by Simon 120 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Duh!
Do you know how many non-Witnesses shunned me when I was a Witness? Now you're going to try and regulate what they can do?
Actually its true any born-in can tell you how painful it can be to be shunned by your school mates for being different.😢
Again though that is individual preference.
The sooner every individual JW realizes that they do not have to obey the WT the sooner this madness will end.
Any organization that promotes -- no DEMANDS -- such intolerance, should not be given special tax consideration. This policy violates individual human rights.
How do they demand it? By ... asking? suggesting? Which human right has been violated that wouldn't require just as much violation for other people to un-enforce?
If they threaten you with harm or with a gun, call the cops - we already have laws for that.
If it's "person A broke rule 123 so they forfeit membership" then there isn't much to be done.
If they group decides to follow the idea that they shouldn't talk to such a person - the group chose that.
All along, the word "choice" always comes up. If someone chooses to shun you then that is their choice. Would you give up the right to freely chose who you do and don't associate with? Will a government agent turn up with the JWs to force you to listen to them so they don't risk being shunned by you?
It's impossible to legislate against people being "not nice" and it's not the place of government to get involved when no laws are being broken.
The sooner every individual JW realizes that they do not have to obey the WT the sooner this madness will end
hear hear ... the message should be that everyone has a choice of whether they want to shun someone or not based on their principles and conscience.
Don't accept "the WTS told me to" as an answer. Demand to know why they are choosing to do what they are doing and remind them that ... they have a choice.
One of their choices is to blindly do as someone else tells them to.
hence called 'mentally diseased'or 'demonised'could become illegal as either slander and/or come under the hate crime laws. I don't know what others think?
I certainly agree with Datadog that muslim extremism is pushing it more to the forefront politically and it's bound to get caught up in any legislation against religous extremism.
Here's the reality.
As much as we feel strongly about the WTS and that they once called Apostates "mentally diseased", it's not really that big a deal in the grand scheme of things is it?
First, some Apostates are freakin' nuts. So it's a valid claim (unless they said "all").
Second, have you any idea what a real hate crime is? Not the PC nonsense that get's promoted by the right xenophobic media. Real hate crimes are way more than just calling someone a name.
I don't think we will get anywhere or get anything other than laughter by trying to equate the behavior of ISIS with the WTS calling people mental. And if they are not going to take action against the far more radical religions of the world with a hard message of killing ... why do we imagine the WTS will be a target for them?
Yes, we can take advantage of people's focus on "religious intolerance" but I think we need to think seriously about some of our claims otherwise they just make us look like crazies.
Interesting question Simon.
I haven't read the entire thread and am only jumping in (late in the conversation, I know) addressing the points in the OP.
It's important for us to recognize that what is right or wrong is not the same as what is legal or illegal.
Also, that any individual has the right to shun anyone else is surely not the same as institutionalized, coerced shunning as practiced by cults such as Jehovah's Witnesses and many others.
If you don't want to talk to me, then I guess that's your right. But if you won't talk to me because someone else told you to, then that's just messed up: you're in a cult!
It's important for us to recognize that what is right or wrong is not the same as what is legal or illegal.
I agree - it doesn't and shouldn't make them look good. The campaign should be "Jehovah's witness shun family members in a cruel and unloving manner based purely on the say-so of their elders". Trying to get them outlawed is unrealistic IMO but it doesn't mean we can't tell the world what they do (and I guess the world will leap into inaction just as with the Amish and other groups that do a similar thing).
If you don't want to talk to me, then I guess that's your right. But if you won't talk to me because someone else told you to, then that's just messed up: you're in a cult!
Here's the problem: people have the right to be in a cult. Sure, the extreme cults are "easy" ... but how do you legislate and where do you draw the line? Who decides?
I think Mormons and JWs are a cult as well as Catholics and Muslims.
Do I get to decide?
What we should be doing is focusing on educating people, not trying to fight for something that is unattainable.
Focus on harm such coercive tactics used cause to the population would be instep with moral acceptance and can be worded in such a manner. Limit a corporation religious or otherwise to enforce policy over its members make shunning a real big no no.
Marked for latter read in totallity!
Simon: We should be doing is focusing on educating people, not trying to fight for something that is unattainable.
Absolutely. And this is what I do, one high school student at a time. Every day of every work week, and sometimes on weekends!
No, I don't have a website presumptuously proclaiming to speak for the "silent majority," but I do have a website dedicated to educating young minds, teaching them how to think critically and logically in a number of different subjects and disciplines.
I may only affect a relatively small number of people, but I know I make a difference in their lives, whether they are JWs, Jews, Catholics, Born-Again Christians, Muslims or atheists.
