Disassociation - shunning - can we all lobby Government that it is against freedom of religion?

by stockholm_Syndrome 45 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Simon

  But the paedo-protection and no blood policies definitely should be banned.

  For the first one, the issue is legislation and violation of existing laws. People can already be held accountable if they put children in danger.

  For the latter, it's still a religious belief. They shouldn't be allowed to put any spin on it (e.g. suggesting health benefits) as then they are really practicing medicine but it's like vaccinations - people are allowed to make idiotic beliefs based on some idiots teachings.

  Whether you can come up with realistic legislation for things is difficult. Usually the courts get involved when it's minor children but when it's grown people ... we all make decisions that affect our lives based on our current belief system. How exactly do you legislate against that and where does it end ... making people exercise more, drink less etc... ?

  Why would governments get involved in certain things and what would be the benefit for them, the politicians, to do so?

  None of them is going to piss off millions simply to slightly improve the lives of a few thousand.
• 

  LoveUniHateExams

  ^^^ good points ^^^

  I was thinking more about under 16s or even under 18s.

  The paedo-protection and no blood policies should carry an eighteen certificate, like certain films do.

  In other words, these two loony doctrines should not affect, by law, under 18s.
  
• 

  StephaneLaliberte

  There are limits to “freedom of religion” and “right to free speech”. For instance, no religion can encourage its members to commit crimes.

  The problem here is that shunning on an individual level is not a crime (and should never be). So, no legal actions can be taken against a group who encourages its members to shun someone.

  This is why the court should recognize that organizing the shunning of specific individuals should be considered a crime. It is bullying and can have very serious consequences. Seeing that the organization itself organizes the shunning, I think a brave enough lawyer could actually go against the watchtower on this and win.

  JW say things like: Remain loyal to Jehovah by shunning your disfellowshipped loved ones. Any court would see this as an order. There is no room for independent thinking here. When someone’s entire family and social circle follow this, they are collectively causing significant distress to the victim. This is all organized by the same group. The fact that they say it is a commandment from god does not make it legal. If they said: God instructs us to stone dissenters, would that be covered by “Freedom or religion?” or course not. Purposefully causing distress to someone and calling it “discipline” is nothing less than a crime to me.

  But who is the lawyer that will take this on?
• 

  James Mixon

  We have laws, buying a car , home, medicine and etc. to protect the consumer. Why not mandate laws for religious organization and cults, they must spell out before you join what will happen if you leave. This will protect both parties, no way a person can come back and say i wasn't aware I could lose my family. If a contract is put before you before you join, it may make you think this is serious I better read the fine lines.
• 

  StephaneLaliberte

  James Mixon: this is a false argument used by the JWs. It is not because an abused person agreed to suffer abuse that it makes the abuse OK. There is no “safe word” with the JWs to have them stop shunning you. It’s like an abusive husband that strikes his wife. Even if she knew that by not doing this or that, she'd get the beating, this does not make the beating OK. Abuse is abuse. Organized shunning is abuse.
• 

  Ruby456

  jehovahs don't go that far - they do not commit physical violence or even threaten physical violence - so it cannot be called abuse in that sense
• 

  honest

  In Australia we have anti bullying laws in organisations. Shunning and exclusion is included in these laws. The only problem is that religious organisations are exempt from these laws. if we have anti bullying policies for work and school then this should also extend to religions. Jehovah's Witnesses and Scientology and any other harmful cult should be threatened with loss of charity status and tax exemptions if they don't comply with basic human rights. if they want to mandate shunning sure go ahead but the government should not subsidise or give tax exemptions to them. If watchtower uses coercion so can the government 😉.

  Oh as for media not being interested in the shunning policies of Jehovahs witnesses, I disagree.... Keep your eyes open because there will be more exposure re shunning in Australia.
• 

  Ruby456

  witnesses call shunning and disfellowshipping self protection - just cause they don't advertise this doesn't mean that it is not understood by governments as self protection
• 

  StephaneLaliberte

  Ruby456: I only took physical damage as an example that is easy to visualize. Yet, everyone knows that mental abuse IS abuse. Not physical, yet, abuse nonetheless.
• 

  honest

  

  Ruby4562 minutes ago

  jehovahs don't go that far - they do not commit physical violence or even threaten physical violence - so it cannot be called abuse in that sense

  Mental abuse is just as damaging.

  Jehovahs witnesses are not exempt from physical abuse either, they demand you to die rather than take a blood transfusion and if you disobey them you'll lose your entire family. That is physical abuse and mental abuse.