Watchtower fined in Belgium

by Vanderhoven7 66 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Rivergang

  the practice of the so-called “ostracism” among the Jehovah’s Witnesses,

  "So-called"? Then what they do is certainly a bloody good imitation of ostracism!

  
  
• 

  Anony Mous

  You have to realize two things:

  1) this verdict is in the EU. The concept of free speech and freedom of religion does not exist anywhere in the EU. State religions de facto also still exist there. While we can debate the drawbacks of this, the State has decided it is in its best interest to tightly control the population with taxes and regulations.

  2) disfellowshipping is a form of psychological abuse. If it were true that, as the WTBTS claims, that its members have the freedom of association, that would be one thing covered by freedom of religion. But we all know lives are tightly controlled by elders and the organization and its members cannot exit without fear of physical or psychological reprisals by other members at the direction of its leaders.

  This would be similar to saying a victim has allowed their abuse by an abusive partner by staying in a relationship, even though it is true in certain cases the victim bears some responsibility of excusing behavior, it does not absolve the partner from further abuse.

  I personally agree that the organization should be able to qualify its own religious tenets without interference, but it should not be blanket absolved from the results of those tenets which have often qualified the tests for incitement to violent behavior.
  
• 

  JeffT

  I've said this before on this subject:

  Keep in mind, a court decision like this cuts both ways. They can't keep you from associating with them, and you can't stop them from associating with you. You tell Grandma uberzealous JW she can't come over and preach at your children, she pulls this court case out and says the courts says you can't stop her. Now what do you do?
  
• 

  Anony Mous

  @JeffT: this case is narrowly defined. In your example, Grandma cannot preach to your children without your consent. However, if you say that grandma should be hated because she is a Christian, then that is a basis for hate speech regulation and yes, you can be fined and jailed.

  
  

  Again, in the US, we have freedom of speech, the EU has speech regulations. You cannot say you hate anyone in the EU for any reason without risking a fine. You can’t espouse hate for Jews, Islam, gays or other group identities in the EU without risking a fine. And yes, that means extremist groups are well visible in the EU society but remain officially non-existent. Political groups have likewise been persecuted for being “hateful”.

  You can for example choose not to associate with ex members of your organization or your family, but if I say everyone else in the family should hate that person, then that is indeed a hate speech violation. The Christians often say “hate the sin, not the sinner”, JW unlike other groups in Christianity claim you should “hate the sinner”.
  
• 

  JeffT

  Anony Mous: You're making me glad I'm an American. What worries me about these decisions is setting precedent. Maybe EU courts don't work like American courts. In the most US courts a case like this establishes precedent which can be used in the future to make a "narrow" decision less narrow. That and we can all ignore the GB if we want to. We can't ignore the government.
  
• 

  fulano

  The fine is actually € 96.000
• 

  vienne

  Part two of Dr. Introvigne's article on the Belgian court. https://bitterwinter.org/the-ghent-jehovahs-witnesses-decision-dangers-for-religious-liberty/
• 

  Vanderhoven7

  Thanks for sharing Dr. Introvigne's article Vienne.
• 

  vienne

  There is supposed to be a part three, I'm told. When I see it, I'll post it.
• 

  vienne

  Dr. Introvigne's concluding article https://bitterwinter.org/the-ghent-jehovahs-witness-decision-dangerous-for-all-religions/