The Problem With Absolutes

I've tried to be emotionally neutral about being a former Witness. There isn't much good that comes from harboring unending anger towards an organization that, at the institutional level, hasn't two shits to give about my opinion. Likened to drinking poison and hoping your enemy dies, expecting them to change because of my hurt feelings is foolish. It's another example of external control psychologies that permeate society.

Sometimes, though, I think that anger has a place; particularly in the face of injustice. Humans are keen to disparities and abuses of favor. It isn't hard to spot when a person is receiving preferential treatment, and it doesn't take long for us to get tired of it. But it is so pervasive that we can see it at every level of our social structure. Carried to an extreme, it even constitutes violations of civil rights.

This is not that extreme. It's just hypocritical bullshit, unfortunately.

When I disassociated myself a few months ago, I did the superlative favor of informing my family personally, instead of having them find out through congregational back-channels. I fully understood where that would lead, and the familial bonds suffered predictably. Most of us already comprehend the depth of pain shunning can bring, so there's no need to expound on it here. We understand that there is no right of birth or basic human dignity that cannot be undone by a firmly held belief. But how and what should you feel when that belief is only as firm as the perceived offense to the shunning party's religious pride?

You see, I was raised by a mother that is really only concerned about the outward appearance of comparative piety. Were I simply inactive, it could be plausibly denied that I was an apostate, but sending that letter removed all doubt. The whole of the Organization now knows that she and my former-elder father had failed as Christian parents. Shunning is the only way they save face.

I know, that in itself is not exactly an inequity. I knew what the price would be to disassociated, and I accept that. But we also know that even tangential choices can be called into question by the congregation. Our rejection of worldly practices was supposed to be so absolute that we didn't utter holiday greetings, participate in holiday parties, or encourage the celebration thereof. I knew of households so strict about this policy that even using the word "Christmas" was verboten, being replaced instead with "X-mas" (the topic of substitute swear words also comes to mind).

So this past Father's Day, while I spent the day with my son, and neither hearing from, nor contacting, my own father, I was a bit surprised by my cousin's Facebook post to her father. Now, don't let me give the false impression that my cousin or my uncle are in the wrong. They are not Witnesses. Never were. And while she didn't specifically say "happy Father's Day", it was posted on Sunday and written directly to her dad. It was sweet, appreciative, and loving.

There, as a subscript to the post, was a heart. The heart was placed there by my mother.

It was small. Likely, no other person in the world would even care. There could be no mistaking its intent, however. My mom was endorsing a worldly holiday observance. Although it was for her non-Witness brother, it was no less complicit.

Alright... so that's how it is...

Witnesses are acutely aware that they should be acutely aware of hypocrisy. Jesus was very aware of it and pointed it out frequently. I used my better judgement and did not hijack well-wishes meant for my uncle to point out my mom's hypocrisy. But I admit, I did fume over it for a while. One is either fully invested or divested from the faith if it's to have any integrity. A little bit of straying from the path is still straying and, as my mom demonstrated, integrity is apparently contextual.

This has been one of my biggest bones of contention since I first entertained the idea of disassociation. Why? Well shunning typically arises from the dedication to moral philosophies which stand in opposition to those doing the shunning, and it is absolute. There is no wiggle room. Shunning is not invoked for something as paltry as liking a Father's Day wish, but the rejection of the holiday as a Christian activity is similarly absolute. So I'm left wondering which part of that is okay...

The thing is that it's not okay. A legitimate complaint could be lodged about this, but that brings me back to how I started this entry. Is it worth being angry about it? Does a person who doesn't have the integrity to treat everyone outside themselves with consistency deserve my energy? To be succinct, no. The don't deserve it. We have no duty to direct any of our energy to them. It certainly may be worth it if it is in alignment with our greater goals (such as spending time to write about it for other apostates), but we're under no obligation.

For me, this is just another ember in the burning bridge that tied my potential to the prison of constrained thought. The energy that I give to this is actually for the benefit of those still seeking the freedom of an unencumbered spirit. That's my greater goal. I have a deep and abiding distaste for bullies, and there is nothing quite as brutish as isolating a person because of their transient contextual differences while only pretending to have the high ground.