See, I love reports like this, dear Terry (peace to you!) because of how I think. Let me show you:
The 1966 Civil Rights Covenant also authorizes the formation of the Human Rights Committee. That Committee issued General Comment 22 in 1993. General Comment 22 affirms that people have the right to profess or not profess a religion, to choose a religion or choose no religion at all and the right to choose theistic, non-theistic, or atheistic traditions.
Without being called nasty, slanderous names like "apostate"?
"General Comment 22 continues by stating that article 18 “bars coercion that would impair the right to have or adopta religion orbelief, including the use of threat of physical force or penal sanctions to compelbelievers or non-believers to adhere to their religious beliefs and congregations, to recant their religion or belief or to convert.”
"Coercion" (use of force or intimidation to gain complaince) through use of "penal sanctions to compel"... such as slander, the loss of familial ties, even loss of consortium... all brought through [judicial] meetings that result in "penalties", including expulsion and ostracism... as well as more slander?
The concern that human rights advocates have is concerning deprogramming, exit counseling, cult interventions, and other similar therapies. Thesetherapies aim at getting the “cultist” to recant his or her beliefs through confrontational and deceptive means.
Two things catch my eye here: (1) that the WTBTS is being held out here... yet, they DENY they are "cultists" (so, how can it apply to support them?), and (2) these are the very tactics used by the "CULTISTS"... as to those who don't/no longer believe what THEY do.
In 1981 the Declaration on the Elimination ofAll Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief was created. The 1981 Declaration defines discrimination as “any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on religion or belief” that attempts to abolish the rights freedoms and enjoyments of religious freedom.
Ummmm... apparently that "don't go to college" teaching has led to even the higher-ups not having much in the way of reading comprehension skills. Either that, or the WTBTS didn't get the "memo" regarding the provisions of General Comment 22, else they would have had to tell the author to "We're not "cultists"... and this is kind of how we treat those who leave/disagree with us... so you might wanna keep our name out of it!"
Conclusion:
1. Most of the anticult and counter cult organizations have failed to provide credible research.
I conclude that:
1. The author obviously didn't speak to any ex-"cultists" (oh, excuse me, exJWs) or he would have known that the very cult he's trying to protect violates General Comment 22... and its article 18... on a regular, consistent, and ongoing basis itself... and so his "research" isn't credible, either; and
2. Most anticult organizations have not mentioned the contribution Jehovah’s Witnesses have made to religious freedom in their research.
2. Because perhaps they DID speak to ex-cultists... and realized the HUGE dichotomy that existed... and so decided to stay mum rather than open up THAT "can of worms" (i.e., make it difficult for those who DO benefit from freedom of religion as a result).
I have to wonder: who commissioned/paid for the report?
Mayhaps I'll try and reach Mr. Brown and send him a link to this page... and forum...
Peace!
A slave of Christ,
SA
