklets that they publish. I do know that their founder was a follower of William Miller in the Millerite movement. Miller's movement was heavily based on his interpretations of Bible prophecy and he believed that Jesus was to return to Earth on a certain day. On that day some 50,000 of his followers waited on an open field for Jesus's triumphant return. Many of these followers sold all their worldly belongings expecting to be taken to heaven by Jesus. When Jesus failed to show, the Millerites fell apart and some of the followers started new types of Christian religions as a result. The JWs were one of these new religious groups.

The early JWs were very heavy into Bible prophecy and have a very long history of failed prophecies, culminating with the failed prediction of God's Kingdom on Earth in 1914. I once mentioned this to an old friend of mine that was a JW. He never had heard any of it.

http://www.freeminds.org/psych/propfail.htm

Jon.

1st November 2006, 12:05 PM

An interesting legal argument would be whether or not a child has 1st Amendment rights to freedom of religion to NOT be held to its family's religious beliefs contra-blood infusion.

I don't know about the US, but in British Columbia (and I suspect the rest of Canada too - there was an Alberta case a couple of years ago), no child is held to its family's religious beliefs if those beliefs prevent the child from getting prompt and effective medical treatment. Most hospitals (or at least health regions) have social workers and lawyers on call to make emergency applications to the court for guardianship of children who need blood transfusions and whose parents are refusing consent. I understand that it has been a long time since a child died in BC because its parent(s) refused medically necessary treatment.

CAVEAT: There are a couple of qualifiers and clarifications to the above statement. First, it does not apply only to blood transfusions, but that is the most common situation. Second, the last sentence is intended only to refer to situations where the child is brought to the attention of medical professionals in time for something to be done, not cases where the parents failed to get any medical treatment at all.

Its a really tough question - the issue of politicians who are 'Dawkins/Harris' atheists.

Tough, yes, but almost certainly academic, at least in North America. I don't see any politician being elected in the US or even Canada who publically espoused views like Dawkins' on religion.

I AGREE with their books. I CONCUR with their positions. And - my dad is an avowed, devout theist. Do I need to change his mind? Not really. We disagree about a lot of things. He thinks I'm going to hell. I think I know where both he and I will end up when we're dead (he'll be on my mantelpiece in a nice Art Deco period urn until I get around to interring him. I'll end up as ashes put...somewhere.)

But - he's also not trying to legislate away my freedoms. I'd like to think that if I was king of the world, I would not legislate away his freedom to believe in his god.

I don't think even the most totalitarian regimes have ever managed to legislate beliefs. Only behaviours.

zizzybaluba

1st November 2006, 12:10 PM

The early JWs were very heavy into Bible prophecy and have a very long history of failed prophecies, culminating with the failed prediction of God's Kingdom on Earth in 1914. I once mentioned this to an old friend of mine that was a JW. He never had heard any of it.

My JW friend told me that the 1914 prophecy had been "interpreted incorrectly". Now they think that Jeebus will return while there are still people alive who were alive in 1914.

Trantor

1st November 2006, 12:15 PM

My JW friend told me that the 1914 prophecy had been "interpreted incorrectly". Now they think that Jeebus will return while there are still people alive who were alive in 1914.

I guess that means any day now!:D

zizzybaluba

1st November 2006, 12:34 PM

I guess that means any day now!:D
Yep.
My JW friend (who I haven't seen in 11 years) was valedictorian of my high school class. Besides being a JW, he was incredibly intelligent... he could've been a doctor, lawyer, scientist, and I wouldn't have been the least bit surprised.
But instead, he decided not to go to college because it was a waste of time since Jeebs was coming soon, and he figured he'd better spend what little remaining time he had till then going door to door. Last I heard he was working at the JW headquarters. Sigh...