WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO STOP SHUNNING?

by Mary 43 Replies latest jw friends

  • DaCheech
    DaCheech

    Sure so, but for the few instances out there, there is some liability

  • Mary
    Mary
    If a person knowingly joins the group, they are agreeing to follow the precepts of the religion. This has been upheld as a freedom of religion issue.

    Yes but what about the majority of us who did not 'knowingly join' this religion?? We were born into it and didn't know anything else. What about OUR rights of Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion? Aren't these laws in effect telling you that you can practice your belief without fear of reprisal? If a mother or father decide to speak to their DF'd child or grandchild and are themselves severely punished, how do they have Freedom of Religion?

    Any law passed targeted at the JW's view on shunning could be abused in other ways. It doesn't take a JW to shun. Many families have rifts within their structure due to financial or other disagreements which cause a member to shun another.....suddenly this would be against the law? There is also no way to enforce a law of this kind. You can't pick up the phone and call the cops crying "My brother is shunning me!" It's just not feasable in a real world situation as nice as it sounds.

    Yes but how many Witnesses are ONLY shunning family members because the religion is forcing them to? I understand what you're saying. A good example is I guess the rift between Angelina Jolie and her father Jon Voight. She won't talk to him for whatever reason. That's her choice. However, Witnesses are NOT given a choice. They are forced to shun family members out of fear of reprisals from the Organization. How is this any different than the Salem Witch Trials? I guess my thought is that a law needs to be passed that forbids any religion from telling their followers that they MUST shun a family member. I dunno.....it just pisses me off when I see someone that I care about going through hell because of this religion's screwed up values. If there is an afterlife, I hope the Governing Body members ROT IN HELL for all the damage they've caused in this life.

  • Dismembered
    Dismembered

    Greetings Mary,

    :If enough of us wrote letters, what do you think our chances would be of getting some law passed that forbade religions from telling people they must shun family members?

    I consider you to be a cornerstone poster. You're incredibly adept, as well as satirical in posting here on JWD. Come on Mary... it's only when 'hell freezes over' will they change their teaching/practice on shunning. If they were unable to enforce that wicked rule, what else would they have? Remember they're a bunch of asswipes.

    Dismembered

  • Mary
    Mary
    I consider you to be a cornerstone poster. You're incredibly adept, as well as satirical in posting here on JWD.

    Wow! Thanks hon....(I wasn't expecting that!)

    Come on Mary... it's only when 'hell freezes over' will they change their teaching/practice on shunning. If they were unable to enforce that wicked rule, what else would they have?

    That's exactly my point......you're right---I don't think they'll ever change it voluntarily, but if 'Caesars Laws' forced the issue (like they have several times on the blood issue), then they would not be able to destroy families the way they are presently.

    Remember they're a bunch of asswipes.

    You're right........I hear they've got a whole factory full of these down at Patterson (for those messy accidents whenever Dateline is on):

  • Dismembered
    Dismembered

    Touche Mary

    Dismembered

  • Finally-Free
    Finally-Free

    If legislation prohibiting shunning were passed I could be forced to associate with Jehovah's Witnesses against my will.

    Sure, the shunning policy sucks, but I don't put all the blame on the society. I put equal blame on the individuals doing it. The people doing the shunning are adults, have their own brain, and should have some measure of common sense and decency. If they lack such basic human qualities then fine. I don't want or need pieces of shit like that anywhere in my life.

    We cannot take away the JW right to freedom of/from association without forfeiting our own. Perhaps a better approach would be to ban the baptism of minors.

    W

  • Auchmull
    Auchmull
    How is this any different than the Salem Witch Trials?

    Nineteen people hanged (including my 11th great grandmother, by the way), one person pressed to death and as many as 13 people died in prison. A little different.

  • choosing life
    choosing life

    Shunning is inhumane. When you are told you can live forever, never have to experience death because the end is imminent and that your children will never reach the age to start school, shunning is not something you give much thought to. I disagree that we came into this with full knowledge of the damage that shunning can do to a family. If all those things I was promised had come true, I never would have known the pain of shunning.

    That said, it does need to be made known to the public. The jws are not the loving and benign religion that they say they are. We all need to make this known to anyone we can. I used to hide the destructive side of this religion when I was still in. Now I let others know whenever I can.There are some countries that consider jws to be a danger to society and breaking up families is one of the reasons they will not grant them status as a religion. I have 2 disfellowshipped children and can testify to the division and misery this policy causes. But I don't see it changing through laws, only through individual action and enough bad publicity. Image is everything to the watchtower society.

  • jwfacts
    jwfacts


    It has to hurt their bottom line, so legal and financial pressure. I think the more we write to newspapers, lobby goverments and the UN, the more their growth is affected, and ultimately the less people to donate money, the more the WTS is willing to change their ways.

  • SirNose586
    SirNose586
    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

    Sorry Mary, they're not going to make a law to fix the Borg.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit