by koolaid-man 65 Replies latest jw friends
This was just sad. Terrible. And all to maintain the illusion of the only true religion.
I also found the "liberal" nature of the legal dept rep interesting.
I hope Dale follows through and has legal success. The 7.1M in Brooklyn properties they just sold should cover it!
Thanks for sharing Rick.
Heartbreaking stuff.
Divorce is often/usually 'wrenching.' When a church or religious organization encourages it, based just on belief difference, it is revolting.
Where was that Awake from their own writings?, stating that no one should fear losing their family if they change their religion. The WTS is a big hyprocrite that way, on their long list. They don't help people, and the children, well, I really feel sorry for them.
Dale, I hope you can be building your health, physicial, emotional, spiritual, to build a relationship with your children, proving to them the kind, loving person you show. Helping to create their own mental thinking, as age appropriate. Instill them to love their mom with respect. Find wise 'gentle' ways to help them be aware that there is a good, positive life for them.
Help build, good fun times for them to have good memories of their youth. For sure, JW kids don't look back with fondness on all the brain-dead meetings and door-to-door work they had to spend. Try to get into 'city' sponsored activities (museums, zoos. parades, sports activities) to do together, often not expensive.
Maybe if your wife sees how you pour so much good energy into the kids, she will re-think. If not, at least your kids will love it. Unconditional love, your kids will not hear, nor see in the WTS.
I would love to see a case like this succeed against the Watchtower Society. Unfortunately, I think there is little chance this kind of case would go anywhere. (Note, I'm not a lawyer and I'm unqualified to give legal advice.) The Watchtower Society is very good at avoiding lawsuits by claiming that the court case would involve unconstitutional interference with internal religious matters. I believe there is a good chance that the case would be thrown out before the evidence was even heard.
I also understand it is difficult to sue for alienation of affection. These kinds of laws date back to when women were viewed as property and easily influenced by third parties. The wife has a mind of her own (in theory at least, being in a cult changes things, but the court might not recognise that) so it would be hard to hold someone else accountable for her actions. The talk given by the circuit overseer is probably irrelevant, unless he mentioned the husband by name. I think it would be viewed as simply the expression of religious opinions.
I'm sure the elders were careful to not actually recommend that she get a divorce. Even if they did, it might be almost impossible to prove.
I hope he doesn't make the mistake of being passive during the divorce with the idea that he can get his revenge by suing for alienation of affection. He needs professional legal counsel urgently. I think the circumstances make it likely that he can get a somewhat favorable settlement in terms of support and visitation or custody of his kids. If he is aggressive enough (especially if he seeks custody of his kids based on his wife's involvement with an organization that slanders him openly), his wife might even decide to end the proceedings.
The recurring problem is the First Amendment's Freedom of Exercise clause. United States const'l law overrides any federal, state or local laws.
Another thought proving causation is difficult. She is a grown woman and judges who rarely have any personal experience with cults will find it hard to envision that she had no free will of her own. Modern divorce law is not so strong on blame but allowing parties to get a new life. I have no experience with it but friends who practiced family law only talked about economic analysis.
Not trying to be a bummer. Only showing pitfalls so maybe you can avoid them.
Doesnt it seem that there are other constitutional interests that could be argued in this sort of case? Does free exorcise trump this man's right to family and love of his children. I agree that in most cases that the 1st protects them....this seems like a way around it.
SEE----RICK FEARON IS REDEEMABLE!!! I knew it!
"Doesnt it seem that there are other constitutional interests that could be argued in this sort of case?"
Yes, I think so. The problem, as I see it, is to even get a court to agree to interfere in internal religious matters so these arguments can be heard. The arguments don't mean much if the case is thrown out before it gets to trial.
The situation may be different for the divorce case. The court might not care if the wife has been influenced by third parties, but it might be very concerned if the wife will subject the children to an environment that slanders the father and treats him like the worst kind of person.
minimus, be cool.
