Do Jehovah's Witnesses Have The "Right" To Practice Their Religion???

by minimus 71 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  OnTheWayOut

  But I strongly believe that most educated persons realize onr thing about JWs and that is that they won't give even their kids blood if they needed it. To hope or believe that lawyers, judges and lawmakers are completely out of touch with the machinations of the Watchtower is to think that most of these people are ignorant.

  I respectfully object to this portion of your statement. I don't believe that lawyers and judges are
  any more out of touch with the machinations of WT than they are with the machinations of any group.
  They don't take action because the squeaky wheel gets the grease. There are many squeaky wheels
  out there. Politicians tackling a religious group is rare nowadays. There would need to be a public
  outcry.

  "Most educated persons" think various things about JW's or they don't think about them at all. I have
  heard quite educated people say that "JW's don't believe in Jesus or medical care. Isn't that right?"
  They make similar mis-statements about Mormons, Scientologists, Catholics, Libertarians,
  7-Up Spots, Amish, Muslims, Hindus, Shintos, Communists, Pagans, Africans, West Virginians, etc.
  Too many are out there for them to understand all the issues.
• 

  minimus

  Regarding the blood issue, the legal world is quite aware that JWs don't take blood. This is why I keep saying what I do. You suggest that if they were informed about the blood beliefs things can change. I say they are informed. There's no secret. No law broken. AND THAT'S WHY THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY DO.
• 

  Blueblades

  The Watchtower themselves are misrepresenting the blood position by the misinformation about blood over the years. The forbidden of Blood Transfusions and the "AMBIGUITY" explanations that follow demonstrates it has all of them scratching their heads, us included. This causes wrongful death, because those that adhere to a doctrine that they don't understand, still believe that they will not have Jehovah's favor if they do take a life saving procedure. They believe that they will die forever and not be resurrected into a paradise earth.

  The Watchttower Society is misrepresenting the blood position themselves because of all the ambiguity they spill out about this medical issue that they themselves have changed over the years. You can take this , you can include this, no you can't take this, you can't include this. yes you can, no you can't. So that many are denied the blood procedure that can save a life.

  They misrepresent their own blood position. Those who died in the past because of what was told them then, were given misinformation on blood tranfusions.

  Blueblades
• 

  Beep,Beep

  " the WATCHTOWER states a Witness should "hate" not just the disfellowshipping act of sin but the SINNER too"

  Since when?

  From my earliest years I can remeber being taught to hate the sin yes, but not the individual.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  I did say: We need to let the dangers of the WTS be known.

  That's much more intense than "You suggest that if they were informed about the blood beliefs things can change."

  I say they are informed. There's no secret. No law broken.

  "Informing about the beliefs" and "letting the dangers be known." I get you. You are starting to sound like MAD hanging up
  on the individual words. Let's get this clear.

  It would be wonderful to criminalize many WTS tactics of recruitment, retainment, and control. There is no law broken
  until that happens. Strangely enough, while their actions are not criminal, the pendulum is swinging against them in
  civil cases and in protection of the children from their doctrines.

  The average politician or judge is not concerned with shunning or Witness blood policies. If we let the dangers be known,
  it would involve further swaying public opinion and that would put pressure on politicians.

  I gave you a long list of their dangers that could be cited as "illegal" if the laws were changed. Then you just say that
  they are informed. Does the average politician know that WTS is a mind-control cult? Do they know that 14 year olds are
  being shunned by their grandparents and best friends? Do they understand this could lead to suicide or campus killing
  sprees? Do they know that WTS tells it's members that the government (any government) is an agent of Satan, or that
  WTS is kicking it's employees out the door with no social security or healthcare benefits?

  There are plenty of secrets. We can tell them if the opportunity comes up.

  Let's pick apart anything Minimus said:

  Sorry but I think your list doesn't qualify as "criminal".

  Violating minimum wage and social security laws is criminal. The government just has to be convinced that
  they are doing that. Your statement almost passes as approval as long as the law doesn't prevent it.

  I would like to see that shunning be considered a "hate crime" because the WATCHTOWER states a Witness
  should "hate" not just the disfellowshipping act of sin but the SINNER too!

  It's not a hate crime. You seem to agree with me, then you go on to say what they do is legal. Don't you
  think the government is aware of this potential hate crime? If you say no, you agree with me. If you say
  yes, then you agree with me that it should be criminalized.

  What criminal things do JWs do??

  You say this one right after you say that their shunning SHOULD be a hate crime. I never said that. You
  make the same points I make with different examples. I will argue from your side- shouldn't they be allowed
  to hate whomever they want to hate if it's not against the law? The law is aware of their policy.

  The only thing I can say is there's so many confusing rules that a lawyer would be scratching his head too.

  Compare that to "the legal world is quite aware that JWs don't take blood." I am scratching my head at your
  position, Min.

  Common sense time- I know that their current activities are "for the most part" not illegal, but I wish they were.
  I know that you agree that some of their activities could be made illegal. Why are you trying to argue with me
  because I feel stronger and voice my opinion in a different style than you do?
• 

  undercover

  From my earliest years I can remeber being taught to hate the sin yes, but not the individual.

  There are some older WT articles that aren't as, um, merciful as one would expect a Christian to be. I don't have the references handy, but I'm sure someone can provide them.

  It's another one of those things where the WTS has spoken out of both sides of their mouth. On one hand, they say that one should not be overly judgemental of the one in error but hope that they come back to Jehovah. But then in another article they'll make mention of hating the evildoer and those who have left the true and righteous way. I think that human nature has helped most JWs to accept the notion that its wrong to hate the individual and we tend to be willing to give them the benefit of the doubt if at all possible.

  It's as if the WTS wants the followers to "hate" the wrongdoer just enough to avoid them while they are in a state of being DFd, yet be willing to welcome them back with open arms the minute they become re-assimilated back into the bOrg.
• 

  minimus

  OTWO, I think that perhaps you are a bit oversensitive?? Please don't think I'm trying to put you down. I am using specific words that you said to express why I differ with you on some points. Regarding what you qualify as "criminal", please report the WBTS to the authorities for their criminal acts. Tell them (the authorities) why they need to be prosecuted. Go ahead. Inform them. Let's see if you've got a case.

  The average lawmaker and judge is not concerned about JWs. You say, "if we let the dangers known" it could effect public opinion. I think not. The only ones that are righteously concerned about JWs are exes.

  Regarding what IS illegal, if the laws are changed it's a moot point. Criminalize a lot of organizations for their tactics of recruitment, retainment and control.

  If people know that JWs believe that Satan is the god of the governments and every other religion, then what? Politicians knew that during Rutherford's day.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  I am using specific words that you said to express why I differ with you on some points.

  Yet you agree with me that things they do should be criminalized. You say 'shunning be considered a "hate crime" '

  You differ with me on some points so you attack my entire position.
  I have no recourse left but to answer, then I am over sensitive?
  
  

  Regarding what you qualify as "criminal", please report the WBTS to the authorities for their criminal acts. Tell them (the authorities) why they need to be prosecuted. Go ahead. Inform them. Let's see if you've got a case.

  Inform them of the dangers- don't just say it's illegal. Prove that is should be illegal. It can be done. How would you
  make their shunning a hate crime? Not just you, but WE as a group speak our mind that their shunning should be
  a "hate crime."

  All that's left for me to say is a repeat of how I ended before:

  The only thing I can say is there's so many confusing rules that a lawyer would be scratching his head too.

  Compare that to "the legal world is quite aware that JWs don't take blood." I am scratching my head at your
  position, Min.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  I think they have a right to practice their religion

  If I disagree with Minimus, I should start a thread on how he is an apologist for the WTS.
  I can find enough quotes to back this up. Don't be overly sensitive when the next new
  thread is "Minumus Supports WTS's Point of View."
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  the courts have ruled that refusing a blood transfusion is not necessarily illegal.

  Minimus supports withholding necessary blood transfusions from infants.