If you change religions by changing your mind and moving on to something "better", then, technically you are an Apostate.
Consequently, unless you are born a JW you have to abandon another religion to become a JW. So, being an apostate is a good thing if you abandon some OTHER religion; but, if you abandon the JW's you are bad.
Martin Luther abandoned Catholicism. He was an apostate. Good or bad?
Charles Taze Russel abadoned the religion of his parents for adventist views and managed to abandon those beliefs for some fresh ones of his own. He was a double (or triple) apostate.
Joseph Judge Rutherford changed religions to become a JW and was, consequently an Apostate.
Everytime a JW goes to a door to make a convert he is encouraging apostacy! But, that kind of apostacy is noble and fine.
When David found fault with Saul and opposed him he was apostate.
When Jesus criticized the leaders of Judaism he was apostate.
Paul was apostate.
Who the hell wasn't apostate?
My point being this. The governing body encourages in every way possible apostacy on the part of every other religion's membership but, brands it the greatest of all evils when it happens to them. Double standard?
When anybody at anytime who is in a posItion of leadership and responsibility cuts themselves off from criticism and condemns whistle-blowers and treats them as anathema they are setting up the Loyal Opposition to become APOSTATE.
To prevent Apostacy the Governing Body needs to allow a means of hearing criticism and dealing with it. If the JW's have the TRUTH it should be able to easily defend itself against any such criticisms. But, if JW's have lies and distortion--they have every reason to fear criticism and would necessarily cringe at having their deeds exposed to the light of day.
Even a Bank or Savings and Loan has regular audits. What would you think of a bank that refused an audit? Would it inspire confidence?
Sometimes the people who love us most must oppose us when they see us on a wrong course of action. It is an act of faithful integrity and stalwart conscientiousness to point out error.
APOSTACY, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
When an honest complaint is made and no method of repair or redress is made possible; it is the party who disables the debate who CAUSES the Apostacy.
Only a person of conscience can turn their back on a religion that turns a deaf ear to correction.
Apostacy, therefore, is a sign of a healthy conscience that has met a dishonest and ignorant policy of stonewalling.
Long live Apostacy!