1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

jehovah's witnesses

Discussion in 'Religious Education' started by clarenut, Nov 2, 2007.

  1. Judgemental and condemnatory: "I find Ishouldleave's attitude quite shocking"

    Now what about my bacon question?

  2. 'you cannot pick and choose and then expect non-believers to make special allowances for the bits you pick to follow'
    'as according to their own religion they shouldn't even be there, there is no need to make special allowances'

    and i'm the one being judgemental and condemnatory?
  3. Well, yes, I suppose Jehovah is being judgemental but then He's allowed to be surely?

    Remember my post (which 'shocked') was almost entirely quotations from the JW own magazine.

    And still my bacon question is unanswered.

  4. Your bacon analogy is wrong. The JW's in question are not requesting special treatment - the OP makes no mention of this. All the OP is asking for is guidance on how to deal with issues that they may find problematic (note the *may*).
  5. oh dear, oh dear.
  6. soory E.M - not directed at you!
  7. pete14

    pete14 New commenter

    Quotations may be taken from Jehovah's Witness magazine but it is possible they may be being used completely out of context by the authors of the article on the website from an American organisation that for all I know, mainstream Jehovahs Witnesses may completely disagree with. Interestingly, the article in the website has strict copyright rules at the bottom of the page that OP does not seem to have read.
  8. E.M.

    I never said they were requesting special treatment. I simply said that as according to the quotations, the JW were not supposed to be at school anyway then there would be no need to offer any form of accommodating treatment.

    With the bacon question - which no-one has tried to answer - I am making the same point i.e. if adherents clearly are not adhering then why should the offering of accommodating facilities etc even be considered for the bits of their religion they do adhere to?


    Yes, they may disagree with. Nonetheless my central point remains. If followers are not 'following' is there a need to offer any facilities that would help them?


    Thank you for post 25.

  9. I am only 7 weeks into RS teacher training and find shouldileave points almost bizzare if I am honest.

    Surely RS lessons are there to enable pupils and teachers alike to learn and share beliefs, practises and encourage acceptance of all beliefs etc. How could you possibly say to a pupil im not teaching you because your religion says i shouldnt.

    The bacon analogy is completely wrong to me because how can you compare eating bacon to the education of a young person!

    "if adherents clearly are not adhering then why should the offering of accommodating facilities etc even be considered for the bits of their religion they do adhere to?"

    Because we cannot dictate to people what they believe in, plus it is our jobs to teach, regardless of what the pupils believe in!!!

  10. No-one says a teacher should say they're not teaching someone because their religion says I shouldn't.

    I have never said that and neither has anyone else.

    Nowhere has anyone said any religion says a teacher should not teach someone.

    The JW (according to the quotations) believe a JW should not attend a school where there are non-JW.

    Nowhere is anyone comparing eating bacon to educating someone.

    You miss the point.

    If a Muslim openly eats bacon and yet ALSO asks for extra facilities to practice Islam would you agree to it?

    If a JW attends a school (which is the analogy to the bacon-eating as that too is forbidden) then would you facilitate special conditions?

    Nowhere did anyone suggest that anyone dictated to anyone what they believed in.

    Nowhere did anyone say it was not our job to teach (whatever people believe).

    You miss the point.

    Is it our job to provide special facilities for people to practice the bits of their religion they choose to adhere to?

  11. thank goodness dianaprice
    was beginning to think it was just me who was having that thought.
    all this talk of bacon is making me hungry.
  12. I agree - it is bonkers to provide extra facilities for someone who is blatantly acting against their religion.

    That is what I have been trying to get over to people for several posts now.


  13. No, you're argument is bonkers. Religions are not black and white rules that must be followed. I spend so long explaining this to kids. Someone isn't a Christian because they don't follow a set of rules, same applies ot hindus etc. There are general things that can be applied, but academically if someone classes themselves to be of their religion then they are. So for example a person can be a muslim and eat pork, not wear the veil etc.

  14. I see. "So for example a person can be a muslim and eat pork"

    So, as an example, a Muslims can be someone who does not peacefully submit his or her self to God and in fact does not follow the faith of Islam.

