WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO STOP SHUNNING?

by Mary 43 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Scully

  Mary:

  Scully said: I'm of the opinion that any discriminatory action - which is what shunning is - against an individual on the basis of their race, religion (or lack thereof), nationality, or any other characteristic that is protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a violation of that individual's rights under the Charter.

  Exactly, and you put that extremely well. Forced discrimination against someone because they do not want to practice a certain religion, is against their Rights under our Charter.......I think I'm going to look into this a bit more.

  It seems clear to me that when you have people shunning someone which is endorsed and instructed by an Organization that it would constitute a hate crime against the shunned person on behalf of the Organization. Those kinds of acts are illegal in Canada. A person's ideology (religious or otherwise) should not allow them to commit acts that violate others' Charter Rights, even if the individual's Charter Rights allow him to hold a certain ideology. Can we commit libel or slander against someone if our religion allows it? Or would the court rule that an individual's Charter rights do not allow him to breach the legal boundaries of free speech?

  If you think about it, when someone is announced at a Kingdom Hall as being "no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses" - it is (1) a signal to other members to commence the hate crime of shunning against the individual and (2) a slanderous statement implying that the individual has committed a sin so heinous that they cannot even enjoy the association of friends and family, when that is not necessarily the case. You can't even disagree with a tenet of the belief system or hold your own private opinions that differ from the WTS's teachings, because you could be the next victim of the hate crime of shunning.
• 

  Mary

  If a cross shouldn't matter, then don't let it matter. Leave "religion" out of it and just LOVE those kids.

  That's the point: They're not allowed to "love those kids" anymore as one of my friends got DF'd. And it wasn't my friend who made a big deal out of it, it was the Organization---the same bastards that instruct family and friends who are still in, that they risk expulsion themselves if they associate with him.

  It seems clear to me that when you have people shunning someone which is endorsed and instructed by an Organization, that it would constitute a hate crime against the shunned person on behalf of the Organization. Those kinds of acts are illegal in Canada.

  Exactly. We're not allowed to discriminate and exclude anyone based on their skin colour gender or religion yet this is exactly what the Watchtower is encouraging. I just found this little gem in a 1974 WT which shows that for a brief moment in time, they seemed to be almost human:

  ***

  w74 8/1 p. 471 Maintaining a Balanced Viewpoint Toward Disfellowshiped Ones ***

  As to disfellowshiped family members (not minor sons or daughters) living outside the home, each family must decide to what extent they will have association with such ones. This is not something that the congregational elders can decide for them. What the elders are concerned with is that "leaven" is not reintroduced into the congregation through spiritual fellowshiping with those who had to be removed as such "leaven." Thus, if a disfellowshiped parent goes to visit a son or daughter or to see grandchildren and is allowed to enter the Christian home, this is not the concern of the elders. Such a one has a natural right to visit his blood relatives and his offspring. Similarly, when sons or daughters render honor to a parent, though disfellowshiped, by calling to see how such a one’s physical health is or what needs he or she may have, this act in itself is not a spiritual fellowshiping.

  Oh I forgot.....Jehovah had "light flash up" in the recent September or October WT to "reveal" that they should actually be treating family members like garbage and cut them off without a second thought.

  A person's ideology (religious or otherwise) should not allow them to commit acts that violate others' Charter Rights, even if the individual's Charter Rights allow him to hold a certain ideology. Can we commit libel or slander against someone if our religion allows it? Or would the court rule that an individual's Charter rights do not allow him to breach the legal boundaries of free speech?

  Ironically, we cannot commit slander against anyone outside of our own religion-----unless you were once a member and decided to leave. I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that our Charter of Rights is being ignored every time someone is disfellowshipped for disagreeing with the doctrines in this religion.
• 

  mouthy

  Just saw this post. I have written to every political member years & years ago, They send a very nice letter back to say they will investigate the problem.

  I know folks that have sued the WT & lost. Because since the change in the baptisimal questions, ( covering their butts) we are binding to an organization...We need thousands to speak up & put their money where their mouth is.... otherwise the Billionair Watchtower wins all the time

  Just my two cents
• 

  vitty

  SCULLY

  You have put into words exactly what I think. The organization still has this in effect because not many ppl know about it or dont think they have any redress.

