If a person is sued, rightly or wrongly, they must answer the allegations in that lawsuit within a prescribed time period...in most cases, this requires getting an attorney and paying a retainer to that lawyer. Retainers usually run in the thousands of dollars. Unless the elder you sue is flush with cash, it will cause him heartburn. The key is finding claims that can be made in a lawsuit...and that could be the most challenging problem. I am not advocating filing baseless legal actions, but the shear cost and hassle of defending a legitimate lawsuit will usually drive things into a settlement quickly. That should get you an agreement for them to leave you alone.
I've Got An Idea: Sue An Elder!
by minimus 25 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
alice.in.wonderland
A formal discharge from an organization whether it be termination of employment or excommunication from an organization will always carry the overtone of damage to another's reputation: defamation of character. That's why employers often require a contract(s) to be signed upon employment.
Everyone who's one of JWs understands why people are Dfd and agrees with it or they wouldn't be there. There are some people that are removed from the congregation and then all of the sudden no longer understand. That's more of a personal problem, not a legal problem. -
Finally-Free
Everyone who's one of JWs understands why people are Dfd and agrees with it or they wouldn't be there.
Not entirely. One isn't completely informed when becoming a JW. Had I seen the elders manual before getting baptized I never would have joined them. There was no full disclosure of organizational policies prior to my joining.
W
-
tenyearsafter
AIW...I believe the thread is referring to people who are being harassed while still in the congregation. When trying to root out "uncleaness" in the congregation, elders have been known to be quite strident in their efforts to "keep the congregation clean". Once someone is DF'ed, the elders generally stop making contact...in many cases, not even making the annual call to see if that unrepentant individual was ready to turn away from their "errant" course and return to the congregation.
As to your contention that JW's are well versed in the disfellowshipping policies, I disagree. JW's know you can be DF'ed when they join, but I guarantee that they don't know the extent of the "sins" you can be disciplined for. My guess is that unless you have read the Elder's Manual, you don't know those details either. For example, are you aware that there are several types of sexual misconduct, depending on the "level" of intimate contact, that can lead to varying degrees of discipline? What is considered "causing divisions" in the congregation? I can't imagine any elder wanting to have to testify about the details of these "sins" in a courtroom or deposition setting...
-
alice.in.wonderland
I agree to some extent tenyearsafter. When I wanted to go my own way I didn't want to be at the KH at all. I've been in association with people that have mixed emotions about being in the organization. I was before the elders four times before I was I Dfd. I knew what the outcome would be the forth time that's why I didn't care to meet with them.
Most people choose their church or metaphysical beliefs based on what appeals to them. This person here talks about consistency in Traditional Christianity from a religious author that teaches at Rice University.
http://blogs.chron.com/talkingtolerance/2010/05/condemn_the_adulterers_too.html
This weeks' news brought us the story of a Catholic elementary school rescinding the acceptance of a child because his parents are lesbians. The bishop in the area defended the decision, saying it reflected a pastoral concern for the child. He also added, however, that Catholic schools accept students from all walks of life and vowed to help the lesbian parents find another Catholic school for their son.
I find the bishop's statements on this a bit contradictory, but perhaps that's to be expected. Overall, with rare exception, the bulk of Christianity's myriad denominations are completely inconsistent on issues of marriage and who's "in" and who's "out" of the community of faith because of it.
Traditional Christianity - both Catholic and Protestant alike - rejects homosexuality outright as inconsistent with biblical teachings. Thus, most Christian denominations are on record rejecting gay marriage, civil unions and, in many cases, even basic civil rights for gay people. Why? Because the Bible says it's wrong.Fine. But, what about Jesus' teaching on divorce and remarriage? Jesus instructs in the gospels of Matthew and Mark that whoever divorces and remarries commits adultery. That seems fairly straightforward. And, these are the "words of Jesus in red" - unlike all those passages in Leviticus, the bulk of which most Christians ignore anyway because, well, they're Christians, not Orthodox Jews.
Why pick on the homosexuals alone? Why do the adulterers get a pass on this? Most mainline Christian denominations welcome practicing adulterers into full membership in the church, allow them to serve on committees, teach Sunday School, and more. In some cases, practicing adulterers are even allowed to be ordained to serve as deacons, pastors and priests. Indeed, practicing adulterers fill our nation's churches every week without a word of condemnation from the pulpit. Far from it, the churches are happy to accept their tithes every month to keep the lights on.
At the end of the day, Christian churches - like all other religious groups in this country - are private clubs that can accept or reject anyone they want on any basis they want. That's the way we do it in this country, and I personally think it's the best way.
A little consistency would be nice, though. -
tenyearsafter
A.I.W. - I think the key difference in how various Christian religions enforce their "private clubs" is the issue here. With the exception of Mormons, Scientologists and small cults, I can't think of any "Western" religion other than JW's that proactively investigate "wrongdoing" among their members. If someone in Christendom or Catholicism chooses to leave the church, they do it and at worse their name is removed from the membership roll. Why some things are considered sins and others not by a church show one thing...there is no perfect church, including the WTS. As long as imperfect and flawed men are involved, there will always be "issues" that arise.
Nonetheless, elders should not take on the role of judge, jury and executioner lest they be judged on their own works. Remember...he who is without sin should cast the first stone! If a person decides to leave, let them do it and not hound them to get a "confession".