Freedom, Free speech, Censorship, Religion and Tight Pants

by Simon 50 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  DATA-DOG

  I remember actually believing that all of us ex-JWs could somehow bring down the WTBTS. LOL!!

  Remember annointedJW.com ( something like that )?? Yeah....ahem..

  I honestly believe that the most we can do is just not add to the madness. We can't change anyone. All we can do is present facts. If someone wants to be free of a cult/religion, then they will eventually be free.

  We probably cannot bring down the WTBTS. I hate saying that. We can change ourselves and strive for personal honesty and integrity.

  DD
• 

  Simon

  It would be good for all Newbies to read it as they come on here, it may help them to get over their anger and pain quicker, and to direct their energies in productive ways to chip away at the WT.

  Hopefully it's useful to others. I was thinking of what helped me to get over feeling angry and reach some peace of mind and the whole "accept the things you you cannot change" definitely applies. The more I thought about it the more I realized that as much as I despise religion and the stupidity of it, it's better to allow people to have it because the choice to have it is a valuable freedom that more than compensates.

  We need a balance of religion being controlled so it is not allowed to act out it's excesses or break any existing laws but if people want to believe in fairies they should be able to without being harassed for it. If we can harass them for that, what can people harass us for?

  I honestly believe that the most we can do is just not add to the madness. We can't change anyone. All we can do is present facts. If someone wants to be free of a cult/religion, then they will eventually be free.

  We probably cannot bring down the WTBTS. I hate saying that. We can change ourselves and strive for personal honesty and integrity.

  There's nothing inherently wrong with the desire as long as we keep it in check and don't let it take over our lives or drive us to do crazy things. At some point, it risks becoming just another obsession that we replaced our previous religion with.

  But yes, I believe there is little you can do to "make" someone leave a religion other than make facts and information available to them for when things in their life trigger some awakening. Some people never get the trigger, others get it but have learnt to push it down - they aren't being forced to believe, they are choosing to believe.

  What we often forget is that not everyone thinks and feels like we do. Some people want religion. Some people need religion - the "opium of the people". Some people want and need the WTS brand of religion. Whatever we do to try and destroy one will never destroy the demand or someone somewhere filling that need.

  Over time increased education and freedom will hopefully continue to erode the demand and maybe one day we'll evolve past it as a species. It almost seems to be an accidental side effect of speech and community - it once served a need to explain the unexplained but people recognized it could also be used for power and control so it lingers on.

  Until then, the best we can do is to be there for people who do wake up. I think it's easier for people to reach out for help if you have not been quite so antagonistic toward them when they were 'in'. That is why I find the messaging that JWs are somehow evil rather disappointing. Most JW's are not evil, they are just people trying to do the right thing but in a slightly misguided way. Some of their beliefs lead them to do things that occasionally hurt others but it is often done for good intentions.

  We should make sure we're attacking the bad ideas and not demonizing the people who hold them as we hope to free the people from the beliefs one day.
• 

  Oubliette

  marked
• 

  Vidiot

  I want the freedom to use free speech to censor religion whilst wearing tight pants.
• 

  BluesBrother

  We should make sure we're attacking the bad ideas and not demonizing the people who hold them as we hope to free the people from the beliefs one day.

  I like that sentence.. If the Frenchmen who were horribly killed had remembered that, perhaps the crime would not have happened. I believe that our human right to free speech differs from the right to insult or slander....

  A very well written opening post Simon.
• 

  steve2

  Data-Dog and Simon - powerful and well expressed sentiments - a lovely antidote to the ( understandable) drive to try 'to bring 'em down' urge that blindsides clear thinking.

  We need to prioritize being effective, not being 'right' - the latter puts people off, whereas being effective has a clear eye on the mid- to longer term picture. Some former Witnesses ( or nonWitnesses with religious bees in their bonnets) come across like maniacal spectres - hardly effective communicators, to say nothing of inadvertently confirming JWs expectations of how apostates and opposers behave. Thanks guys - not.

  Calm and empathic communication may not arrest attention - but it is far, far more helpful in the mid- to longer term than some of the high-pitched, shrill sermonizing that seeks to bring down the organization.
• 

  EndofMysteries

  How and why would any government ban the ability of this one group to follow this one behavior vs other groups and other beliefs?

  People can be free to make their own choices and treat people how they choose to do so. But when the groups leadership puts in writing things such as, "Don't look for excuses to talk to your family, even by email", the government can put a stop to that. That order members to shun family be not allowed and each to decide on their own.

  Tell us how it would be enforced - would a government official accompany you to someone's house and command them to talk to you?

