Ray- yes it is a long read, sorry about the eyesight issue, but at least you can get an overview of the mindset that runs wt each day
If you ever Wondered why it is so HARD to Sue WT for being DFed- read this
by JT 31 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
caligirl
My take on this is that they are saying that upon baptism, one is entering a legal contract to submit to the rules of the organization and whatever consequences they choose to dole out. I look at this letter, and it tells me that since I was a minor when I was baptized, I was therefore unable to enter into any binding contract. Wouldn't that fact void on a technicality any implied consent to be governed by their rules or submit your life to them? I personally consider my baptism void simply because I was not given information with which to make an informed decision regarding what I was agreeing to, in addition to the fact that I was a minor. But I would think that in court, if they were up against someone who was a minor when giving this so called consent to submit to their rules, that the argument of entering a contract might be harder to win for them.
-
JT
My take on this is that they are saying that upon baptism, one is entering a legal contract to submit to the rules of the organization and whatever consequences they choose to dole out. I look at this letter, and it tells me that since I was a minor when I was baptized, I was therefore unable to enter into any binding contract. Wouldn't that fact void on a technicality any implied consent to be governed by their rules or submit your life to them? I personally consider my baptism void simply because I was not given information with which to make an informed decision regarding what I was agreeing to, in addition to the fact that I was a minor. But I would think that in court, if they were up against someone who was a minor when giving this so called consent to submit to their rules, that the argument of entering a contract might be harder to win for them.
your point is an excellent one about "Minors", and while you are probably correct that in most case law a child can't really be expected to be legally bound in a contract- but keep in mind we are talking about RELIGION and this is one area that the courts esp in the usa have been careful to avoid getting bogged down in the mud with and rightly so perhaps
to tell a church they got to speak to a man who commits adultry on his wife and 5 kids- is an area where the courts don't want to even tread- the courts have maintained that church policy and rules are not thier job-
unless there is some physical harm being done to you very little otherwise will be done-
they really don't reconize emotional damage done in most case- "My mother-in-law will not speak to me cause the church told her she couldn't"
in most courts they would laugh at that- like I WISH MY MOTHER-IN-LAW didn't speak to me is what they would perhaps be thinking-
my question is how would this play in some other country other than a western country=
would the courts allow the local branch to be sued if someone brought a charge of mental stress or something-
i know in most western countries it is very hard to due--
-
waiting
Hey JT.....so glad you didn't abandon us!
Regarding disfellowshipping, slander, defamation of character:
If it is established that there may be substance to the charges and evidence is produced showing that a serious sin actually may have been committed, the congregation's body of elders will assign a judicial committee, consisting usually of three elders, to handle the matter.
The judicial committee has the responsibility of protecting the congregation from the effects of a member's unscriptural conduct as well as helping a wrongdoer to mend his or her ways
That would be slander.....if the person doesn't have the elders prove that they are a scripturally serious sinner and wrongdoer.
If the person wishes to bring witnesses who can speak in his or her defense regarding the matter, the person may do so.
Wasn't Bill Bowen refused the right to have witnesses for his defense regarding the matter of his disfellowshipping?
D. In every situation where guilt of a wrongdoer is established, a primary endeavor of the judicial committee is to restore the wrongdoer.
It is the hope of the judicial committee that the wrongdoer will manifest genuine repentance, as indicated, for example, by producing "works that befit repentance." (Acts 26:20) Thus, the wrongdoer may be helped to 'make straight paths for his feet' thereafter.-Hebrews 12:13.
However, though the wrongdoer may wish to remain in the congregation, the wrongdoer may have become hardened in his or her course of wrong conduct and fail to respond to the efforts of the a elders who are acting in the capacity of a judicial committee to help this individual. Works befitting repentance may not be in evidence, nor may genuine repentance be apparent at the time of the hearing. In such cases it would be necessary for, the responsible elders to expel the unrepentant wrongdoer from the congregation, thus denying him or her fellowship with Jehovah's clean congregation. This would be done to protect other members of the congregation from the spiritually bad influence of the wrongdoer, safeguarding the moral and spiritual cleanness of the congregation and protecting its good name.-1 Corinthians 5:11-13.
Thus, a person disfellowshipped is a serious, unrepentant, wrongdoer.....in contrast to the persons inside "Jehovah's clean congregation." In other words, the disfellowshipped person is also a dirty sinner. The df'd person is also a bad influence for the moral and spiritual cleanness of the congregation. Only the people within the congregation have a good name.
The disfellowshipped person is a:
serious sinner
unrepentant wrongdoer
scripturally unclean
immoral
bad influence
bad name (reputation)
other people need to be protected from the df'd person
G. Announcement of disfellowshipping, When it becomes necessary to disfellowship one from the congregation, a brief announcement is made, simply stating that the person has been disfellowshipped.
No matter how brief the announcement..........the disfellowshipped person is now branded to all jw's for as long as he's out of the WTBTS as a serious sinner, unrepentant wrongdoer, scripturally unclean, immoral person who is a bad influence on clean people, and clean people need to be protected from this gross sinner.
Also, jw's have been known to tell outsiders that "so and so" is no longer in the congregation.......and that they were disfellowshipped, which is what happens to serious, unrepentant, sinners.
Yeah, Disassociation is much tidier for the WTBTS when they wish to dispose of a body.
