Why Are JWs Allowed To Ignore Immigration Laws?

by ErieGuy 18 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  ErieGuy

  We all know how the WTS loves to toot their own horn about how JWs are the most law abidding citizens in the world. So then, why does the WTS tolerate (encourage by its own inaction) the continuous ignorance of immigration laws?

  I have personally observed a whole host of illegal former Canadians, Mexicans, and Central/South Americans in congregations scatttered throughout the U.S. Is the withholding of "privileges" sufficient conduct by those God told to obey ALL laws not conflicting wih his own? Surely, JWs are not allow to pick and choose?
• 

  ozziepost

  Downunder, there are many illegal aliens who are becoming Dubs.

  The Society's position changed almost ten years ago and their attitude is now that this is purely a matter for the secular authorities. The congregations are not to get involved. So long as the Dub who is an illegal has advised the authorities of their position, they are qualified for "privileges", such as pioneer, elder, ministerial servant, in the congregations. Some have been appointed.

  Cheers, Ozzie
• 

  ErieGuy

  I suppose there are two separate issues here.

  One is the case where an already "illegal alien" is converted, and the other is where an already JW ignores a country's immigration laws to become an "illegal alien".

  I have personally seen both cases. I suppose that the greater percentage is probably "illegals" becoming JWs, but my own firsthand contacts have been JWs becoming "illegals".
• 

  freeman

  I personally know of a JW from the Dominican Republic that married someone just to get into this country. In fact the person he married and then latter divorced is his own half sister, using a loophole (READ LYING) to get around immigration laws. However when he became a naturalized citizen he took a different oath of allegiance just for JWs because the standard oath offended his conscience. Elders did nothing and he still brags about how he put one over on the INS.

  GAG, PUKE!

  Freeman
• 

  simplesally

  Actually Ozzie, they are allowed to become baptized but are not allowed to hold priveleges other than that of a regular publisher. No mike handling, no ms or pioneers.

  They base their stance on allowing one to become baptized on the letter from Paul to Philemon. The slave Onesimus, a fugitive, was allowed baptism even though in violation of the Roman law at the time. He was a runaway slave. Therefore, they allow Christian dedication and baptism (considered requirements from Jehovah, obeying God's Law, if one is to be a servant of God). But to have privileges, one must be above reproach even in the eyes of secular authorities....hence no privileges.
• 

  ozziepost

  G'day Simplesally,

  I don't like to contradict, but what you state is the OLD position here downunder.

  I had first-hand knowledge of this psoition being changed after representation from the Australia Branch to the GB around 10 years ago. It was conveyed to all BOE by letter.

  Following this, many gained "privileges".

  Cheers, Ozzie

  Edited by - ozziepost on 2 September 2002 18:54:6
• 

  freeman

  I did a Spiritual Warfare thing on my wife this morning using this newspaper article. I got her to agree and say how bad is was that we taxpayers would be footing the bill for these illegal immigrants that get hurt here in the USA. How bad it was that everyone is made to pay for these people that have no respect for the immigration laws, and the laws of our land. She was shaking her head agreeing with me 100%. And then...and then...

  Then I dropped the bomb on her when I informed her that the surgeons had to be extra careful so the guy would not bleed to death because as a JW he refused blood.

  WOW if you could have seen her face. I know, I know, Im very bad, but I just cant help it; the devil made me do it!

  Freeman

  Edited by - freeman on 2 September 2002 20:4:32
• 

  LoyalLeon

  The change in policy came also to Europe 10 yrs ago.

  But by communication via COs the former rules are now applied again.

  LL
• 

  ozziepost

  The change in policy came also to Europe 10 yrs ago.

  But by communication via COs the former rules are now applied again.

  That''s very interesting, Leon. Can anyone else confirm this? Say in the USA?

  Cheers, Ozzie
• 

  ErieGuy

  My understanding is that U.S. illegal aliens had "privileges" removed in the early 1990s. That was from an October 1995 conversation with a California elder, and was supposedly confirmed about one year ago by a Florida elder. It would be nice if someone could verify or correct.