  The law could hold the GB and printers responsible for what they print. They could get things from jail time or even just loosing charity and non taxable status. If a charity is teaching hate and breaking up families, why should they be exempt from taxes? I bet that the $ would make the GB change their tone real quick!

  What is the point of demanding something if it would be utterly and absolutely impossible to legislate? Have you read the articles on the florist who refused to give gay couples flowers for their weddings. Their beliefs weren't honored on them not believing in gay marriage. The law didn't tell them to just go elsewhere as many others would be willing to sell flowers. So when a religions leaders are instructing to do something harmful to children, families, etc, why would that be 'impossible' to legislate? It's far from impossible.

  We have to be pragmatic - how would a court decide what was hurting vs "protecting the congregation" as the WTS would claim?

  The court could make and force them to uphold what they claim and try to sell to the public their policies as. Since they try to make their policy under FAQ appear to be that family ties remain no matter what, only no spiritual talk, the court could force them to uphold it that way. They try to recruit members claiming worst case if anybody in the family leaves is no more spiritual talk but still family, that they abide by that. Or put a big disclosure on their study material like cigarette companies, etc, are required to do, "By joining Jehovah's Witnesses, if anybody in the family later on leaves, those who remain are required to shun them for life should they never return. It doesn't matter whether they break laws in the bible or not, we believe those who don't obey the Governing Body must be shunned." They can force a real disclosure of their true beliefs upfront instead of beating around the bush and trying to whitewash it.
• 

  Simon

  People can be free to make their own choices and treat people how they choose to do so. But when the groups leadership puts in writing things such as, "Don't look for excuses to talk to your family, even by email", the government can put a stop to that. That order members to shun family be not allowed and each to decide on their own.

  Where are those orders? They print a magazine and have some general beliefs that they encourage people to follow. Do you have a clear paper trail to show direct commands have been given to anyone?

  The best you'll get is that "someone misunderstood" or "that was just one person going to far". To quote my favourite movie, "it doesn't matter what we know, it only matters what we can prove".

  The law could hold the GB and printers responsible for what they print. They could get things from jail time or even just loosing charity and non taxable status. If a charity is teaching hate and breaking up families, why should they be exempt from taxes? I bet that the $ would make the GB change their tone real quick!

  Where are they clearly teaching hate? That is our interpretation. To them it is trying to encourage people to "return to the truth".

  I am playing devils-advocate to show that just because we believe and "know" something it can be a world away from proving it to the extent that a government would pass legislation against it. Remember, you'd likely have every other religious group campaigning against any interference on their behalf as well - which politician is going to touch that?

  Have you read the articles on the florist who refused to give gay couples flowers for their weddings. Their beliefs weren't honored on them not believing in gay marriage. The law didn't tell them to just go elsewhere as many others would be willing to sell flowers. So when a religions leaders are instructing to do something harmful to children, families, etc, why would that be 'impossible' to legislate? It's far from impossible.

  That is different. That is a business dealing with the public and a law against discrimination.

  It does not apply to a religious group that wants to have certain membership conditions based on their religious belief.

  Or put a big disclosure on their study material like cigarette companies, etc, are required to do, "By joining Jehovah's Witnesses, if anybody in the family later on leaves, those who remain are required to shun them for life should they never return. It doesn't matter whether they break laws in the bible or not, we believe those who don't obey the Governing Body must be shunned." They can force a real disclosure of their true beliefs upfront instead of beating around the bush and trying to whitewash it.

  But aren't their beliefs already printed in the magazines? Aren't people free to believe what they want and join whatever group they want to join?

  It sucks that they are able to get away with these things ... but that is the nature of freedom and people's right to make bad choices and to follow bad advice that others are allowed to promote with their free speech.
• 

  steve2

  There are actually very few direct quotes that could be construed as "hate" language so End of Mysteries examples barely stretch an incredibly thin canvass over an olympic-sized swimming pool.

  Courts are already clogged up with Big Brother legislation. Despite the individually-felt hurtfulness of JW policies, Watchtower literature is plankton to the secular authorities who have far, far bigger fish to catch.
• 

  zeb

  Simon I hold to this,

  "I do not agree with what you say, but i will defend to the death your right to say it".--Jefferson ( I think)

  Steve2. What has ever worried me about he wt is that in a bad time for countries, economy and govts; say some crisis happening that they wt will make such a bloody fuss that the govts will jump on them to shut them up. It will have nough to do with faith but thus voiding a nuisance in the path of some reconstruction. But realize this it wont be the gb who get it in the neck it will be the rank n file.