JW Children Lie in Custody Cases (page 21)

compound complex

Face-slapping.

Murder:
to "slightly kill" someone.

The examples given only touch the surface. Since then, many additional rules have been made. There seems to be nothing on which the organisation is not willing to legislate. A "Question from Readers" in the June 15, 1982, WATCHTOWER (page 31) even rules on whether a Witness can submit to medical treatment in which (to reduce the risk of stroke by blood clot or for other purposes) a leech is used to draw off blood. The answer, based on a very wandering type of argument, is "No." [Though saying initially that such "use of leeches would conflict with what the Bible says," the only Scriptures referred to thereafter are God's words to Noah that humans should not eat blood (Genesis 9:3, 4), and his command through Moses that the BLOOD OF SLAIN ANIMALS be poured onto the ground. (Leviticus 17:10-14) Since no human will eat the leech, and no one will likely retain the blood the leech sucks, it is difficult to see what possible connection there is here. (emphasis: RF.)]

compound complex

Unbalanced Thinking

By legalistic thinking, a comparatively innocent minor action can be transformed into a major one of great culpability. In life there is need for balance, since the rightness or wrongness of many things really comes down to a matter of DEGREE. As a simple example, a gentle pat with one's hand on another's cheek signifies affection, whereas a strong slap on the cheek tells of anger, even hatred. The action of the hand and fingers is the same in both cases; it is the difference in the degree of force that converts an expression of affection into one of hatred. So, too, in more complex aspects. While the element of degree may not enter notably into such clearcut offenses as murder (a murderer does not "slightly kill" or "moderately kill" or "strongly kill" someone), or theft, or adultery, it does play a deciding role in a wide variety of life's affairs. Thus, people commonly work to earn money. This does not, however, justify classing them as "greedy." But if the DEGREE of concern for money passes a certain point, then greed is evident. Who can specifically identify that "certain point" so as to draw a clear line of demarcation, one that divides precisely between the proper and improper concern for gain? It is only when the evidence CLEARLY POINTS TO EXCESS that one can feel justified in assessing another as greedy. This is true in a whole host of matters. [ibid., p. 256; emphasis: RF.]

compound complex

SOON:

Unbalanced Thinking, concluded

Submission to Superior Authorities
Alternative Service
"compromising"
"violating neutrality"
sacrificing liberty - necessary?
Branch Overseers' views vs. those of GB

compound complex

Again, in Bible times the religious leaders failed to exercise such balance, to distinguish between actions of a minor nature and those which might be termed major. Thus, when they saw Jesus' disciples, on the Sabbath day, picking grains of wheat, rubbing them in their hands to remove the chaff and eating them, they accused them of a violating the Sabbath law against work. How could they? Because, in their unbalanced, extremely scrupulous thinking, the men were, in effect, both harvesting and threshing. Indeed, if they had picked large quantities of grain, loading up their cloaks with the wheat, and then rubbed the chaff off, producing piles of such grain, they would have be doing just that. But they were not. And Jesus reproved the religious leaders for 'condemning the innocent.' ---Matthew 12:1-7.
This same unbalanced thinking seems to be the only explanation for the positions taken by the Watch Tower organization in a number of the policies already described. Perhaps nothing demonstrates this more forcefully than does the issue of alternative service to be performed in place of military service.

compound complex

bttt

compound complex

Submission to the Superior Authorities

Remind them to be submissive to the government and the authorities, to obey them, and to be ready for any honourable form of work. ---Titus 3:1, New English Bible.

In many enlightened countries, the government provides for a non-military form of service to be performed instead of military service and training. They do this specifically to show consideration for the conscientious objections of some citizens to participation in war or military service, a concession that is surely commendable. In CRISIS OF CONSCIENCE this subject was discussed in part. [Pages 101-103, 116-131.] As explained there, the organization's policy is that no Witness can accept an order from a draft board (or any other governmental agency other than a court) to perform alternative service---which generally consists of hospital work, rendering services to elderly people, work in libraries, in a forest camp, or in some other field that would benefit the community at large.

compound complex

Why a Witness cannot accept an "honourable form of work."

"Violating neutrality."

When the judge "decides."

compound complex

bttt

compound complex

Since any of these is clearly an "honourable form of work" why must a Witness not accept it? Because in its being "ALTERNATIVE service" it is a "substitute" for military service, and because such work stands IN THE PLACE OF military service then, by some process of reasoning, to accept an alternative service assignment from a draft board is deemed the EQUIVALENT of having accepted military service and therefore one has "compromised," has "violated his neutrality," and becomes bloodguilty. If that reasoning seems remarkably convoluted, there is yet more that follows. [ibid., p. 257; emphasis: RF.]

JW Children Lie in Custody Cases

Share this