Talk:Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Jehovah's Witnesses, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Jehovah's Witnesses. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

[edit] Recent Edits

Richardshusr, you have undone edits I made to the article. The main edit was the removal of a lengthy passage in the introduction that does not really have much to do with persecution. The only part that was relevant is already repeated in the 1910-1920 section. The into should not be so long, and should stay on topic.--Jeffro77 (talk) 11:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Jeffro77. I agree with the points you made. I was just objecting to the deletion of large portions of text without explanation or discussion.

Although some of the points that were in the intro may seem "off topic", I think it is POV to report that JWs were persecuted without also providing the contextual background of that persecution. Attacking the religious establishment and opposing war may seem perfectly natural to us now but these were not obvious rights let alone virtues in the early to middle 20th century. JWs were also much more aggressive and obnoxious during that period than they are now.

In truth, the use of the word "persecution" is POV and there are a large number of WP editors who think this word should not be used at all. I don't want to get into that can of worms now. I'm OK with using the word "persecution" as long as we don't fall into the trap that the "persecuted" were virtuous and innocent and the "persecutors" were evil.

I do agree that the intro was too long. That was probably an artifact of my pulling the text out of another article (probably Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses). I have trimmed the intro by pushing much of the text to the body of the article. This article needs a lot of work in terms of organization, making sure it stays on topic and logical flow. The intro is also pretty choppy and could probably use some improvement. Please re-read the article and give me your thoughts on how it could be improved.

--Richard (talk) 17:47, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article Scope

Currently, this article basically says "Jehovah's Witnesses annoy people, and people don't like them. Oh, and by the way, sometimes there's been some violence against them." The article is weighted outside of the scope indicated by the title. Either rename the article, or remove the superfluous detail.--Jeffro77 (talk) 02:00, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Ummm... I need you to be more clear about your objection. It was fully my intent to say "In the first half of the 20th century, JWs were very in-your-face about their views which included telling Catholics that they were doing the work of the devil. These views combined with their active door-to-door and on-the-street-corner proselytization provoked strong negative reactions which resulted in persecution to the point of violence. In response, JWs actively pursued their civil liberties in court and contributed significantly to the development of key principles of freedom of speech and freedom of religion."

It is, IMHO, highly POV to suggest that JWs were persecuted through no fault of their own. The dislike of JWs in the first half of the 20th century was very understandable, especially considering that the society at the time was far less tolerant than ours is today. If a person said today about the Jews what the JWs said about the Catholics, that person would be hounded for being anti-Semitic. It is, IMO, important that the reader understand how JWs acted in those days.

I am not condoning the persecution or violence of the JWs but failing to explain the context of the persecution imparts the wrong impression to the reader.

Much of my understanding of this topic was acquired from researching the article on United States Supreme Court cases involving Jehovah's Witnesses which is mostly my work as are many of the articles on those cases. I have read and understood the summaries of more than 20 cases involving the JWs and so I think I know what I'm talking about. If you think this article doesn't present a fair presentation of the history, please explain more clearly what your objections are.

--Richard (talk) 04:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Richard, the point put simply is this: the article as it stands would more appropriately be called "Attitudes toward Jehovah's Witnesses in the United States".--Jeffro77 (talk) 00:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I figured that's what you meant but I wanted to be sure. I disagree with you. As I explained above, the attitudes described here are simply there to put the persecution in context. If you wish to document more persecution, feel free to do this. However, I would resist a change in scope or title to this article. --Richard (talk) 06:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

The current title does not match the content. Resisting a change to both is stubborn and illogical.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:23, 18 May 2008 (UTC)