-
hawkaw
The way you win the "shunning" battle in common law tort cases, as Motte-Trille v. Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society Inc. of Canada and many other church cases teaches you, is using "due process".
If a church or similar organization "df" a member or agent or employee without proper due process (ie follow their rules) then the "court" can review the case and can award damages.<p> The organization owes you a "duty" to follow their own rules before kicking you out the door. The harm of course is found if family members and friends are shunning you and your business interests etc. as per the Watchtower's rules.
And yes the WTS legal department in Canada is well aware of this serious problem and I have provided the case law to those who are actually going forward with a pretty big lawsuit sometime ago.
Have a great day everyone.
hawk
-
goofy
For some reason all this legal talk and preceding of the society brings to my mind a scripture test stating to the affect that "You are no longer under law but under love" hummmm.....did someone forget to tell the society this before they spent all that money on sending their attorneys to law school so that they can keep the followers under law? and fight by means of the courts and laws? Hey, they could have saved a lot of money if they knew that scriptural passage and knew that law was done away with and because of Jesus we came under love. Anyone want to share that passage with Brooklyn? Besides why does this brother get to go to college and I could not?????? Why is it wrong for me and not for this brother???
-
JT
WAITING __
your point is well taken, but notice what you mentioned:
and this is where the "Legal" problem lies, the courts have no desire or intention of determing what consitutes any of the above- AND because of that reason it makes it so difficult to sue esp here in the USAThe disfellowshipped person is a:
serious sinner
unrepentant wrongdoer
scripturally unclean
immoral
bad influence
bad name (reputation)
other people need to be protected from the df'd person
-
rocketman
Waiting, I like the way you broke it down. When put in that manner, a dfing does start looking a lot like slander, or at least an implied slander, perhaps.
-
JT
The way you win the "shunning" battle in common law tort cases, as Motte-Trille v. Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society Inc. of Canada and many other church cases teaches you, is using "due process".
If a church or similar organization "df" a member or agent or employee without proper due process (ie follow their rules) then the "court" can review the case and can award damages.<p> The organization owes you a "duty" to follow their own rules before kicking you out the door. The harm of course is found if family members and friends are shunning you and your business interests etc. as per the Watchtower's rules.
Hawk
makes a very interesting point, i was not aware of canada law allows for that and in such countries as yours folks should GO FOR IT-
notice though you mentioned the following:
"due process".
If a church or similar organization "df" a member or agent or employee without proper due process (ie follow their rules) then the "court" can review the case and can award damages.<p> The organization owes you a "duty" to follow their own rules before kicking you out the door.
and this is what a Judical case does-- follow a certain format or process- requiring the wt thru it's reps the elders to TAKE ACTION, and for that reason as has been discussed here MANY MANY TIMES the wt will continue to move issues that have for used been handled thru the Judical process leading to DFing to the new and improved process of DAing which requires absolutely no effort or action on THIER PART- IN FACT IT IS DEFINED AS YOU TAKING THE ACTION- and when a person sits down and puts PEN TO PAPER AND MAILS THAT LETTER ALONG with a ton of wt errrors and flipflop- the wt legal dept has determined that the neccesary steps have been taken to relieve them of lawsuits
as i have mentioned before I firmly believe that the wt based on it's current trackrecord, will continue to move more and more DFing issues over to the DAing column to keep the local elders from having to appear that they are the ones TAKING ACTION AT THE BEHEST of wt,
The harm of course is found if family members and friends are shunning you and your business interests etc. as per the Watchtower's rules.
once again i fully agree, but the problem once again is can the courts step in cause your mommy and my mommy won't talk to us-
with the combination of freedom of association and assembly wt is able to hide behind that law very safely
most juries would have a hard time "legally" feeling compelled to make somebody's Uncle talk to them , when in thier own life exp families don't talk to each other for years many times over all kinds of issues:
Money, inherting the family land, married in the wrong family, ran off with your bro ugly wife, didn't get the Bass Boat when daddy die, Rover the Dog got all the family money in a trust fund along with only one sibling and the rest of the kids got a Lump of coal in a Macy's shopping bag after the lawyer read the last will and testament-
so to force folks to talk to other folks is a legal nightmare-
-
JT
rocketmen says
Waiting, I like the way you broke it down. When put in that manner, a dfing does start looking a lot like slander, or at least an implied slander, perhaps.
you hit the nail on the head- and esp if the issue is going to the miltary, this for the society is a major concern for I was told by a Heavy at Bethel that in some countries it is viewed as the wt is telling young men to commit treason or undermining the gov- they view the ACT of 3 men calling in a young man to tell him he will be excommunicated and no one will talk to him if he joins the army as "FORCE" yet the legal desk has been very successful in instituting this concept back in sept of 81 called DAing i was at bethel and the time and some of you may recall Dr Dixon the bethel doctor, he had a fleshly bro who worked in the Writing Dept and recall him telling our New boy Entrance School the letter and calls they got from Inactive JW or ones who had just missed alot of meetings folks were calling them up to tell them- Sis Johnson since you have missed meeting for the last 4/6 weeks for example then sister you have DAed yourself and i will have to treat you like a DFed person He told us that many jw misunderstood what and how DAiing actually was to work so they Boys in the Service Dept had to work out the bugs- so the wt is able to get the same result without the work or legal backlash