Public Defamation = DF'd ???

Lillith26

This is probably too simple and perhaps to good to be true but the WTBTS practice of officially announcing a person by name at a meeting to be "no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses", combined with the WTB literature that clearly states how to 'treat' such named person is a clear act of Public Defamation of the named person... an act that one would maybe have legal grounds on which to take out a lawsuit???

I suspect this is an angle that may have been over looked from a legal perspective...

It's just a thought.... do we have any Lawyers in the house???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

kwintestal

One of the few defences for libel is making a statement that is actually true. If they DF you, you are not a JW, therefore it is a true statement. I don't see how legally they can be held for anything. (Canadian Laws btw, not sure if it'll be different elsewhere).

Lillith26

What I do find interesting is... you sign NO written contract with the WTBTS at the time of baptism (as far as I know), you pay no actually membership fees (the cover this by calling it a donation), so if no written contract is legally signed, then it can not be broken... (still following here? )....

If your not a 'legal' member, then legally, the statement is a 'false statement'- as you must first be 'legally' a member to get booted out.... the fact that they are 'publicly' booting you out if you are not first a 'legal member' is public defamation by way of 'slander', and that inturn insites the other members (the public) to treat you in such a way, that is defaming your personal reputation, it is a form of 'false light' that causes undue emotional stress and further slander from the other members (the public)...

or do you have to sign a form before you get baptised????

Lillith26

http://en.wikipedis.org/wiki/Intentional_infliction_of_emotional_distress

the fine art of DFing a person publicly is also a clear act of - intentional infliction of emotional distress.... the reasons for DFing a person are clearly written in black and white in the appendix of the "Remaining in God's love" WTB publication, along with how other members are expected/trained to 'treat' a DF'd person/persons...............

I am just trying to look at this all from a 'Legal Prospective'...

Lillith26

or do you have to sign a form before you get baptized????

If you have to sign a form to be baptized (legally binding contract), wouldn't that make any 'baptizims of minor aged children' (under 16 in Australia) null and void, as a parent must sign if a child is under a certain age??? the contract would end as soon as the child was of legal age to re-sign for themselves.... but you only have ONE baptizim... Hmmmn....

keyser soze

I am just trying to look at this all from a 'Legal Prospective'...

The 'legal' perspective is that they can boot anyone out that they want, and they don't need a reason.

troubled mind

It is their club and they can do whatever they want . Their rules you agreed to follow when you made your public declaration at baptism .

So what if you were under age , so what if it hurts like hell and causes you emotional pain for the rest of your life . Dam*t they are God's chosen people and you just need to accept it ......sarcasm just one of the many services provided here :)

Meeting Junkie No More

"combined with the WTB literature that clearly states how to 'treat' such named person"

Lillith26 - I am with you on this one -

Legally, I am hoping that this is what can be shown to be a Human Rights Violation...just need a class-action on behalf of all those who have been treated unjustly based on an infringement of their human right to resign from a religion. Not being a lawyer, I don't know if it will fly but there needs to be some kind of test case on the human rights front IMHO.

keyser soze

Legally, I am hoping that this is what can be shown to be a Human Rights Violation...just need a class-action on behalf of all those who have been treated unjustly based on an infringement of their human right to resign from a religion.

Religions have the right to operate however they see fit, so long as no laws are being violated. This includes their right to shun people who are no longer members. This right is protected by the constitution. It's called freedom of religion. There is no basis for a lawsuit, class-action or otherwise.

Lillith26

I hear you Junkie, but the WTBTS (from what I can gather) is kinda like a 'franchise', each individual KH although 'associated' with the 'GB head quarters'- is still 'legally' a seperate entity in it's own right... some times to take down an octapuss- you gotta do it one leg at time! This octapuss has lots of legs lol

If just one lawsuit of this kind is granted in any country, and just one KH is forsed to pay damages, then it will open pandoras box and more will follow....

If they change their doctrines/practices on this to try to prevent more lawsuits... the R&F will a) know about the media coverage of lawsuits, b) see dramatic changes within the org, c) question other teachings and hopefully d) wake up and leave....

Public Defamation = DF'd ???

Share this