How old does someone have to get, to gain immunity for blood-guilt for being a part of JWs? (page 2)

designs

As an x-Elder is never goes away entirely. I sat in a hospital with a young husband while his wife bled to death.

Good question. I've thought of it before and even started a thread realated to it. I like to think of it as this: if I did something unlawful, and did not know so, am I exempt from consequences/punishment? No.

King Solomon

Just to clarify, I'm not interested in answering the question at this point, but asking questions. Maybe I'll offer my opinion, but I'll wait to allow others to voice their opinion.

RVW said:

But, let me ask you, of what benefit would it be to "Awaken" someone who has maybe a few years left of life? You really don't see that as being cruel to them?

That's the argument used by those who'd defend elderly war criminals who've managed to evade capture and prosecution for the war crimes committed they committed decades before, during WW II. The answer for that scenario is that the value is in seeking an ethical sense of fundamental fairness and justice, of being forced to account or at least consider the harm that may have resulted for their past actions. Obviously being a JW who shuns others isn't illegal, but there IS a moral issue at play here.

Lost Generation said:

I don't grant them that, I simply consider them victims. If a victim cannot/will not see that they are such, no amount of argument on my part will convince them of such.

So everyone in the JW's are victims? Who's NOT a victim, then: the GB? The CO's? The elders? The rank-and-file who can claim, "I was just following orders"?

That excuse didn't fly for subordinates at the War Crimes Trials in Nuremburg, where the courts told low-level defendents in the chain-of-command that THEY were responsible for exercising a modicum of decency and independent thought, a responsibility to tell their supervisors that they wouldn't follow their orders which violated standards of basic humanity. Military members have the responsibility to not follow an "unlawful order" by a superior.

Obviously, the JWs are not as extreme of an example as engaging in genocide or executions, but it seems the same basic principles would apply: a member cannot hide behind their membership in the group, and claim they were just following orders as any valid defense.

And if not directly engaging in cruelty, you could make the same claim for guilt-by assocation, sharing in the actions of others. As I said above, JWs are willing to condemn those who join the military with guilt by association, and the JWs don't apply slack to those in the military. Shoes now on the other foot, and it seems reasonable to expect they should be held to the same standard to which they'd hold others.

FH said:

Bloodguilt. Is that a concept outside the JW org? Or is just a concept inside the JW org? Is it the same thing as guilt by association?

It is a term with origins from outside of the JWs (I've heard it in the context of Jewish guilt), but sure, guilt by association is the same idea: sharing in the sins of the group, even if you're not one who was personally involved in the actual offensive behavior.

Awake said:

Good question. I've thought of it before and even started a thread realated to it. I like to think of it as this: if I did something unlawful, and did not know so, am I exempt from consequences/punishment? No.

Good point. Being ignorant of laws is not an excuse for violating laws ("But officer, I didn't know it was illegal" doesn't fly). If anything, it MAY be a factor when it comes to the sentencing phase, but not in determinging whether the accused in guilty or innocent (and using it as a defense pretty much points to one's guilt).

Aware!

Designs- we are all guilty indirectly or directly.

Awakening caused me to re-examine my beliefs and worldview. I no longer push what I believe onto others, something I did a lot when I was a JW. In our defence, we were brainwashed and told that if we didn't do it we would be bloodguilty.

never a jw

accuse anyone who's a part of the Organization of sharing in the blood-guilt. That actually makes sense to me

Most dubs are victims, how can they share in any blood guilt? We don't even hold guilty most of the rank and file of Hiltler's army for killing Allies' soldiers.

Any age would be an arbitrary number to select who is a good/bad candidate to be awakened. I know relatively young adults from very humble backgrounds who have little education, earn low wages, and have no aspirations to improve their status. They, however, seem very content with the beautiful lies of the WTS and the social network of brothers and sisters provided courtesy of the Borg. I have to say: leave them alone.

Young people, especially those raised in democracies with access to information and opportunities to education and economical/social upper mobility definitely need to be awakened as soon as possible. It's a crime not to awaken them, especially if we are next of kin or good friends

King Solomon

Never a JW said:

Most dubs are victims, how can they share in any blood guilt? We don't even hold guilty most of the rank and file of Hiltler's army for killing Allies' soldiers.

But that's the question: how can you say everyone's a victim, yet the overall group is guilty? Where does personal responsibility kick in for NOT being a member of the group, whether the individual is aware of the problem or not?

And for the record, simply being a soldier who killed Allied Forces in Hitler's army isn't guilty of any war crime, as long as the soldier followed the Geneva Convention's rules of war (eg not intentionally killing innocent civilians, etc). However, engaging in human rights atrocities (such as exterminating Jews in gas chambers) WAS a war crime, wherever the soldier was in the chain-of-command. It was inexcusable, as soldiers have a moral obligation NOT to commit atrocities in the fog of war.

cyberjesus

Its a mind control cult. The damage they do to others is factual. The ignorance of their actions is factual as well. Your question is a leading question. They are guilty of damage with abscense of malice.

Phizzy

I am still having a problem with the "bloodguilt" concept as being valid morally when it comes to meting out justice.

Here in this country we ,U.K, we enacted an ill-conceived law that was trying to break the gang culture, and it said if you happened to be amongst a group some of whom perpetrated a crime , you were guilty too.

Because of this concept, a huge number of young people are wrongly imprisoned here at this very moment, that is not justice, it is a knee jerk law that should simply not be on the books.

Please could you explain, King Sol, how by simply being associated with a group like the WT/JW's for a period, and believing the Bull***t as coming from God, could make someone "Bloodguilty" ?

Should someone because of this mere association, being in the wrong place at the wrong time like the kids above, be adjudged as desrving of death ??

Is that Justice ? If so, whose ?

sizemik

I think maybe we're using the word bloodguilt to describe guilt by association (without malice as cj said), and applying the strict JW interpretation of the implications. But the level of responsibility must depend on individual culpability, which has many levels, with R&F drones firmly placed at the bottom IMO. More is asked from those to whom more is given . . . ha.

irondork

A person is no longer bloodguilty after they reach the age of unaccountablity. It's different for everyone.

How old does someone have to get, to gain immunity for blood-guilt for being a part of JWs?

Share this