I Think I have Found a Way to Litigate

by Simon Templar 22 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Simon Templar
    Simon Templar

    I have been thinking about how the WTB&T Society bullies all of its members into submission with the threats they use (by practice), i.e. “if you do this we will DF you and you will be shunned”. “If you DA yourself, we will make an announcement and your friends, relatives and family will abandon you”, etc. “Get in line and do what we say or else”. If you don’t like how they change doctrine and bible understandings constantly and want to just fade away, they will pursue you and throw you out with one of the above punishments following quickly.

    I have had enough. I have been thinking about this and came up with the following legal basis to do something about it. I am employed a field which is related to law. I know and understand more than the average person on this subject so I developed the following.

    The law in my state indicates that within the secular constitutional state, religious freedom cannot be recognized unconditionally, even within a religious community. This is because religious norms depend on voluntary compliance. If you don’t comply, the religion can’t force you (with sanctions) with the termination of your family or friend relationships, etc. The state’s monopoly of legitimate force does not allow compulsory means in the hands of religious communities. The religion can’t force you to do anything. Consequently, I believe that per the law, the state must prevent attempts by a religious community to enforce religious norms against an unwilling believer. Since freedom of religion includes the right not to join a religious community, the state must also guarantee the believer’s right to exit without punishment (sanctions).

    We have, as US citizens certain fundamental rights. These rights do not only obligate the state to refrain from certain actions, but also require the state to actively protect constitutionally guaranteed liberties against intrusions by private actors such as a religion and its hierarchy. This duty to protect can be a duty by the state to protect a believer from his/her religious community.

    The law in my state indicates that the secular constitutional state cannot tolerate a religiously required behavior even if the believer complies voluntarily with the commandments of that religion, if the behavior contradicts the very essentials of the constitutional order, i.e. the person’s rights under the constitution and at law. There is no obligation to sacrifice the identity of a civil society to religious demands. In other words, the believer does not and cannot surrender his/her constitutional rights because they become a member of a certain religion. The believer maintains all of his/her rights and if they exercise any of those rights, the religion cannot sanction or punish him/her for doing so. Some examples of this are: Voting, leaving the religion, birthday celebrations, etc.

    So, I am going to do what I want to do, and if challenged or chased by the Elders, I am going to start an action for violations per the above. I am not telling or suggesting to others to do the same. I am discussing this with an attorney now and will be talking to several others. I want 2-3 opinions from attorneys on how to litigate this so when and if I am bothered by the Elders, I am starting an action against the WTB&TS and each individual Elder involved. I have had enough of their pushing people around.

  • Diogenesister

    Is it true that voting is now considered a "conscience" matter? If so it makes me wonder if the lawyers have advised them to make it so. To order otherwise would be contravening basic rights.

    I studied law as an undergrad and whilst what you say makes a lot of sense, I worry that when it comes to shunning they will claim it's an individual's personal right TO shun others...or not "associate"(hate that word) with others if they choose to do so.They will insist they do not compel anyone. We know they do, of course. We understand "undue influence"....Will the law?What does anyone think?

  • StarTrekAngel

    How can the law argue with someone, like you relative, who swears and insists that he does not want to have anything to do with you and declares to be sound of mind and free of pressure.?

    I think other have tried to make the same argument already.

  • Viviane

    Yeah, that won't work.

  • Zoos

    It would be pretty effortless to show a court the many times Watchtower has PUT IN PRINT the mandate to shun.

  • Viviane

    True dat, but the corollary is that you have to show which statutes of the law were broken.

  • Nathan Natas
    Nathan Natas

    Simon Templar said, "I know and understand more than the average person on this subject..."

    I disagree. What are you, a restaurant inspector?

    Here's the rub: membership in the JWs is VOLUNTARY. When you were baptized, you agreed to FOLLOW THEIR RULES, and one of the rules is that they can use "loving" "scriptural" disciplinary methods to "save" you from your "sinful" nature.

    They have legal rights too, y'know.

    ALL of us made a BAD DECISION when we "decided" to be baptized as JWs. At some point you just have to accept responsibility for you MISTAKES, FORGIVE YOURSELF, flip them the bird, and go on your way, injured perhaps, but undefeated.

    ...and here is a great way to test what your lawyer's opinion REALLY is: ask him to work with you PRO BONO. If he gives you reasons why he can't do that, it translates to "your case doesn't have a chance of succeeding, and I like to eat three times a day."

    Best of luck to you!

  • rebel8

    So, in the eyes of your state constitution, "forced" = fearful of social and spiritual consequences if they don't?

    I would be interested in reading the part of your constitution that says the following:

    require the state to actively protect constitutionally guaranteed liberties against intrusions by private actors such as a religion and its hierarchy. This duty to protect can be a duty by the state to protect a believer from his/her religious community.

  • smiddy

    Nathan Natas hit the nail on the head .Jehovahs Witnesses are not employees of the WTB&TS ,they are nothing more than volunteers who choose of their own violition to follow suggestions made by the organization .

    The rank and file Jehovahs Witness does not represent the Organization of the WTB&TS .or its affilliates.

    How many of the rank & file do you think understand that fact ?

    Nobody in the organization forces anyone to comply with their directions , you do so voluntarily .

    I know , and you know , they use emotional blackmail against the rank & file JW`s , but that is a lot harder to prove in a court of law.

    The r&f member doesnt have to abide by that pressure , they can choose not to ,they are responsible for their own actions and nobody else.

  • berrygerry

    First question: Which country are you in?

Share this