Do Children Who Get Baptized Have Any Legal Leeway To Leave The Religion When They Are Older Without Shunning? (page 2)

minimus

Kids make contracts with Jehovah (the Organization).

wobble

As a born-in baptised at age 12, I went into this in depth when I was contemplating taking a high profile public opposition to the JW's which I knew they would DF me for.

Apparently here in the U.K the law says that even though I as a minor entered in to a contract with these people and that contract would be difficult to enforce at the time, once I reached majority and I took an appointment from the WT , I legally agreed then to their "terms and conditions".

This was a blow to me, I had been baptised under the very old vows, it was 1962, which said nothing about loyalty to "God's Org" or anything similar, in fact if I was to be baptised as a Christian today in to another Church , those vows would be fine by me.

But apparently by accepting a post as a MS, or even as an appointed volunteer at an Assembly say, you then put yourself under the new "Terms & Conditions"

Proving my original baptism invalid is of no use, they can still DF me.

Boy, did they trap us in a tangled web, if only Householders knew this horror stuff they would never open the door to JW's.

DanaBug

Minimus,

This is something I've been thinking about lately too. I know the shunning won't stop. But what if some case sets a precedent so that children cannot enter into that contract with the WTBTS? If I ever won the lottery, had the money to do it, I would try it. I'm no lawyer, but I think it would take establishing that those baptismal vows are the legal basis for disfellowshipping and therefore a religious contract or law that minors cannot legally be held to or allowed to be part of in the first place. It wouldn't be about stopping shunning but stopping minors from being baptized.

VIII

Lawyers here in the US will take your money and enjoy the process. You will never be able to find a court willing to take this on. Read the links above. If they tried with the JWs they would have the Muslims, Scientologists, 7th Day Adventists and every other person with a bone of contention against the faith they were raised in. Doesn't matter what *we* think and how shunning hurts.

Until they are declared a cult and not a viable religion, it is untouchable.

minimus

They are a religious cult.

trebor

The shunning is alledgedly originating from individual JW's and not from marching orders.
And that is the Borg's "out" on most of their most heinous rules. "We don't control our members. They choose their associates themselves. They choose for themselves to let their kids die rather than get a blood transfusion. They chose to forego an education and planning for retirement themselves. We don't control our members."

I don't know about that. This seems pretty directive to me:

Our Kingdom Ministry, August 2002, Page 4, paragraph 12:"Benefits of Being Loyal to Jehovah: Cooperating with the Scriptural arrangement to disfellowship and shun unrepentant wrongdoers is beneficial."

Also, their relatively new publication "Keep Yourself In God's Love" states that strict avoidance [of disfellowshipped and disassociated persons] is really necessary, in the appendix under the subject of how to treat a disfellowshipped person.

skeeter1

When a child makes a contract, he has two choices when he turns 18. He can ratify it, or he can repudiate it.

Let's take the first example, ratification. Say, the child continues on as a Jehovah's Witness. He's then ratified the contract.

Let's take the second choice - repudiation at the moment he turns 18. Yes, he can then undu his Jehovah's Witness affiliation. But, his parents' & congregation still likely have the right to shun him. The Watch Tower will deny that it had any orchestrated effort of getting the parents to shun the child, but the parents came to their own conscience...(bull shit, we all know).

Perhaps in countries which do not have such wide allowance of "freedom of religion", where the child did not completely understand the shunning rules when he was baptised, and where a child turned the legal age and immediate rejected the religion....that would be a case ....

Skeeter

RubaDub

Min ...

I don't think there is much that can be done from a legal standpoint since the courts typically refrain from involving themselves with intra-church affairs.

However, it would be a good idea if the Society offered some sort of Baptismal Learner's Permit or allow younger ones to get baptized on a Trial Basis. Perhaps it could be a scaled down version of the real thing. Maybe instead of full immersion, the person could just be wet down with a garden hose. Then after trial period expires, the person could decide if he/she wanted to go through with the real thing.

Just an idea.

Rub a Dub

eva luna

This has been on my mind too.

I was wondering if it can make a difference if you were baptized before the baptism questions were changed.

You were not pledgeing yourself to an Organzation then.

Any thoughts?

minimus

This new batch of youngsters don't have a clue what they are getting themselves into.

Very sad, indeed to be pre-teen or a teen in 2011 JW land.

Do Children Who Get Baptized Have Any Legal Leeway To Leave The Religion When They Are Older Without Shunning?

Share this