Mandated Shunning is a Crime

by Lee Marsh 110 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • LoveUniHateExams
    LoveUniHateExams

    What's the objective, generic principle applied here that allows you to discriminate based on religion?

    The WT has a group rule - no associating with former members. They aren't pulling it out of their ass (even though you think so). They cite scripture. You can object: "They have that scripture wrong!" But that's the point - people believe all sort of interpretations of everything.

    Why is this case (shunning) different, IN PRINCIPLE, than, punishing based on, say, thinking abortion is wrong? Why can't your law be used, as precedent, to take away the charitable status of any organization the current culture (which changes constantly!) deems as hurtful? - these are all good points.

    There's no objective, generic principle that allows me to single out religions.

    But, because religious groups' mandatory shunning causes problems, I believe governments can put pressure on them by saying that they'll only continue charity status if the cults drop mandatory shunning.

    You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours.

    That kinda thing.


  • Fisherman
    Fisherman

    Shunning is a Crime

    People are put in jail all the time and horrible things happen to them throughout the world. It separates families, causes stress and both physiological and physical harm to the prisoner and sometimes even death. Sometimes they also execute prisoners. All because they broke some laws.

  • Lee Marsh
    Lee Marsh

    There are certain laws already regarding shunning. Governments and agencies that give money to any group that practices mandated shunning should not get funding.

    Example 1: A couple with 2 children. The husband commits adultery, is disfellowshipped and the wife chooses to divorce him. She gets custody of the children and he gets visitation rights.

    She immediately begins demonizing him. Instead of helping the children maintain contact with his children, whom he had a good relationship with before, they are now refusing to see him. The law says he has rights. he hasn't abused the. He pays child support. But she won't let him near them and has made them too scared to go. She is actively teaching the children to shun their father because he now serve Satan. This is called "alienation of affection" and it IS against the law in many places.

    Example 2: Due to the court seeing the above, the judge decides that it is in the best interests of the children to place them with the father and she now has visitation rights. When she has them, she takes them to meetings and out in service. She studies with them and yup demonizes Dad again. alienation of affection The judge now insists on the wife not taking to the kids about the religion or taking them to meetings or out in service. So she gets her mother to study the Bible with them. You see where this is going?

    Example 3: A 15-yr old boy doesn't want to go to the meetings. He isn't doing anything wrong or hanging out with a bad group of kids. He is just fed up and doesn't want to go anymore. His parents insist and he digs in his heels. Arguments gets worse and the elders are called. Publications and the Bible is read but nothing is going to change this boy's mind. So the parents throw him out of the house. he has no where to go. They don't find another place for him. They don't try social services for a foster home. Just throw his things out of the house and let him figure it out.

    First of all this is against the law. Parents have a legal responsibility to care for their children, generally as long as they are minors. That includes giving them a home and the things they need to physically and emotionally survive. It includes a formal education generally until they graduate high school. And if you can't do it, find someone who can. You don't just throw them out of the house like yesterday's garbage.

    Second, this is your flesh and blood that you are supposed to love more than anyone else. Where exactly is the love? Threats of punishment, isolation, shunning. This is emotional abuse and it is wrong. Period.

    Example 4: A couple has a baby and the DRs say t needs a blood transfusion. The HLC is right there to make sure the no blood policy is enforced. The parents, believing this rule comes from Jehovah (not the WTS) are devastated. One parent, caves in and signs the papers for the baby to get the care it needs. She is disfellowshipped and then shunned for saving the life of her child. She continues to go to meetings but no one talks to her. Her husband barely talks to her about anything to make sure he isn't crossing a line. With all of this, plus her hormones going wild she is suffering from post-partum depression and attempts to commit suicide, believing everyone will be better off without her. neglect = emotional abuse

    Example 5: A sexual abuse survivor grows up and decides to go to the police about sexual abuse that happened when she was a child. She went to the elders at the time but they covered it up and forbade her from talking about it or she would be disfellowshipped for causing divisions in the congregation. She has suffered severe post-traumatic stress disorder since the abuse and got no help for that. Because the elders did nothing when the abuse was reported, they are arrested. She is disfellowshipped. they very thing she was most scared of. Now she is alone to fight through the past and get through a daunting legal process. And yes everyone is shunning her for doing the legal, moral and ethical things. And since she did go to the police other victims of the same abuser are coming forward. Now they are all shunned but heck at least they have each other. Right? denial of legal rights and emotional abandonment

    Example 6: A JW finds out that her daughter who was disfellowshipped is dying of cancer. She has been shunning her daughter for 12 years. The mother desperately wants to see her daughter again but her elder husband keeps reminding her that he will shun HER if she goes to the hospital.

    All this shunning. The anguish, the isolation, the sheer cruelty of it. Any agency or government that gives money to any religion that does this to people doesn't deserve the money. They get it because they are supposed to be doing "good works" with the money. Not treating people like garbage that you toss away.

    JWs pride themselves on showing love for each other, for their neighbors that they preach to. But heaven help the one that says I don't want what you are offering or I want out or that broke a rule.

    ALL groups have a legal right to decide who can be part of the group. Who is in and who is out. That isn't in question.

    But how you treat people who don't want to follow your rules or don't agree with them is a whole other story.

  • LongHairGal
    LongHairGal

    LEE MARSH:

    Correct. This is what the Witness religion does, but the world doesn’t really know about it.

    The man on Beroean Pickets once made a good point: ..a secular employer can fire somebody, but they don’t go around telling the person’s friends and family to shun him/her.. The Witnesses go too far!

    As far as making a minor child leave home because they don’t want the JW religion, I know of two instances that happened years ago.. Surely, this should be illegal.. It just so happens it worked out well for these people.👍🏻

  • LoveUniHateExams
    LoveUniHateExams

    As far as making a minor child leave home because they don’t want the JW religion, I know of two instances that happened years ago.. Surely, this should be illegal - I think it already is. Parents cannot legally throw out their child.

    But does this mean we should criminalise mandatory shunning?

    And what's the best way to tackle top-down shunning?

  • LoveUniHateExams
    LoveUniHateExams

    how you treat people who don't want to follow your rules or don't agree with them is a whole other story - I agree it's important how people who leave should be treated, and shunning is bad.

    But is legislation the best answer?

    Isn't there a better way of dealing with the problem?

  • LongHairGal
    LongHairGal

    LOVEUNIHATEEXAMS:

    It’s already illegal but it happens every day somewhere in Witness world that some minor is either thrown out of their home or compelled to leave. Just read posts on Reddit.

    I see the point of those who argue that the government shouldn’t be involved in who people associate with.. But, my issue is how the dysfunction of the Witness religion causes problems to society in general.. I am referring to damaged people being burdens to taxpayers because they can’t function, etc.

    While this veers a little off topic, another example is Witnesses who get jobs in hospitals, etc. and violate confidentiality and cause their employers to get sued. All these problems are caused by the religion and it would be nice if laws were passed to change things.

  • MeanMrMustard
    MeanMrMustard
    Example 1: A couple with 2 children. The husband commits adultery, is disfellowshipped and the wife chooses to divorce him. She gets custody of the children and he gets visitation rights.

    Ok.

    She immediately begins demonizing him. Instead of helping the children maintain contact with his children, whom he had a good relationship with before, they are now refusing to see him.

    Parental alienation. Happens all the time, in plenty of non-witness families. It doesn't take the WT for a vindictive former spouse to be an asshole.

    The law says he has rights.

    The overwhelming trend is that the courts won't care ... if it's a man.

    he hasn't abused the. He pays child support. But she won't let him near them and has made them too scared to go.

    This has very little to do with the WT. How do I know? This is a common occurrence in mens groups. If he has visitation, it's not the WT keeping his kids away, it's the nutcase ex-wife.

    She is actively teaching the children to shun their father because he now serve Satan. This is called "alienation of affection" and it IS against the law in many places.

    Alienation of affection is a rare law, it's constitutionality has been seriously questioned, it has to do with a third party interfering in an active marriage, and it's NOT A CRIME. It's a civil action, if anything. Good luck getting the courts to do anything about it. Parents poison their kids minds on the daily without any help from the WT, and this tort law is never appealed to as a remedy.

    Example 2: Due to the court seeing the above, the judge decides that it is in the best interests of the children to place them with the father and she now has visitation rights.

    Wouldn't happen. Not because she is teaching the kids their father is an evil "worldly" guy. But let's say for the sake of illustration, she is a basket case - insane, and the court acts on that. Carry on....

    When she has them, she takes them to meetings and out in service. She studies with them and yup demonizes Dad again. alienation of affection The judge now insists on the wife not taking to the kids about the religion or taking them to meetings or out in service.

    No. A judge wouldn't do that. You think a judge would wipe away her freedom of speech, religion, and association at the same time? Amazing.

    So she gets her mother to study the Bible with them. You see where this is going?

    No.

