This is the first time I have started a post here. I have not been able to get the entire essay "Jehovah's Witnesses, Blood Transfusions, and the Tort of Misrepresentation" to read yet, but reading the excerpts alone has given me hope.
How so? Only a few weeks ago, a member of my family who is a witness said "If my husband and I had "a sliver of a doubt that this was the truth, we would be so outta here!" Did she know what she was saying? Pretty loaded comment, what I heard is that they are "burdened, tired, worn-out, exhausted, and would love to dump the whole load".
"A sliver of a doubt". I wonder how many of them feel this way, how many would latch onto something to set them free. I think there are thousands, and I was one of them. CofC set me free because of the way "secular facts" were exposed, appealing to my intelligence.
Now, what really hit ME while reading the excerpts from Barbara is this:
Excerpt #1 from "Jehovah's Witnesses, Blood Transfusions, and the
Tort of Misrepresentation."
Government intervention into religious exercise through meeting this
test is rooted in legal precedent. In Reynolds v. U.S., one of the first
decisions limiting religious freedom, the Supreme Court upheld a law
criminalizing polygamy because of the state’s compelling interest in
protection of the family unit.
 Additionally, courts are now willing to allow aggrieved citizens to sue their church if it misrepresented a secular fact. For example, one court has held a religious organization liable for misrepresenting its use of donated funds.
Similarly, the Catholic Church became engulfed in a flood of
tort law suits following revelations that some of its priests sexually
abused minors and that the church allowed known sex-offender priests
to continue their posts.
I see the following quote as the real key to this new "tool" to expose the lies:
"The essay examines the State’s power to protect its citizens by allowing
followers and their families to pursue legal action against a religion when it misrepresents secular facts which harmed the followers."
If this isn't loaded, I don't know what is. How about a financial accounting
for the funds donated to the WWW (World-Wide Work)? How about an accounting
for not informing their believers about the molesters in their midst?
These are NOT doctrinal issues, they have to do with "secular facts".
I am not a law student, but what I am reading seems to intimate that they
may now be held liable for mis-information on a purely secular level -
n paste" method of presenting their followers with half truths and statements
totally out of context to further their own points.
And there there is DUMBO -
wouldn't they love to get their hands on this info? I guess I'll send
it to them.....
Well, that having been said, I think this is BIG NEWS, but it is just the beginning.........slivers of doubt to fill many quivers have just been ordered up.