JW's Should Be Banned!

by mr_doubtful 23 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Londo111

  Banning is counterproductive for cults. It feeds into the persecution complex. Those under cult indoctrination will dig in further.

  Russia's banning of JWs is a win/win for Watchtower. They get to play the Persecution Card which validates the belief system. It also feeds into the whole "the end is so close" and attack by the "king of the north" hype, which also ends up being validating. JWs in all other parts of the world, who might've been on the verge of waking up and freeing themselves, will be scared back into "mother's arms".

  Removing tax exemption and/or financial penalties targeted at the organization are the best stick. The answer is not penalizing individual JWs, who become victim twiceover, both of an authoritarian religion and an authoritarian government.
• 

  blondie

  Between the years 1934 and 1945, the WTS increased a great deal in numbers during the persecution....part of the 1975 doctrine was that persecution was near, proof that they were on the threshold.........I think the WTS is trying to drum up business.
  
• 

  SonOfLiberty

  I think as long as the religion isn't violent, terrorist types or physically harming people it should be given religious freedom. Once you ban one, the domino effect begins. I do agree though, banning the act of shunning should be looked at. As it is essentially thought crime punishment. I don't know it's sticky. This shit has been done since the scriptures were written, so it's nothing new. Perhaps a regulation on how it's done or to whom. It shouldn't separate families though, they should let families decide that on their own like they did during the time in the scriptures.
  
• 

  slimboyfat

  It's a myth that JWs grow better under ban. None of the major examples support this idea. There were fewer JWs in Germany at the end of the Third Reich than at the start. And JWs only grew very slowly in the Soviet Union. Only when communism collapsed and JWs were legalised in the 1990s did JWs grow rapidly in Russia and Eastern Europe. Similarly JWs grow better in African countries where they are well tolerated and less so in countries where they have been banned or restricted. So it's a myth that persecution is good for JW growth.
• 

  Londo111

  Perhaps growth may stagnate in Russia, but what about growth everywhere else?

  Think about how much 9/11 had people flocking back in. This could have a similar effect.
• 

  slimboyfat

  I guess JWs outside Russia may find the situation interesting, or mildly fortifying. But as for bringing many more people into the JWs, I doubt it.

  How about we organise our own letter campaign? Wouldn't it be cool if we could manage thousands of letters to JW headquarters saying:

  "Dear Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses,
  As former Jehovah's Witnesses we fully support your freedom to worship in Russia and we wish your campaign to protect religious freedom every success. At the same time we wish that your organisation would respect the religious choices of those who have been Jehovah's Witnesses at any time, without seeking to alienate former members from family and friends. As the Awake! magazine said in 2007: "No one should be forced to worship in a way that he finds unacceptable or be made to choose between his beliefs and his family." Please could your organisation begin living up to this principle by discontinuing the practice of shunning former members who make alternative religious choices? Not only is this the right thing to do, but discontinuing such harmful practices may actually help you argue for and secure your religious freedom in Russia and elsewhere.
  Yours faithfully,
  Former JW members"

  
  
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  I disagree. There are no human rights violations here.

  You are free to leave (exercise your freedom of association), and so are they. Freedom for everyone!

  MMM
• 

  Londo111

  To be truly free to leave, one would be able to leave without institutional shunning. That is what exists in most denominations.

  If a JW does not shun the leavetaker, then they are dealt with by the elders, and can find themselves on the outside and shunned as well. This is not freedom.
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  What other institutions do is irrelevant. The religion is a group of people exercising their right to associate with whomever they choose. Each of us has that same right. In order for you to feel truely free, you trample the freedoms of others.

  Shunning, especially family members, is for assholes. But being an asshole isn't a human rights violation.

  MMM
• 

  Londo111

  It is emotional blackmail. It is coercion. Not freedom.

  And it is not a practice that comes from a group of like minded individuals who had this idea and come together. This decision emanates and is enforced from the top down.

  JWs don't have the right to associate with those judicial committees have been announced disfellowshipped or disassociated and remain JWs.

  Of course, as I've said, I'm against any sort of ban.