    Fair enough.

    Your classes must be interesting!
  15. Oh for goodness sake - you clearly have no understanding and are jsut being deliberately obtuse.

    You don't proffer the image of wanting to engage in discussion and debate but merely appear to want to rant.

    A person is technically a chrisitna if they have been baptised and never set foot in the place again. they can claim membership but that doesn't mean they will follow the Bible etc

    Of course we teach stuff like that - that religion is diverese, that people claim to belong and yet have little understanding - if we weren't we wouldn't be being truthful and would be teaching inaccurate rubbish.

    Another analogy for you - you have been bought membership for a local gym - tha takes you a member - doesn't mean you have been, know how the machines work, follow the fitness regimes etc!

    I really cna;t be bothere dwiht this one anymore - it's not going naywhere except round in circles.

  16. First of all, I haven't ranted at all, despite the criticisms made of me.

    Secondly, I merely offered an opinion i.e. that as their religion forbids them to even be at school then the school shouldn't make EXTRA facilities for them.

    That seems logical to me.

    You make a couple of points that seem totally illogical to me and as you seem to think i don't want to engage in discussion, I am happy to discuss.

    "A person is technically a christian if they have been baptised and never set foot in the place again."

    That's nonsense. If someone is baptised and then (just as an example) sees Mohammed as the last prophet etc etc then they're not a Christian. That seems clear to me.

    But again you miss the point.

    If someone by their conduct shows clearly they are not a practising JW (or any other religion for that matter) why then do you think the school should make special provisions for them?

    You haven't answered that - and yet you see fit to post criticisms of me accusing me of not discussing.

    As you wish.

  17. pete14

    pete14 New commenter

    Just because most JWs do not follow the extreme interpretation of their faith portrayed in the out of context quotes on an American website (a country where most religions/denominations have a small proportion of literalist fanatics) does not mean they are not a practising JW. They may not practice in such a fanatical and literalist way but nor do the majority of the adherents of the faith because they do not accept it as something they are required to do or not do.

    Incidentally, the same does not apply with Muslims or Jews and pork because the prohibition is mainstream teaching not extreme interpretation. Even then though, who are we to judge? Ethical issues in religion are all about interpretation of the teachings of the founder, holy books,leaders or personal feelings, conscience etc. These can be contradictory. Look at the gay Christian debate. If a Christian is gay does that mean we shouldn't allow them leave to celebrate Christmas, Easter etc just because their sexuality is against a strict literalist interpretation of Christianity? Of course not.

    If 'shouldileave' really feels this way then fair enough, if this is just to score points or provoke a reaction then I think he/she has perhaps done that and should now leave alone. I did notice that the content of post 2 appeared on another JW thread on opinion yesterday - totally out of context in a thread that was about the tragic death of a JW mother who refused blood. Rather insensitive I thought (although it was posted under a different user name which has not appeared on this thread).

  18. The 'bacon' argument is spurious, purile and facetious and as a consequence not worthy of debate, this is why we are trying to ignore it in the vain hope you will just go away.

    Think of it like this;

    Should a teacher at a Catholic School bar entry to:

    Any teenager who lusts after his neighbour's wife, or his Ox or Ass.
    Let alone one who disrespects his parents of God forbids steals or swears.

    This is before I move on to those who have had sex or are ononists.

    Hang on a minute why don't I continue my Witchhuny and look for children of divorcees or gay parents.

    This is before I even move to working on the sabbath.

    Within any faith or denomination there is always going to be a whole spectrum of believers from the lapsed to the fanatical.

    It is not really about picking and choosing but about trying the best you can to follow the faith how you can.

    I do not wish to make it personal and I do not know your faith, but how pious are you?

    I am a Roman Catholic, teaching RE at a Roman Catholic School and I know and understand my faith better than most.

    However because I know it well I also know technically I am lapsed and also technically I am not in Full Communion.

    I also know that it is only because I know that I know, I know. Nobody else knows and probably most would not be able to explain how I know that I know or even know why I know I know.

  19. I have heard so much about bacon on this post that I am beginning to fancy some, and I am a Jewish vegetarian.

Share This Page