MeanMrMustard

Joined

• started 67 topics
• posted 3,872 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by MeanMrMustard

• 
  25

  It begins norway no money for wt because of shunning

  by Yomama in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  organized shunning will stop when money stops.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Woe, woe.. hang on there. Putting aside the greater issue here, did I catch this correctly???:

  The County Governor has received a letter from Rolf Furuli in connection with the exclusion and expulsion of members. The Ministry of Children and Family Affairs has asked the County Governor to consider whether the inquiry from Furuli seems to be information of importance for registration and government grants for Jehovah's Witnesses, cf. Section 6 of the Religious Communities Act, and possibly assess the need to make further investigations, cf. Section 10 of the Religious Communities Regulations.

  So it was Furuli, after getting DFed himself, that got this ball rolling? My oh my, after decades of enforcing shunning and towing the WT line, he does this?
• 
  25

  It begins norway no money for wt because of shunning

  by Yomama in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  organized shunning will stop when money stops.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  According to the State Attorney, they will now miss out on NOK 16 million in support. A little extra poking around and it seems like (although I could be incorrect) that Norway is distributing actual subsidies here, not tax cuts. Although I loath the idea of "tax breaks" being a government payment at all (just stealing less money isn't a payment). But I digress.
  
  16 million kroner is about $1.7 million USD. According to jw.org, there are 12,001 publishers in Norway. That would come to about $146 per publisher for the year. In other words, about $12 per month for each publisher.
  
  Even though the WT is appealing, I'm sure they can easily use this horrible attack by Satan's system in order to ask each publisher for a bit more of their budget. You know that small sandwich you buy each day at lunch? Just do that one time less each month.
  
  To be fair, I'm not for the government handing out cash, regardless. And the organizations that rely on it become beholden to the government based on that money. Do you think there is anyone in the WT organization, at any level, thinking "Well, that's $1.7 million less, maybe we should just rework our entire doctrine"? And for all the faults of the WT, it's really good at being prudent. Do you really think they won't compensate for the clear political shift anyone can see coming?
  
  This isn't the beginning of the end for the WT or for shunning.
  
  To summarize:
  1. The subsidies to the WT is barely anything
  
  2. It can be used as a rally point to gather more funds from the publishers, and it will most likely work
  
  3. They might win the appeal anyway
  
  4. It won't change the minds of any one of the 12K publishers in Norway.
  
  5. And this is the most important: the support system for the WT in Norway are those 12k people - the same people that *agree* with the WT in principle and/or in action.
  
  By all means, the WT are engaging in assholery. Draw attention to that, absolutely! But don't fool yourself, the shunning isn't going to stop.
  
  And hold those who shun you responsible - your "friends" and "family". It's their moral agency.

  ALSO - think about what sort of political world you are creating by giving the government control over freedom.of association. It seems to be eroded in Norway and Belgium, perhaps also the EU in general.
  
  
• 
  8

  Call me Suspicious, but ...

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  when the president is going somewhere to talk about an infrastructure bill, and wants support for ever more endless spending, some of which is for bridge reconstruction, having a bridge collapse on the very day and in the very place he's going just seems "too perfect", doesn't it?.

  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60173771.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Yeah, kinda like the Jussie Smolett incident happening at the same time Cory Booker and Kamala Harris wanted to push through anti-lynching legislation? Everyone was mocking it as useless, woke, virtue signaling, and then all of a sudden a noose appears.
• 
  15

  Coercion at its worst: religious mandated shunning

  by Yomama in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  by patrick haeck any comments on article?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  From the article, concerning his decision to leave JWs:
  

  Because we made this decision, JWs were mandated to shun us. Parents, siblings and long-time friends could no longer talk to or associate with us.

  No. They could talk to him at any time, but chose not to. Each person that shuns is either believes the WT's stance or not.
  
  If they do, then each person agrees with the WT's edict, and enforces it through their own choice.
  
  If they do not agree, then each person, although understanding the moral assholery afoot, give in and go along with the assholery, and enforce the edict through their cowardice.
  
  But, look, I get what he's trying to do. I just disagree with couching his goals in the moral high ground of "human rights". He wants a world in which the WT no longer engages in the assholery. And since the WT had basically told him (and us all) to go pound sand, he seeks to hand the government a giant hammer to beat them down until they are no longer assholes. If successful (and it may turn out that way in Belgium), he would have associated the idea of "prohibiting assholery" with "human rights".
  
  I'm sure that precident would never, ever backfire later on.
  
• 
  15

  Coercion at its worst: religious mandated shunning

  by Yomama in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  by patrick haeck any comments on article?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Oh, ok. That was the article title, not yours.

  So I assume this:

  https://www.openmindsfoundation.org/blog/coercion-at-its-worst-religious-mandated-shunning/
  
• 
  21

  Enforced shunning violates free moral agency

  by Yomama in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  what do you think?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Are you free if someone else makes a decision for you? If by going against the grain will garner the very same action towards yourself are you truly free?

  
  Freedom doesn't mean a lack of all obstacles and consequences.
• 
  21

  Enforced shunning violates free moral agency

  by Yomama in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  what do you think?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Where I think Government can get involved is when the Cult demands the shunning of family members.

  
  What's the limiting factor here? And if it does get involved, is the stage set for some pretty bad unintended consequences? Is there, on net, more harm than good?
  
  

  This results in breaking up family networks and has a detrimental effect on Society. A family network is a positive for our society.

  
  True, but I can think of several political ideologies that are bad for families, some explicitly set out to destroy families. Perhaps we can sue those organizations for holding such beliefs.
  
  

  When Cults wreck this family arrangement often the outcast members become a burden on Society

  
  As if there sits a shiny, strong, cohesive family, and this religion (an external force) comes around and wrecks it? No, the family is made up of people, each with a choice. The hard pill to swallow, IMHO, That's the hard pill to swallow - the realization that your family doesn't actually love you like you thought they did. "Oh no, its the organization! Because my family would never do such a thing on the own." Yes they would. They do all the time. It sucks. The DFed shouldn't let them of the hook so easily.
  
• 
  21

  Enforced shunning violates free moral agency

  by Yomama in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  what do you think?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  I see you have made several threads and posts on ‘Shunning’ so I assume this has hurt you deeply and for that I’m sorry.

  Yeah, we can all agree on that.

  @Yomama: We agree that the practice clearly and completely fits into the category of "assholery". But family members do have a choice. It's true that the WT is telling them that the right thing to do (in God's eyes) is to shun. Their conscience is telling them otherwise, and they have the moral agency at that point.

  I think what causes the most hurt is that the DFed know this, and it's terrible to come to terms with the fact that one's own family are doing the wrong thing. All the relationships, all the nurturing that occurred during childhood, all the good times - "Why is my family doing this? They are good people! The religion is forcing them!" Yeah, that's a tough one for sure. But they are doing it, they are choosing a publishing company over you. It's on them.
  
• 
  15

  Coercion at its worst: religious mandated shunning

  by Yomama in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  by patrick haeck any comments on article?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Comments:

  There is a confusion between "rights" and government granted "entitlements".
• 
  15

  Coercion at its worst: religious mandated shunning

  by Yomama in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  by patrick haeck any comments on article?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  I assume this?

  https://www.thebulletin.be/court-hits-jehovahs-witnesses-eu96000-fine-discrimination