How to sue the WT over shunning policy. It CAN happen!

by Bad_Wolf 224 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  StephaneLaliberte

  let me review my last comment:

  For the father analogy to be inline with the practice of the watchtower, you'd need this to happen:

  1) Father tells his kids not to speak to his ex wife.

  2) One of the kid, Johnny, talks to the mother anyway.

  3) Father stops talking to that kids.

  (the above is not a nice scenario, but nothing abusive).

  4) Father than goes to the other kids and forces them to shun Johnny. If you speak to Johnny, I will disown you.

  Number 4 is in line with what the WT does and that, even for the father, should be held for harassment in court.

  The point is: If the punishment is me taking the personal decision to shun you, well, that is legal. If the punishment is : I will destroy your social circle, that is illegal.
• 

  StephaneLaliberte

  In short, the neutral law is that it is senseless to take actions to destroy the social circle of anyone else. The only reason why it is hard to see it is that it does not really happen outside of religion.
  
• 

  JC323

  Ok, so that is your definition of compelling governmental action. that is perfectly logical. But there is a wealth of case law that disagrees with you. And I honestly from the bottom of my heart if you somehow got a state legislature to make a law defining it, it would be struck down by the courts even before the ink is dry on the governor's signature. Just because the case law does not define it the way that you expect it to, how mandatory precedent rules apply would require courts to strike it down.
• 

  StephaneLaliberte

  Just because the case law does not define it the way that you expect it to, how mandatory precedent rules apply would require courts to strike it down.

  Laws change with time and new judgments can invalidate past judgments. The bottom line is this:

  When people are threaten by organized shunning, can we say that they are free? We are supposed to be a free society, however, these abusive religions create a sub-society where these rights are abusively taken away from them. This is where society as a whole is seriously impacted.
  
  
• 

  JC323

  In all honesty, the foundation of the court cases is based on an 1871 supreme court case. I really don't see any court bucking precedent for 148 years of case law.
• 

  StephaneLaliberte

  Hey JC323, on a personal level, what do YOU think about shunning?
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  You just have to get tax exempt status revoked for any group (religious or otherwise) that denies these basic human rights (Freedom "from" religion, to leave without penalty) by their enforcement of religious laws.
  
• 

  JC323

  Stephane: I don't like I don't believe in it. But for the government to make in an actionable offense would do way more harm than good. Even the threat of removing tax-exempt status as Desirous. We saw what happened with Tea Party nonprofits and the IRS a few years ago. When you start to have government dictate what is acceptable action and thought without a compelling governmental interest it is a slippery slope.
• 

  poopie

  Scientific studies have shown over and over again that enforced shunning causes psychological damage to humans. Once again should the government allow tax exemption to a religion that fotces it citezens to cause physiological damage to its citezens under the guise of freedom of religion. Now think back to peoples temple the people were forced to stay agsinst there will even children. The point is forced shunning harms everyone including Jws.
• 

  poopie

  So a surgen general warning is needed like smokeing. So if enough people complain law will be amended.