Shunning is unloveing
The right to shun - wrong?
by Simon 120 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
steve2
What rankles me about the JW organization is its institutionalization of "chain" disfellowshipping. That is, you can be shunned by other JWs for not shunning those who have been disfellowshipped . In every other way you are a devoted JW, you mind your business and don't expect your brothers and sisters to change their minds, but your conscience allows you to speak to disfellowshipped Witnesses. If you continue doing so, you will also be shunned.
-
Simon
What rankles me about the JW organization is its institutionalization of "chain" disfellowshipping. That is, you can be shunned by other JWs for not shunning those who have been disfellowshipped
That's where the personal choice comes in. If enough people do it then the power simply dissipates. The only reason that shunning is powerful is because people hand over that power and right to choose.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"
Shunning is the ultimate "do nothing" - not even say hello.
-
TheWonderofYou
Simon:
...the personal choice comes in...
I agree that it depends much on the personal character, education, willigness to except other cultures and tolerance. The more information and dialog happens the better will be the personal choice, the personal hehave towards one who is disassociated, excommunicated or has other opinons.
The change will happen bottom up.
A big public interest about happenings in a minor religion cant be awaited. Who is interested in the social shunning that happens in the american Amish-cult?
So I think that it is the busines of those who suffered to highlight the sad consequences of shunning to the Organisation's leaders.
- Working together with humanitarian initatives and so getting stronger awareness of the matters like the human rights to have family ties even after a excommuncation case.
- Speaking about the News articles (Psychology today, Jamaica...., copying and sending to the congregations), this could stimulate a change.
- Partaking at scientific studies of international humanitarian organisations.
The only reason that shunning is powerful is because people hand over that power and right to choose.
I would compare that power with the power of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the power of thoughs said High Officer for Human Rights, Prince Zeid
-
Diogenesister
Simon Second, have you any idea what a real hate crime is? Not the PC nonsense that get's promoted by the right xenophobic media. Real hate crimes are way more than just calling someone a name.
Actually I would say its the leftwing pc brigade but anyway.Hate crime comes in many forms. At one end of the continuam there is actual bodily harm with intent perhaps "gay bashing" at the other name calling (maybe at those who dont share your religous beliefs)and hurtful behaviour which surely includes shunning.The results can be pretty devastating with shunning, particularly when it involves the young, old or witholding natural family interaction like seeing the grandchildren. Yes its not bombing but it has resulted in death through suicide.
The point is, like poor child protection policies its unethical for an organization to make rules compelling members to shun.
Of course the libertarian in us will revolt at the thought of more legislatation against any form of personal choice but we are talking about a charitable organization . Not so long ago many forms of behavour by an organization were assumed to be impossible to legislate around - corporate manslaughter being one that springs to mind. Perhaps an appropriate term for the WT 'chain'shunning policy would be 'corporate enforced bulling'. Manipulative enforced hurtful personal behaviour.
Of course they only have the power you allow them to have, but that doesn't mean its not wrong and it doesnt mean they cannot be 'encouraged'to look at and improve WT policies by various methods.
-
Simon
Actually I would say its the leftwing pc brigade but anyway
Yeah - it depends on your perspective. I was referring to the outrage hype that normally follows a report which you are correct, would more likely be liberal (hope that makes sense).
I think whenever you see a report along the lines of "police are investigating claims that this may have been a possible hate crime" then there is a good chance that it really isn't and it's someone hyping things up and trying to ramp up the "harm" they have suffered for a cause.
Genuine hate crimes are usually more clear cut and easier to label IMO.
When people make false claims it normally backfires and they lose sympathy. That's why I think we need to be careful of making claims that are too outlandish against the WTS.
If something is a hate-crime then sure, go for it, but otherwise I think it's better to publicize the hurtful and unloving behavior without trying to over-hype it.
-
Diogenesister
Berrygerry IMO, one of the absolutely most insane court decisions of all time was when the US Supreme Court decided that corporations are persons (and therefore have some rights ??? ).
I don't know anything about this or how they have specifically used this law in their favour but I can say that the opposite is also true. Its possible the same law may be used to bite corps like WT on the ass - for example as I mentioned the corporate manslaughter law.
I think your right that by not maintaining accepted public or govt standards they may well loose their qualifying charitable status or other priviledges.
-
Jeffro
Simon:
What would the legislation look like? How would it be worded to only apply to religious shunning?
There is no reason why such legislation would need to apply only to "religious shunning". It would apply to organizations that direct people to shun others.
Would it be of any value if people were still shunned? What would the penalties be?
Similar to other anti-discrimination laws.
Would it mean people who should be shunned couldn't be? (e.g. child molesters)
People should be given specific warnings about individuals who may pose a threat to society (or to vulnerable groups in society) and individuals can then make their own informed decisions about who they associate with, but that doesn't mean that certain people 'should' categorically be 'shunned'.
There's a big difference between "keep children away from A because he's a convicted child molester" and "don't talk to A because we said so".
-
berrygerry
I don't know anything about this or how they have specifically used this law in their favour but I can say that the opposite is also true.
The US has a very flawed view of corporations, which spills over into all institutions, including religion.
Corporations are NOT "persons," and should have few, if any, rights.
The consequential US decision is that directors and executives of corporations must ONLY do what is in the "best interest of the shareholders."
Hence, we then end up with "risk management," whereby business decision are SOLELY based on short-term monetary decisions (eg. Chrysler's refusal to abandon a known faulty hatch design, as well as refusing to recall a 25 to 50 CENT patch - resulting in numerous deaths - see page 8 of pdf http://websites.firecompanies.com/njiaai/files/2014/07/Daimler-Chrysler-Vehicle-Problems.pdf )
The film "The Corporation" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Corporation_%28film%29 ) rightly described them as psychopathic:"The Corporation attempts to compare the way corporations are systematically compelled to behave with what it claims are the DSM-IV 's symptoms of psychopathy, e.g., the callous disregard for the feelings of other people, the incapacity to maintain human relationships, the reckless disregard for the safety of others, the deceitfulness (continual lying to deceive for profit), the incapacity to experience guilt, and the failure to conform to social norms and respect the law. "
(Sound familiar?)
As was acknowledged by WT in the Aus RC, a person desiring to leave the WT corporation / religion faces an impossible choice.
No person should have to make that choice.
WTS is the epitome of a psychopathic entity.
WTS deserves old-world justice executed on murderous psychopaths.
-
Simon
I don't know anything about this or how they have specifically used this law in their favour but I can say that the opposite is also true. Its possible the same law may be used to bite corps like WT on the ass - for example as I mentioned the corporate manslaughter law.
Actually, I think this is one of the problems of "corporations as citizens". Not only do companies get the rights that should only belong to individuals thus putting them on equal terms (usually unequal give resources) but when the corporation is found guilty of something they *it* takes the blame.
But guess what ... you ain't sending a corporation to prison are you?
It ends up being a way for the officers of the company to pass off responsibility.
As berrygerry says, corporations focus on short-term profit and that can lead to risky behavior - faking task results with VW, not doing recalls when they should with others. In extreme cases I think GM was caught doing cost / risk analysis and deciding that it was more profitable to pay compensation for the deaths their bad design caused than do a recall.