End shunning or lose tax free status

kneehighmiah

Which would the watchtower choose if it came down to this in the United States or Europe? Losing tax free status would mean losing millions of dollars. Ending shunning means people would leave by the boatloads. Remember shunning probably hurts the ones forced to do it more than it hurts the ones on the receiving end. Most people wouldn't shun their own children if they didn't feel they had to. I think the warchtower would chose to end shunning. Always follow the money.

Julia Orwell

Neither. They would fight tooth and nail through the European court of human rights and whatever equivalent I'm the USA and elsewhere to keep both. They would cry to the UN like little spoiled brats that their rights to freedom of religion are being violated.

punkofnice

OK. I know this is just hypothetical buuuuut........

If there is truth in the changes in Poland then they'd do some spin like 'confessional sacrements' or something.

They are a cult and cults need to ensure outsiders and 'apostates(tm)' are kept away from the brainwashed r&f. They would put some spin on shunning, in fact they'd LIE like they normally do.

Theocratic Warfare Strategy = ***w07 2/1 p.6***

Every lie is an untruth, but not every untruth is a lie. Why not? A dictionary defines a lie as “an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive.” Yes, lying includes the intention to deceive someone. Hence, to speak an untruth unwittingly—such as giving someone incorrect facts or figures by mistake—is not the same as to tell a lie.

Moreover, we need to consider whether the person asking for information is entitled to a comprehensive answer. For instance, suppose Manfred had been asked the same questions by an executive of another company. Would Manfred have been obliged to tell him everything? Not really. Since that executive had no right to such information, Manfred would have had no obligation to provide it. Of course, even in this case, it would have been wrong for him to tell a lie.

NeonMadman

Obviously the Watchtower could end their shunning policies if they wished, just by issuing some "new light." From a legal standpoint, however, I'm not quite sure how you would be able to enforce any action against shunning. Would you require that individual Witnesses now spend time with people who have left the organization, whether they want to or not? How could you ever enforce such a requirement? What if they simply don't like the person, apart from any religious considerations?

Would you require that the Watchtower issue a statement repudiating the doctrine? What if they did? Couldn't shunning still be carried out as a "private conscience matter" (as, in fact, they would like you to think it is done now)? Wouldn't this set a dangerous precedent of government dictating what doctrines a religious group may and may not teach? Actually, I can see where interference by government of that sort could easily be a back door to the establishment of a state church.

The topic of government agencies somehow pressuring or forcing the Watchtower to "end shunning" comes up fairly often, but I can't imagine how the logistics of such a move would work, apart from some serious erosions of religious freedom that would negatively affect people of all religions.

Heaven

They would just lie about the shunning... and then keep doing it.

doinmypart

It is about money and control. They would keep their tax break and write an article "ending" shunning, BUT in practice continue shunning. Similar to how they handled the voting issue. Around 1999 they had some problem in regards to voting in some country, so they penned a QFR, here's a snippet:

w99 11/1 28-29
In view of the Scriptural principles outlined above, in many lands Jehovah’s Witnesses make a personal decision not to vote in political elections, and their freedom to make that decision is supported by the law of the land. What, though, if the law requires citizens to vote? In such a case, each Witness is responsible to make a conscientious, Bible-based decision about how to handle the situation. If someone decides to go to the polling booth, that is his decision. What he does in the polling booth is between him and his Creator.

Shortly after this article came out, the DO met with our BOE and told us there was no change, we do not vote. And then he went into a short Q&A letter from Branch. Here's a more recent quote from a 2008 publication:

lv pp. 212-215
What should a Christian do in lands where voting is compulsory or in a situation where feelings run high against those who do not go to the voting booth? Remembering that Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego went as far as the plain of Dura, a Christian, under similar circumstances, may decide to go to the booth if his conscience permits. However, he will take care not to violate his neutrality.

So I think they would handle it in a similar fashion; say one thing for the public while telling members something different. Shunning and DF'g are two separate things. The WTS will continue to DF members. They might adjust the shunning piece, make it less Draconian, but shunning is too powerful a tool for them to let it go.

DesirousOfChange

Couldn't shunning still be carried out as a "private conscience matter" (as, in fact, they would like you to think it is done now)?

That is in fact where I think the issue headed.

However, if your conscience misleads you into make bad decisions, you will be dealing with the elders.

First, loving counsel. Then, brazen conduct.

The shunning policy will be put on the shoulders of the individual -- and they better make the right decision!!!!

Doc

AlphaMan

If the Watchtower ends shunning they lose control of information the R&F is exposed to.....NOT going to happen.

Vidiot

kneehighmiah - "Losing tax-free status would mean losing millions of dollars. Ending shunning means people would leave by the boatloads."

Now there's a choice that would raise the GB's collective blood pressure.

EndofMysteries

Well when hitler and the nazi's started giving watchtower followers problems, Rutherford wrote a letter to hitler about how they were also against jews and shared common values.

End shunning or lose tax free status

Share this