The right to shun - wrong?

by Simon 120 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  TheWonderofYou

  The right to shun - Wrong?

  No, I like to shun JW, mormons and adventist all the time when I see them walking around or stand somewhere or when they look away as if they would not see me, or if they are in preaching mode, because I am really not in the right mood to talk with these people at all and to hear their messages, I am never in the mood to talk with them. I dont like to discuss. The most I sometimes do if a JW looks at me I say: hello, but only few of them smirk back without greeting of course. Only two or three former JW friends had a longer conversaion with me mostly when I met them in a shopping center, over the last period of 30 years being away. So the only way out or to live in peace is to shun them.

  BTW Nobody, not even my wife and my 2 daughters know that I once was a JW. Nobody else, only my mum and you here on board.

  The same shunning I do with a guy who seems to be a fan of salafist. 2 years ago I began to talk with him at a training. He lately told me that it is urgent to change religion and have the only true religion islam, because i could go to hell if I would not change religion. He handed me out a book of an egyptian source about the islam. He lives near to me, saw him then going around on the street handing out free korans and carrying a big progaganda on his back intitled "The true religion" (thats a german street service of salafist ) now I am shunning him too. In our town handing out korans has been prohibited.
• 

  Pistoff

  The OP doesn't address the difference between our individual choices to avoid someone, and belonging to a group who mandates that all members shun based on leadership's decisions.

  That is a huge distinction.

  Policy vs individual choice.

  IMO, that is the argument; we all make choices to avoid someone, but is it legal or ethical to allow a star chamber to mandate the isolation of people they deem dangerous, and enforce it across the entire membership.
  

  A second issue is the level of shunning; we may avoid someone's company as individuals but we seldom refuse to look at them, say hello or acknowledge that they are alive, even family members.

  The WT is moving closer to enforcing a complete shunning of those they deem offensive.
• 

  TD

  My position, if I were a lawyer, is "what law has been broken"?

  Simon, are you familiar with the concept of "Public policy?"
  
• 

  Simon

  The OP doesn't address the difference between our individual choices to avoid someone, and belonging to a group who mandates that all members shun based on leadership's decisions.

  Doesn't everyone have the choice of whether to ignore the mandate or not?
  
• 

  TD

  Freedom of choice and the freedom to exercise it are two different things. The former is an abstract and the latter is a tangible.

  In the movie, The Godfather, Michael Corleone tells a story about a man who was given a choice: In ten seconds, either his signature would be on a check or his brains would be on the check.

  What had been taken away from that man was not his freedom of choice, because he was still free to choose and accept the consequences, however messy they may have been. What had been taken away was his ability to exercise his freedom of choice without adverse consequences.

  That is an extreme example, but anytime a third party attempts to force a person into a particular choice via coercive measures, that person's ability to exercise freedom of choice is being restricted

  Heck. Even the Jehovah's Witnesses have commented on this distinction in defense of their use of the term, "Enforced celibacy" in connection with the Catholic priesthood.
  
• 

  GLTirebiter

  There is a difference between being free to avoid those we would rather not deal with and being compelled to shun somebody we otherwise would want to associate with. "Freedom of Association" is based upon mutual choice; the WTBTS policy is a compulsion enforced by a third party.
  
• 

  Ucantnome

  i wasn't much good at shunning.
• 

  Simon

  So is the choice we have to shun someone else or else be shunned ourselves?

  It's a little like "the box" movie. Do you trust someone else to make the right choice or do you press the button?

  Of course the choice is difficult - standing up for what is right and doing the right thing often are.

  But should "I have to follow orders" be a legitimate excuse for following them?
• 

  Xanthippe

  It's different for every family isn't it? Mine don't use the necessary family business except for funerals. They could stretch a point much more if they wanted to but I think they choose not to because they still want to punish me.

  From what I read some of the guys on here have family that go above and beyond the WTS rules because they are naturally people who hold a grudge.

  I do agree with Simon that there is a certain amount of choice here and some families seem to inflict pain because that's the way they have decided to be in their lives.
• 

  Simon

  they choose not to because they still want to punish me

  I think we often underestimate the capacity for families to be complete dicks. Sometimes the shunning is an excuse for them to be cruel, not the cause of it.

  Of course all cases are different - it doesn't apply to all.