    Example 3: A 15-yr old boy doesn't want to go to the meetings. He isn't doing anything wrong or hanging out with a bad group of kids. He is just fed up and doesn't want to go anymore. His parents insist and he digs in his heels. Arguments gets worse and the elders are called. Publications and the Bible is read but nothing is going to change this boy's mind. So the parents throw him out of the house. he has no where to go. They don't find another place for him. They don't try social services for a foster home. Just throw his things out of the house and let him figure it out.

    [Snip the rest]

    You admit the parents are breaking a current law by abandoning their child, a minor. You don't see an issue here?

    First, the WT does not have a policy of abandonment. The parents, elders, whoever can try to claim its because of the WT policy, but it's not. This is actually a great example of people going far beyond. The issue here is that the parents and elders are good old-fashioned dicks.

    But let's assume for a moment, just for the sake of argument, that the WT did condone this behavior. As per your example, they are already willing to break the law! What good would a new one do?

    Second, this is your flesh and blood that you are supposed to love more than anyone else. Where exactly is the love? Threats of punishment, isolation, shunning. This is emotional abuse and it is wrong. Period.

    Yyyeeaaap. Exactly! The problem here is the parents. They are morally depraved assholes. They don't love their child, and any claim to love their child is fake and empty. Why? Because they could choose differently. THEY choose.

    Example 4: A couple has a baby and the DRs say t needs a blood transfusion. The HLC is right there to make sure the no blood policy is enforced. The parents, believing this rule comes from Jehovah (not the WTS) are devastated. One parent, caves in and signs the papers for the baby to get the care it needs.

    Good for her!

    She is disfellowshipped and then shunned for saving the life of her child. She continues to go to meetings but no one talks to her. Her husband barely talks to her about anything to make sure he isn't crossing a line.

    Wow. Seems like another dick going far beyond the WT's own suggestion. But he's still a dick.

    With all of this, plus her hormones going wild she is suffering from post-partum depression and attempts to commit suicide, believing everyone will be better off without her. neglect = emotional abuse

    *sigh*. Yes, it's neglect. Emotional abuse. Yep. But I really challenge you to find the WT direction that says a husband should forsake husbandry duties because his wife is no longer a JW. In fact, I've heard quite the opposite. So in this example, again, we have people acting on their own, rooted in their own failure to perceive the moral thing to do.

    More on the "what if the WT were different" arguments in a different post.

    Example 5 and 6 : I'll have to address in another post.

    Just too long.

  • Lee Marsh
    Lee Marsh

    Granted my examples were all about religion. But hey Amway (does that still exist?) they practice shunning. Gangs, the sex trade (heck they often kill the ones who leave and I had a client that was stabbed by her pimp for trying to leave.) . Even some companies shun when someone jumps ship and goes to work for the competition.

    Individuals - personal choice.

    Groups of any kind, political, financial, social, companies, even big publishing companies - no - immoral and unethical to force people to do this.

    This is an ex-JW board and well those are the examples for here. For the WTS that uses mandated shunning not to protect the flock as they claim but rather to prevent people from learning what we find out and then leaving. it is used to stop the bleeding of members. It is used solely to control both the ones on and the ones who leave.

    Do we need to change the laws? In sone cases, many listed above, yes we need laws. And please remember just because there might be laws where you live doesn't mean there are laws everywhere.

    And let's be honest, JWs/WTS ignore the law whenever it suits them. A parent that throws their kid out of the house or forces them to stay in the bedroom all the time, including for meals (yes I have read the stories) should be punished. Kids deserve better than that.

    There was a photo posted everywhere of a man who had his son and I think grandson over for a meal. Nice. Until they found out grandpa would be eating in the next room so he would not be guilty of "even eating" with what the WTS called an evil man. I felt bad for everyone in that situation and the WTS forces this on people. Yes you could say it was the man's personal choice. No one would know if he sat at the table with his family. But for decades he has been force fed the belief that if he sat down with them he would be committing a great sin against God.

    True if you are leaving your old religion to join the JWs.

    We follow the Bible’s advice to “respect everyone”—regardless of their religious beliefs. (1 Peter 2:17, Today’s English Version
    https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/tolerant-of-other-religions/

    Not true if you are leaving the JWs even if you don't join another religion

  • Lee Marsh
    Lee Marsh

    Just a thought I posted on another thread:

    One recent question in many countries, however, is this: Are the rights of a religion or any group, above the rights of an individual? And if they are violating the rights of individuals, should they maintain their non-profit status?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit