Irony In Watchtower defense of religious freedom in Russia

by just n from bethel 9 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  just n from bethel

  While I wholeheartedly will not support a governmental ban on JWs or any other religion for that matter, I find the latest topic at www.jw-media.org a bit ironic. The title is:

  Expression of Christian faith is basis for criminal prosecution in Russia

  Right away most here should be able to see the irony. The Watchtower makes a big deal about individuals not being allowed to express their faith.

  The article goes on to make the following statements, which I find more than interesting.

  …“they stated that he is a law-abiding citizen whom they respect and who has never been known to advocate the incitement of religious enmity.”

  Are JWs that simply express disagreement with some of the Watchtower doctrines, given the same respect? If a JW no longer agrees with 100% of the organization’s doctrine, but has a long history of volunteer service to the organization, and/or has given up much of his life’s secular opportunities to support the organization – would that be something that their own court (judicial committee) would consider?

  What we see here is that the Watchtower is trying to establish a ‘character witness’ and provide evidence that this individual, who merely expresses his faith in public, is not only an upright citizen of Russia, but does not ‘incite religious enmity’. That is, despite his publicly expressing his faith, which he well knows involves persuading people to change their religion/beliefs– the Watchtower does not consider this to cause people to be hostile to other religious thoughts and belief.

  Now compare that to what happens if a JW member has some slightly different beliefs on matters that have never really been permanent JW beliefs to begin with, for example, blood transfusions, the ‘generation’ explanation, or 1914. Can somebody rightfully express their faith about these matters without being considered to ‘incite religious enmity’?

  It seems the Watchtower wants to have it both ways. They want the freedom for individuals to be able to express their faith – even if those expressions may cause others to question their religion. However, should a JW express his or her faith with just a small difference in understanding of a particular Watchtower doctrine, the Watchtower will proceed to try and condemn this person as an enemy of the state organization. The punishment: a life sentence in isolation from one’s friends and family. Might as well be banished to Siberia.

  Does anybody see other ways that this whole Russian situation might be used to help a JW that’s being accused of apostasy?
• 

  just n from bethel

  Here are some more quotes from the article:

  “Kalistratov explained: “My alleged ‘criminal’ activity is an expression of my faith.” He commented: “The bill of indictment does not indicate what specific actions I committed to incite hatred and enmity, so I do not understand the actual nature of the charges against me.” Explaining why the charges against Kalistratov are vague, Prosecutor Bulat Yaimov admitted: “Article 282 is vague, so it does not require that the charges be specific.””

  Anyone see the similarities here and when a JW is charged with apostasy?

  Here’s another quote:

  “Moreover, the proceedings revealed that the investigative agencies exceeded the bounds of their authority. Investigators had indiscriminately confiscated all the religious publications of Jehovah’s Witnesses found in the homes of several believers in the area and claimed that the publications were dangerous months before any court ruling declared some to be “extremist.” Some of the literature was confiscated without a search warrant or other procedural documents.”

  Has any JW had accusations made against them based on wrongfully obtained information? Are JWs ever encouraged to report on fellow JWs based on private information, like medical records?

  This one is classic:

  “this case has therefore attracted considerable media attention.”

  While the Watchtower welcomes media attention and legal aid while defending a member’s right to express his faith – how do they feel about ones on trial in their own religious courts (judicial committees) when it comes to such ones bringing legal aid and media attention?
• 

  yknot

  Yep a case of speaking out of both sides of their mouth.......

  Nothing like religious bans to create persecution and an underdog complex...

  (yknot now leaves the forum to muzzle that pesky staunch offended JW side of her......Russia SUCKS she screams, conscious side protest back so does the totalitarian regime known as the GB)

  sigh
• 

  just n from bethel

  There's also the tract that came out a few months ago - "Could it happen again - a question for the citizens of Russia"

  Here are some of its quotes regarding how Russia is trampling on individuals freedoms:

  " Private medical records have been illegally seized."
  
  " Lawyers attempting to assist in the defense of Jehovah’s
  Witnesses have been harassed and hindered
  from participating in court hearings." (bold mine)

  Has the Watchtower or its congregation elders ever done anything similar to members of its religion?

  And now for the best quote of all:

  "CAN you imagine being denounced publicly as extremist
  or as dangerous? The very words are inflammatory,
  for they call to mind some of the worst
  crimes and the most frightening problems of our
  times. The more the claim is repeated, the more the
  people believe it. But does that make the accusations
  true?"

  Would the Watchtower denounce publicly someone as dangerous who simply has some different understandings of a few doctrinal explanations? Naaaah - they would never do anything like that -they're all about freedom of thought and belief. After all they have said in print 'nobody should be forced to choose between his way of worship and his family'.
• 

  yknot

  Forgot to mention......

  Glad to see you posting again!

  Huggles
• 

  just n from bethel

  Yknot you have a pm
• 

  FatFreek 2005

  Hi JNFB,

  You draw some thought-provoking parallels, thereby making valid arguments. Excellent!

  Len
• 

  just n from bethel

  Now here's another one from the tract:

  For example, if strife arose in a family when one member
  converted to Orthodoxy or began to spend a great
  deal of time at the church, would the Orthodox Church be
  held responsible? Surely not!

  Let's keep going with this great example. The Watchtower must feel so clever with having invented it.

  If the family member converted from JWs to Orthodoxy and all the family were JWs, how might JWs suggest that this "strife" be avoided? What are JWs encouraged to do in such a situation to maintain peace with their family member that converted to Orthodoxy? Are JWs taught to continue showing love to their family member, even though that family member has a different religious belief? Or does the religion of JWs teach that family members with different religious beliefs should not even eat a meal together? If JWs do not break up family members as they so adamantly refute - what is it they teach when it comes to treating JW family members that decide to join another religion? Or just no longer be a JW? In this matter, do JWs ever use expressions like "cut off"?
• 

  yknot

  PMd you back...(google)
• 

  just n from bethel

  There is a video out now at: www.jw-media.org/rus/rus04e.htm

  Here are some notable quotes, bold mine:

  “Gorno-Altaysk [the prosecuting city] apparently lacks one vital resource: religious tolerance – the allowing for exchange of religious information and ideas…”

  “Aleksandr …is being charged with inciting religious enmity. At the heart of the trial is the question: Is it a crime to give someone religious information when requested?”

  “The criminal case has profound implications for freedom of expression of religious belief…throughout Europe.”

  “Throughout the year secret [surveillance operations] have been conducted … on all the Witnesses [in the city] including phone tapping and interception of mail …”

  “What is the purpose of raising charges and not allowing the person an opportunity to refute them? It is not possible to defend oneself against such charges because this is just nonsense.”

  Again - I hope 2 things can come of this. First, I do hope that JWs win the case because Russia's history of oppression is disgusting and this would be nothing more than a regression for anybody wanting freedom in Russia.

  2nd - I hope anyone charged with apostasy can present a defense with these statements and Watchtower testimonies about the importance of freedom of expression.

  The irony continues.