Sign this petition - Investigation On Jehovahs Witnesses Religious Policy That Violates Human Rights and Abuses Religious Freedom

by TJ Curioso 170 Replies latest watchtower scandals

  • Simon
    Simon

    Think about it - there are very few situations where anyone is forcibly compelled to talk to someone else.

    You even have the right not to talk to the police.

    I can only think of a court situation where a judge can order someone to answer a question at threat of being in contempt and possibly fined or jailed if they don't.

    Other than that ... it's hard to think of other cases where the situation is forced upon us.

    And thank god, because otherwise we'd end up being forced to listen to someone elses religious mumbo jumbo because laws always work both ways and they could use the same laws to force themselves on us so that their "rights" aren't violated and they don't suffer the same "torture".

  • adamah
    adamah

    Rebel said-

    I've been talking on this forum for hears about the UN Declaration of Human Rights and wondered if anything could be done to enforce it. I still wonder that, seeing as how the UN apparently has no power to enforce it. The petition is also directed towards US authorities who would also have no authority to enforce it.

    Of course, organized religions are incredibly BIG-BUSINESS in America, and you can just hear the outcry from pastors, preachers, bishops, priests, elders, etc, all stirring up their flocks on Sundays since they won't voluntarily give up a good thing when they see it, and aren't about to let a bunch of Godless liberals in the UN tell THEM how to worship Gods!

    To take action against only the JWs on shunning would involve trampling on ALL freedom of religion, and you'd have all churches submitting donations and amicus curae (legal briefs) to the Courts, IF an initiative ever managed to get to a court case (much like the JWs submitted amicus curae on behalf of their buddy Jimmy Swaggert, as they were interested parties effected by the outcome of his case).

    Governments are not going to meddle into religious practice UNLESS the religions start breaking civil laws (eg murder, by offering child sacrifices to Gods). Why would they do that, when they've got a good thing going already?

    Heck, the 'Duck Dynasty' family patriarch is now back after A&E kicked him off the show, but it stirred up such outrage from the religious right that A&E caved. It was perfectly within their legal right to do so, since they weren't infringing on his freedom of speech. But most believers don't see it that way: instead, they (wrongly) claimed A&E infringed his religious expression, so more idiots are proudly waving their idiot flags (and I wouldn't put it past A&E doing it as a publicity stunt, getting TONS of free publicity after the story went viral).

    The difference is, trying to get a company to cave into pressure works when such media consumer-driven companies are sensitive to public opinion. But governments? Not so much, for the most part, since they're generally quite reluctant to rewrite doctrines of Constitutional law based on only 4,000 signatures.

    And to the resistance from the religious right, add people who actually understand the principles found in the Constitution; then all you have left are a bunch of people who SHOULD see the importance of accepting personal responsibility for their actions, instead of demanding that the Nanny State bail them out at every turn and kiss every boo-boo to their egos, even if it means trampling all over the rights of everyone else.

    (BTW, it's interesting to look at a few of the petitions that are trending on the change.org site; that should give a sense as to what issues gain traction, and actually manage to garner attention to their causes, like the lady who wants to get 911 calls to be dialed from hotel rooms, etc.)

    It's another manifestation of the same narcissistic desire for some pipe-dream that's not so far-removed from engaging in preaching work to gain eternal Panda Petting sessions on a paradise Earth. Same underlying dynamic at play, based on only one's hopes and dreams.

    Apparently many ex-JWs are still clinging to thinking their actions and opinions actually matter to others, as if there's "something" that can or should be done, so an easy answer is to sign some random poorly-worded petition that pops up since signing a petition is helluva lot easier than trudging from house-to-house, door-to-door, etc. Such ill-conceived tactics only end up going nowhere, and since it's so easy to sign a petition online, it's more of merely venting rather than anything, and only causing some loss of credibility for all those involved (which plays into the GB's hands).

    As stated elsewhere, JWs aren't going ANYWHERE, since a sucker is born every minute to replace those who die, and unfortunately most people are hell-bent on learning life lessons 'the hard way' via personal experience, telling themselves "it'll NEVER happen to me!" (until it actually does happen to them....). Part of the human dynamic, I guess....

    Adam

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    What this petition is highlight to the WT that ex Jws are no threat. It shows that the writer of the petition did not know how to research First Amendment law.There is no mention of how Human Rights abuses are investigated by the Justice Department or the State Department. No documentation of similar cases. No references to law review articles by leading professors in the field.

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    The Attorney General would need to resign. This is antiAmerican at its very core. Did no one else see the elementary school films of the Pilgrims landing at Plymouth Rock?

  • adamah
    adamah

    BOTR said-

    This is antiAmerican at its very core. Did no one else see the elementary school films of the Pilgrims landing at Plymouth Rock?

