question of the day does a religious org have the right to hold confidential info on one of its members
without there permission ?
Good question. In view of the fact that the United States of America and its Political Subdivisions exists today as a "religion" the answer would be apparently so. The U.S. gov't. monitoring agencies capture and retain virtually every detail about the existence of each of the inhabitants of the nation. Since virtually all religions which exist within America are today corporations, as is the U.S. Gov't., the abilities to maintain files on membership is probably legit.
There is undoubtedly more to the question though; are there any guidelines on how the info can be utilized or distributed?
you know the Dubs do, when brother mary and sister john have an affair they get DFd, shouldn't an affair and other misdoings be considered as confidential? Yet it goes on your Dub record, for all to see, or whoever handles the records, which includes the elder that takes home the files and his wife does the work for him or snoops in the files.
Now try this little test:
Ask them to hand you your Field Service Record cards and or any other info eg DF forms which they may have on you and see if they accede to that !
Someone should sue them on Judge Judy, she'll know! :0)
Could be good exposure for the Counter Movement!
Here in the U.K it is possible to get your records returned to you, in theory, under the Data Protection Act.
A friend of mine who was DF'd did so, got some stuff back, not a peep about his DFing, they still have that, are in breach of the Act, and don't care.
When you joined the club, you also subscribed to all of the club's rules.
F, subscribe to rules? That is not in the "bible teach" book, or explained to the 9 year olds that have to say ."yes" to " jehovah's spirit directed organisation?", and in pre-baptism sessions with the elders.
...does a religious org have the right to hold confidential info on one of its members
Yes, especially if the members consent to it. Remember the big YES! that JWs yell when they get baptized? That's consent.
Aside from the political debate over religion's phony, faulty argument wanting to be an exception to do whatever they want, the problem with religious organizations getting away with violating the rights regarding information about their members (and many others) is not the legality of it, nor is it whether they have the right (legal or moral) to do so. It's that they convince people to accept and submit themselves to that voluntarily. People abide what the religious organization (or rather, their leadership) tell them without questioning.
That 'yes' is only present in the newer version of the question at the time of baptism.
1. On the basis of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, have you repented of your sins and dedicated yourself to Jehovah to do his will?
2. Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah's Witnesses in association with God's spirit-directed organization? Having answered yes to these questions, candidates are in a right heart condition to undergo Christian baptism." Watchtower 1985 Jun 1 p.30
I was baptized before 1971; I did NOT answer yes to those questions.
It's a moot point of course; the WT twists everything, and will say that your continuing to go to the hall constitutes acceptance of the new arrangement.
Also they get away with murder: