4 ms·

Small correction -- members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (of which I am one) don't have to give up on caffeine. There were some people who

Small correction -- members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (of which I am one) don't have to give up on caffeine. There were some people who taught and practiced that, but that is largely in the past. Even BYU, the church-owned school, now sells fully-caffeinated Coke on campus. This was a fairly recent development. As well, members are encouraged to avoid any media that includes sexually explicit, violent, or otherwise negative content -- not only avoiding R-rated movies. The church teaches that people should be careful about their media choices and consume media that enlightens or edifies, not just entertains. Active members of the church definitely vary in how they interpret that, of course. I do love your point about sacrificing some things and getting a community in return. I work as a software engineer and at the age of 25 I already have two kids. My wife and I definitely sacrifice for them, but I hope we can build a loving family that will give us social returns that are lifelong. Growing up, I had a large network of cousins and siblings that were closer to me than friends were. I know much of this is because of the influence of the church. It is also true that being a member gives you a network of people -- people are always around to help you move in and out, they're always there every Sunday, etc. Members are assigned "ministers", two people who check up on them, are officially assigned to love them, and report back to the leadership of each ward (congregation) regularly about any problems the people they minister to may have. All this in addition to the friendships that naturally form with people you see once a week. Sacrificing alcohol, swearing, and other things -- tithing, Sundays, a two year-mission -- seems like a small trade in comparison for the creation of relationships with people who love you and who you love in return.

kuerbel 7y ago
As an atheist, that sounds terrible. Also there is some legit criticism: taken from wikipedia (where you can see the sources): It also warns members to "avoid independent thinking", claiming such thinking "was introduced by Satan the Devil" and would "cause division". Those who openly disagree with official teachings are condemned as "apostates" who are "mentally diseased". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses This has nothing to do with being a community in my mind. A community would help it's people develop and not keep them in (mental) chains.
- funnybeam 7y ago
  As another atheist, that sounds (taken at face value) pretty good to me. Community is massively missing for many people and having a structure that provides that is very attractive. Not disputing your points, just would be nice to have an equivalent without the religion and other negative side effects
  - permatech 7y ago
    Community is great, but a community of people who drink the kool-aid to get along and go along sounds awful.
    - afiori 7y ago
      As an (Jungian?) atheist I fully claim that similar problems exist fully within non religious communities. Try voicing doubts on progressive ideologies in many woke communities, they do not take is well either. I do not understand why communities often morph in this way.
- tomp 7y ago
  Sounds like present day mainstream media... e.g. if you “think independently” and decide that affirmative action is bad, you’re branded a “bigoted racist” or “sexist” or “nazi”
  - dang 7y ago
    "Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- barry-cotter 7y ago
  That’s the point. A community that can keep people who are indifferent or hostile to its values out has some chance of survival. One that can’t doesn't. Keeping people like you or me out is not an incidental benefit of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, it’s indispensable. If you completely disagree with a community's core tenets they do not want you. And if you’re not a member of a community your feelings about how it should be governed are relevant only insofar as they are enforced by men with guns.
alasdair_ 7y ago
>Members are assigned "ministers", two people who check up on them, are officially assigned to love them, and report back to the leadership of each ward (congregation) regularly about any problems the people they minister to may have. All this in addition to the friendships that naturally form with people you see once a week. I have friends who left the mormon church after decades because of these "ministers". They were always asking when the couple was going to have another baby and constantly prying into their lives and reporting back. They found it creepy. When they finally decided to leave, it got so bad (mormons ambushing them in the strangest places with aggressive questioning) that they had to file for a restraining order to keep them away. The churches stance on homosexuality didn't help either, but it was the ministers that were the most invasive part.

kuerbel 7y ago

As an atheist, that sounds terrible. Also there is some legit criticism: taken from wikipedia (where you can see the sources): It also warns members to "avoid independent thinking", claiming such thinking "was introduced by Satan the Devil" and would "cause division". Those who openly disagree with official teachings are condemned as "apostates" who are "mentally diseased". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses This has nothing to do with being a community in my mind. A community would help it's people develop and not keep them in (mental) chains.

funnybeam 7y ago
As another atheist, that sounds (taken at face value) pretty good to me. Community is massively missing for many people and having a structure that provides that is very attractive. Not disputing your points, just would be nice to have an equivalent without the religion and other negative side effects
- permatech 7y ago
  Community is great, but a community of people who drink the kool-aid to get along and go along sounds awful.
  - afiori 7y ago
    As an (Jungian?) atheist I fully claim that similar problems exist fully within non religious communities. Try voicing doubts on progressive ideologies in many woke communities, they do not take is well either. I do not understand why communities often morph in this way.
tomp 7y ago
Sounds like present day mainstream media... e.g. if you “think independently” and decide that affirmative action is bad, you’re branded a “bigoted racist” or “sexist” or “nazi”
- dang 7y ago
  "Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
barry-cotter 7y ago
That’s the point. A community that can keep people who are indifferent or hostile to its values out has some chance of survival. One that can’t doesn't. Keeping people like you or me out is not an incidental benefit of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, it’s indispensable. If you completely disagree with a community's core tenets they do not want you. And if you’re not a member of a community your feelings about how it should be governed are relevant only insofar as they are enforced by men with guns.

alasdair_ 7y ago

>Members are assigned "ministers", two people who check up on them, are officially assigned to love them, and report back to the leadership of each ward (congregation) regularly about any problems the people they minister to may have. All this in addition to the friendships that naturally form with people you see once a week. I have friends who left the mormon church after decades because of these "ministers". They were always asking when the couple was going to have another baby and constantly prying into their lives and reporting back. They found it creepy. When they finally decided to leave, it got so bad (mormons ambushing them in the strangest places with aggressive questioning) that they had to file for a restraining order to keep them away. The churches stance on homosexuality didn't help either, but it was the ministers that were the most invasive part.