Shunning/Ostracising

by DevonMcBride 19 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  LoneWolf

  I believe there is a way. However, it will take a few of us to have the courage to take the bull by the horns, so to speak.

  The biggest bulwark the Society uses to hide behind is the Freedom of Religion clause in the constitution. What we need to do is to transform this protection into something we can use against them.

  We could pit the freedom of religion of an organization against the freedom of religion of an individual. In short, does a religion, by right of being a religion, have the right to force an individual to violate their conscience? For instance, does Islam have the right to force a member to kill infidels?

  There are plenty of instances where conscience is deemed as supreme. During the Nuremburg trials, many of the Nazi's were defending themselves by saying that they were only following orders. That arguement was thrown out on the basis that their consciences should have told them that what they were doing was wrong.

  We can further sell this idea by referring to Jim Jones, Koresh, and those fools who wanted to ride on the comet. We need something that can reign in these egomaniacs, to even the playing field, so to speak. Limiting them in this manner would be a large step in that direction.

  LoneWolf
• 

  DevonMcBride

  >The biggest bulwark the Society uses to hide behind is the Freedom of Religion clause in the constitution.<

  Freedom of Religion and shunning really don't have anything to do with one another. The Society can't justify shunning in the bible. In my own humble opinion, I don't see where the constitution protects this.

  As I stated in my original post, non-JW's can't understand the effects of ostracising. Politicians and most of the US population, including myself, have never been JW so to them it seems an unimportant issue.

  Devon
• 

  dungbeetle

  That's why the Organized book is up at Kent's site. Do you really that it doesn't SAY you will be expelled/shunned for a blood transfusion? Do you realize that it doesn't SPECIFY what you are expected to DO if a friend or relative is df'd and you must shun them?

  That book is evidence of deceptive recruiting tactics, and I think they should be held accountable for them. Also for child baptism. We need these people to get out of our way so we can 'have at' the Watchtower. Like Erica and those two girls are doing now.

  And keep those books coming. I've just ordered some more books to donate to my public library. I think that will help a lot. And keep getting that older literature up on the web!!!!
• 

  DevonMcBride

  Dungbeetle,

  I was thinking of donating the older publications to the local library but I am afraid they may not keep them. Until I decide what I am going to do with them, I will keep them.

  BTW, you brought up a good point about the WT's organized book.
  Devon
• 

  blindfool

  I don't want a fight here, not looking to make anyone mad or anything...but, shouldn't a bible study know these things go on before they are babtised?
  How long do they go to the meetings. Surely they enconter someone at the KH or in field service who is df'd or da'd before they are babtised.
  Look at the more than 200 questions that Amazing posted a week or so ago. These questions are asked before babtism. I know everyone doesn't get all 200, but, they should go in with their eyes wide open.

  Write all the letters to editors you want, put up fliers and posters, but don't screw around with religious freedoms. That would be a siippery slope indeed.
• 

  BeautifulGarbage

  You have a point, blindfool, about people going in with their eyes open. HOWEVER, with the love bombing that a new recruit receives before baptism would probably make most just gloss over anything having to do with being considered a pariah, even by family, if one is expelled, or leaves voluntarily, from the WTS.

  I'm sure with all the lovey dovey treatment they get, they probably are thinking "These wonderful, LOVING, people would NEVER do that!"

  Most people, when thinking of JW's, have come to mind the no blood transfusion beliefs and their door to door work. The outside world, for the most part, has NO CLUE about the shunning and how it has torn families to bits. JW's are considered strange, but harmless. There is NO awareness of "The Organization" and it's ability to control it's members. Especially through its use of shunning. When I relay the story of my JW family and what shunning has done to it, people are completely blown away.

  I really don't have any answers as to how this depraved policy can become more public. JW's are such a small percentage of the population. It is hard to generate media interest. Perhaps, through Dateline and Silentlambs the word will get out.

  What is really on the WTS's side is how they are able to get their members to "circle their wagons" around the The Organization. So that any investigation of practices, if the light were to be shone on them, would be of great embarrassment to them. The desire not bring "shame on Jehovah" is used with great success for them.

  I wish I had the answers on this one.

  Andee
• 

  DevonMcBride

  >Write all the letters to editors you want, put up fliers and posters, but don't screw around with religious freedoms. That would be a siippery slope indeed.<

  What does religious freedom have to do with shunning? There is nothing in JW bible or any other that says you should shun. Where do you draw the line on religious freedom? Does this mean that polygamy should be legalized because the Mormons practice this? Should brainwashed John Walker go free for fighting with the Taliban?

  Bible students are indoctrinated prior to baptism. They are brainwashed to think that DA's and DF's are bad association. They are not free to question shunning. They are physically free to leave but not mentally.

  Blindfool, I respect your opinion and point of view and I am not mad that you are expressing your opinions. That's what a democracy is all about.
• 

  blindfool

  Devon,
  Glad your not mad. Its nice to have a good discussion without name calling or anything.
  You asked where freedom of religion ends?
  The simple answer is that religious freedom ends where the law begins.
  Polygamy is illegal, as are the traderious acts of John Lindh.
  You are advocating a law against ostrisizing past members of a religion. Think about the pratical aspects of enforcing such a law. Do you tell people that they must talk to each other and be friendly with everyone?

  As you know, the WT can publically change its offical position and comply with any law, and still have the members tow the unofficial party line.

  I think the JW policy of ostrisizing truly sucks. Its one reason I was never babtised. Maybe I saw the policy for what it was before most people do. My mother-in-law was df'd for smoking while I was a bible study. So maybe I was lucky for having such an eye opening experience before being babtised.

  I think a lot of people see the government as a way to make people think and act a certain way. I, on the other hand, think the government should stay out of peoples lives as much as posible.
  Freedom of religion is a major part of the US Constitution, one of the laws our forefathers realized was tatamound to a free nation. Giving up freedoms for security is something we Americans are getting very accustomed too. I think we should be very careful about giving up any more freedoms.

  The political climate in our country probably favors your position. You could possibly get some politicians to go along with you on your idea. I personally feel our freedoms are much to valuable to give up because of policies of groups like JW's.
• 

  og

  DFing is most effective, and most unfair, with those"raised in the Truth". A lot of kids go through a phase somewhere between 13 & 16, where they just want to belong and getting baptized is a great way to belong. And then the trap is sprung. I believe this amounts to child abuse, and reluctantly wonder if the State does not have a role here - perhaps preventing baptism of minors? Worth discussing; it seems like a weak point in the Society's legal armor. (the helmet of Litigation, feet clad with Plausible Deniability, the breastplate of Secrecy...)

  "Belief is the death of intelligence." R.A. Wilson
• 

  blindfool

  og,
  You make a good point. The real problem is with young people wanting to make a life long commitment to an organization before they are mature enough to know the consequenses.