  This is a HATEFUL practice against individuals and should be brought into the public domain. In the UK more laws are being brought in to stop Muslim extremism being taught in the mosques. Im sure if ppl took notice how the WT spreads HATE against christendom or ppl who have left the WT they would be shocked.
• 

  gumby

  And just as public exposure has forced them to re-think their pathetic rules on protecting pedophiles, perhaps more public exposure would make them re-think their disgusting rules on breaking up families when someone doesn't agree with their "new light".

  Unless the WTBTS greed over losing members forces them to change their policies, then only public exposer will change them...and that's a maybe.

  Scully, you also make some very good points about the "announcment" from the platform that so and so is no longer one of jehovah's witnesses. This is a direct statement that others must shun this one now and there are other articles that show that members are not to fellowship with one who is expelled. This counters the witnesses claim that each member can decide for themselves as to how they will treat a member who has been expelled.

  Mary, I remember that 1974 article. If I remember correctly it was written by Ray Franz and it had a much more balanced liberal stance until his heartless piece of shit uncle changed it all in 1981 after they booted Ray out.

  Gumby
• 

  jgnat

  I don't trust governments to meddle with religions. They very nearly always get it wrong. On the other hand, the public does deserve protection against coercive and deceptive recruitment practices, and as Scully said, organization-sanctioned shunning. Such protection could be extended past religions to non-religious pyramid schemes and other organizations who utilize coercive mind control.

  http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/responsibility/questions.htm

  Perhaps people, as consumers, could get some relief also through freedom of information and protection of privacy laws.
• 

  lesterd

  they'd find another legal loophole to get around it, after all "theocratic stratgy", lying, is ok if it accomplishes "Gods will". Everything they say is in the third party so they never have to take responseablity for they actions, doctrin or prophesys.
• 

  TruckerGB

  Sadly,some exwitness forums also practice shunning of former members to.

  Rich
• 

  mouthy

  Sadly,some exwitness forums also practice shunning of former members to

  THEY Do???? I would be interested to know which ones?
• 

  gumby

  Lesterd, hit the nail on the head. If the government stepped in they would just demonise the governments stance and "obey god as ruler rather than men".

  With articles like the one below, they will be programmed to continue in their path.

  Kingdom Ministry August 2002 pp.3-4 Display Christian Loyalty When a Relative Is Disfellowshipped ***

  Display Christian Loyalty When a Relative Is Disfellowshipped

  1 The bond between family members can be very strong. This brings a test upon a Christian when a marriage mate, a child, a parent, or another close relative is disfellowshipped or has disassociated himself from the congregation. (Matt. 10:37) How should loyal Christians treat such a relative? Does it make a difference if the person lives in your household? First, let us review what the Bible says on this subject, the principles of which apply equally to those who are disfellowshipped and to those who disassociate themselves.

  2 How to Treat Expelled Ones: God's Word commands Christians not to keep company or fellowship with a person who has been expelled from the congregation: "Quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man. . . . Remove the wicked man from among yourselves." (1 Cor. 5:11, 13) Jesus' words recorded at Matthew 18:17 also bear on the matter: "Let [the expelled one] be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector." Jesus' hearers well knew that the Jews of that day had no fraternization with Gentiles and that they shunned tax collectors as outcasts. Jesus was thus instructing his followers not to associate with expelled ones.--See The Watchtower of September 15, 1981, pages 18-20.

  3 This means that loyal Christians do not have spiritual fellowship with anyone who has been expelled from the congregation. But more is involved. God's Word states that we should 'not even eat with such a man.' (1 Cor. 5:11) Hence, we also avoid social fellowship with an expelled person. This would rule out joining him in a picnic, party, ball game, or trip to the mall or theater or sitting down to a meal with him either in the home or at a restaurant.

  4 What about speaking with a disfellowshipped person? While the Bible does not cover every possible situation, 2 John 10 helps us to get Jehovah's view of matters: "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him." Commenting on this, The Watchtower of September 15, 1981, page 25, says: "A simple 'Hello' to someone can be the first step that develops into a conversation and maybe even a friendship. Would we want to take that first step with a disfellowshiped person?"

  Gumby