Invited to Attend a J W Kangaroo Court Proceeding: Tell Them to: Put the Reason for Requesting Your Presents in Writing Along With Any Alleged Charges of Wrong Doing, So You Can Give it To Your Lawyer.

by frankiespeakin 31 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Hermano

  What I like about the letter Blondie posted is it establishes that the DA process has very little to do with what the Bible says and A LOT to do with directives from the corporation. Without saying so, it says to the local elders, you and the Bible are just pawns, the real reason for all this is a corporation with billions of dollars and attorneys. It shatters the Jehovah illusion and lets everyone know this is really a LEGAL issue and will be treated as such.

  It gives the local elders a lot to think about. Are they going through all this hassle because of what the Bible says or because of what the corporation says? Where in the bible does the term “disassociate” appear? Where does it say the person disassociating should write a letter? Where in the bible does it say they have to report the result of their committee back to corporate?

  It also gives the legal department something to think about. It becomes more difficult for them to distance themselves from the outcome when elders are following their procedures and reporting back to them. I’m not an attorney, but it sure sounds like the elders are acting as their agents.

  Whether the corporation is doing something illegal or their actions are protected under the constitution is irrelevant. The bottom line is cult leaders don’t like bad publicity. Such a letter puts the corporation on notice that the writer isn’t falling for the Jehovah hype and the writer knows that the corporation is behind these policies. The writer isn’t going to passively roll over and take the abuse. Is it worth it for the corporation to risk possible legal action and negative publicity? The local elders might believe that Jehovah will protect his people, but Legal is more sophisticated than that.

  As another poster mentioned, if more of us approached the DA/DF process by writing a similar letter they just might receive “new light” and “come to more accurate knowledge” about how “first century Christians understood the Apostle Paul’s admonition to the Corinthians.” (Or some similar bullsh*t to cover up the change in policy due to risk of lawsuits and negative publicity.)
• 

  Cold Steel

  Two days after I sent Letter 1, I received a call from two the the elders of my congregation. They asked if I were formally disassociating myself. When I replied that I was not, I was invited to appear before them to face charges of apostasy. I sent this letter as a reply to that invitation.

  This letter, while very well written, is not legally binding. You may request some of the itemized demands; however, they are not beholden to grant most of them. As far as recording devices, you can probably get around that by checking out some of the electronics websites on the Internet.

  Also, please excuse my ignorance, but what are some of the things a member can do that would land them in this sort of situation? And in what way would they be expected to be false witnesses? Isn't that one of the things Christ was subjected to? Would they knowingly manufacture untruths or would they just bend the facts into prevarications?

  With the new policy on the veneration of the Governing Body (Peace Be Upon Them), can not the church disfellowship a person legally, morally and theologically for disputing, questioning or showing disrespect towards them? As they see it, doing anything like that to them would be like doing it to the ancient apostles or even the Lord Himself. For example, there are a host of reasons a person might have for rejecting the doctrine that Jesus was the premortal Michael the Archangel or that Jehovah is not the Father, but the Son. Or that blood transfusions are a sin. But now that the policy has changed regarding the GB (PBUT), even disputing them can be regarded as apostasy and sin. Forget the part about them being self professed, self appointed, unordained blind leaders of the blind; they've still got you because of their binding declaration, even though it wasn't sustained or voted upon by the congregations. And I'm not sure, but do they ask you about the GB (PBUT) in their pre-baptismal questions? Do you have to agree to the doctrine of "from God's mouth to their ears"? It's like President Morsi in Egypt declaring his unlimited new powers. It was a declaration, not a proposal!

  If it is not a court then it is not a Judicial anything, if it is a court it should act according to the standards laid down in the Human Rights legislation of various countries and by the U.N.

  While I understand and sympothize with your sense of injustice over this, I hold the United Nations and other international organizations that infringe on the sovereignty of other nations to be, in themselves, illegal and contemptable. Our freedoms and rights in the U.S Constitution are the acme of justice and human rights, and while I concur that each country has its own standards for human rights, the edicts of the U.N. should never trump or interfere with the standards of other nations. The dictatorships will ignore them anyway. (The U.N. already is trying to trump the Second Amendment rights of Americans with its International Small Arms Treaty, and Obama, who didn't support it during his first term, is widely expected to support it during his second term. The treaty would require signatory nations to implement mandatory gun registration and overwrite state control of firearms. So that's why my negative tilt on this.) Not only that, but the U.N. has corrupted and screwed up everything it's touched since it was implemented. I'd just as soon as keep them out of the picture.