They can be successfully sued for just about nothing. Everything people most complain about is protected by the First Amendment. My idea is not to get hung up on the Supreme Court as an agent for social change. People tend to get angry with me when I explain about First Amendment protections. The same points could be raised in a nonreligious setting. Cult behavior could be an educational campaign. Now only the Internet is stopping them.
The First Amendment law is strong and I support it. There is more than one way to skin a cat, however. When I watch TV or read, if someone is histrionic and argues about religious dogma, I lose interest. Some people raise issues that affect society as a whole. Most of the ugly Witness stuff is also done by political cults, such as Maoists. They have no religion. Focusing on the conduct might raise public awareness.
Even now, if I were researching the Witnesses (and knew nothing about them, this site would repel me b/c it is too antiWitness. A PBS document or a magazine article of general interest not a Bible magazine would interest me.
There is always more than one approach. Always. Because I practice law, I often see how people equate law and justice, which should be the case. Reality is different. The First Amendment is a super strong bar. Rather than waste time writing how horrible the justices are (which they are not), find a way where they are not relevant. I'm thinking of ways of not going through, but around, to reach the same result.
Maximize whatever can be achieved with the First Amendment in play. Lay people tend to think law suits are the way to perfection. They are not. Fundraising and lobbying also go far.
I was interested in people's thoughts and reasonings. Frankly, I did not write this thread for someone I know nothing about to tell me my idea is trash.