    As a child growing up in a JW household, apparently I wasn't the only one who was compelled to change the channel whenever "Schoolhouse Rock" came on TV and tried to teach anything about how Satan's system of government works, so we never saw any of this kind of stuff:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xMHOBEYCXM

    Adam

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    I saw these films every year. We never graduated from the Revolutionary War. Maybe we saw it b/c of the Cold War. My parents would not object. Of course, we saw the Macy's Parade every Thanksgiving as a family. I was probably warned to stay off camera. If my gm saw me, she was watching an apostate show, too. If people are leaving the Watchtower now, they should learn the basic civics of their home country.

    I even had a colonial girl outfit and a cowgirl outfit. Cowboys and cowgirls scared me b/c of the Indian raids. If this is the best the "activist" former Witnesses can do, they should not be allowed to co-opt the terms. Maybe I was exposed to more than most former Witnesses. I would never raise my hand and volunteer to get out of class. It was embarassing enough. My parents were hardly neutral. I don't see how anyone could be neutral during WWII.

    As a matter of fact, a replica of the Mayflower was built during my childhoood. It visited some pier around New York City. My parents insisted I board. When I look back, I did not have typical Witness parents. I am glad.

  • EndofMysteries
    EndofMysteries

    Just about 1,400 now and rising.

    To those who say the shunning policy, etc, is all religious freedom and nobody is forced to do it, etc, here is what I have to say about that....

    If the religion was teaching that those who want God's favor MUST beat up gays, yet they aren't forcing it, you can bet the law would do something about that.

    The religion draws people in from LIES, lies and twisting, very evident in that on the website it makes it appear they don't shun ex members. Or nowhere in a bible study, in bible teach book, etc, do they teach that one must obey the GB. (it's quietly put in after one is attending meetings, from the WT's), etc.

    If a religion would not be tolerated to teach violence on people, or to teach must kill certain people, then I'm sure teaching emotional abuse/blackmail/deceit also can fall under illegal.

    If allowed to keep it, They should be forced and required to disclose fully the shunning policy and family publically. Not lie and twist it on the website so interested ones are tricked. It should clearly say those who become members, if in the future decide to leave, that all ex members are shunned. If they dissassociate (leave), or commit sin and they judge them not repentant, they are shunned.

    OR they should be forbidden from teaching emotional abuse/blackmail on others. If one doesn't believe in the religion, then forbid them from requiring members to shun them, especially own family members.

  • rawe
    rawe

    Hi Simon,

    "Think about it - there are very few situations where anyone is forcibly compelled to talk to someone else."

    Indeed that would be awful!

    However, I don't see that is the main issue with disfellowshipping. How should we feel, if Jehovah's Witnesses made the following public announcement: "So-and-so is an unrepentant wicked sexual pervert and should be strictly avoided?" Would that qualify as slander or should it be protected under freedom speech and freedom of religion? Should one's private religious views be the subject of public comment (even indirectly) by Witnesses? While the announcement Jehovah's Witnesses is benign, we know it is a coded message for what I said more directly. We also know the character of the individual is harmed the moment that announcement is made.

    Freedom of speech and freedom of religion are poweful concepts that are entrenched in both the constitution of Canada and USA. And rightly so, and thank goodness -- where would be on this forum if that were not so? Yet tests of the limits of how far religious leaders can use rhetoric to bring harm to individuals or classes of individuals do make it to court. The Janice Paul case being the latest one I'm aware of in the USA involving the Witnesses. More recently the Westboro Baptist Church has had their day in court (and won) regarding protesting military funerals.

    When police threated to out a young gay teen, the court ruled for the right of privacy over freedom of speech for the police.

    https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights_hiv-aids/court-rules-tragic-police-outing-gay-teen-violated-constitutional-rights-aclu-s

    Personally, I don't think Jehovah's Witnesses should be free to slander former members in the way they do -- but at the same time -- any cure I fear would be worse than the disease. Thus, in this case I probably won't sign the petition. Rather, I'll petition Jehovah's Witnesses directly, as I do each year, as part of the Shun Run. Asking them, respectfully, to discard these policies that bring so many, both members and non-members, harm.

    Cheers,

    -Randy

  • rebel8
    rebel8

    I'd never give my email address to anything from AAWA, the group that compromised the privacy of so many of us in the recent past.

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    I'd never give my email address to anything from AAWA, the group that compromised the privacy of so many of us in the recent past.....Rebel8

    .............

    .......................An AAWA Petition?!..

    http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff254/CDFingers/doublefacepalm.gif

    ................................................................................... photo mutley-ani1.gif ...OUTLAW

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit