Shunning legal since 1987

by TheWonderofYou 18 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  TheWonderofYou

  Legality[edit]

  In June 1987, the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld the Witnesses' right to shun those who fail to live by the group's standards and doctrines, upholding the ruling of a lower court, finding that "shunning is a practice engaged in by Jehovah's Witnesses pursuant to their interpretation of canonical text, and we are not free to reinterpret that text … The defendants are entitled to the free exercise of their religious beliefs … The members of the Church [she] decided to abandon have concluded that they no longer want to associate with her. We hold that they are free to make that choice."[99][100]

  Does this law really say shunning ? Is it cited correctly?
• 

  gone for good

  Anyone (or group) is free to shun anyone (or group) as they wish.

  As long as you remain a member of a group that practices religiously mandated shunning - you are obliged to accept your cults ecclesiastic authority to both shun and to be shunned in accordance with the dogma you yourself support as a member.

  The mistake JWs make is not quietly quitting the cult in advance of the cults judicial actions requiring the members participation in such distasteful acts. You join the Nazi party - you are obligated to act like a Nazi.

  A judicial committee cannot be formed in respect to a former member. And you are legally free to quit any religion at any time you chose.

  Stop making targets of yourselves - quit the f-----g cult now. Make a written record of the date to show the hounders when they finally track you down - they have no authority over you unless you grant it to them.
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  In the US, the Courts dare not "mess" with religious groups. It's that "Separation of Church and State" principle that has gone all amok, and thus unscrupulous quasi-religious groups have full run here to prey upon people (vs Pray for people).

  The first chink that I see ever happening in this national policy, is deciding that taxes various aspects of religion does not violate the policy. It could be argued that by giving religions a tax-free status the Gov't is showing them "favoritism" over all over groups unless they can PROVE they are 1st a CHARITY, by providing open financial records to support their claim as such.

  Doc
  
• 

  TheWonderofYou

  Gone for good: A judicial committee cannot be formed in respect to a former member. And you are legally free to quit any religion at any time you chose. Stop making targets of yourselves - quit the f-----g cult now. Make a written record of the date to show the hounders when they finally track you down - they have no authority over you unless you grant it to them.

  I like your tip: It is like over-rolling the cults procedure. Would be possible also in countries were the religion is state approved. Only resign in time at the proper authority.

  But wouldnt they "shun" me anyway if i would suddenly disappear. Would my family members than not stop greating and visiting me anyway? I am not sure. It is very risky.

  
  
  
• 

  freemindfade

  Here is my thing. Most of us. Especially born ins chose this fate before we were adults. Anyone baptized before 18 this should fall into a different space.
• 

  Listener

  The WTBTS is being challenged in Sweden because of some of their practices, including shunning. The org. is still fighting to be recognized as a religion and receive all the benefits that come with it, including taxation and Government Funding.

  Here's a link to further information

  http://www.upr-info.org/sites/default/files/document/sweden/session_21_-_january_2015/eajcw_-_european_association_of_jehovahs_christian_witnesses.pdf
  
• 

  DATA-DOG

  Wait a minute. The official JW website says that they don't shun? I'm confused?? Why go to court to defend your religious freedom to shun, if you don't shun??

  Jeepers, these religious things sure are confusing....

  DD
• 

  TheWonderofYou

  Right.. They say they dont shun offically, interesting.

  But the problem remains the same. I could not say to anyone I know in the congo , hey i dont believe in this things anylonger, but i like to sit here and listen.
  Either I go away or i will be expelled.

  They fought for their right to shun, but obviously the meant only "excommunication" and not the "no greating thing, the disgusting things"....?
  Because they say that they dont shun at all.
  Obviously the word "shun" is only falsely in the law text.

  But why did they not only speak of excommunication/DF withouth that unnecessary "shun"-touch incl add-ons like not greating eg.? Was it really necessary to shun that woman in america to avoid compensation for damages?

  Perhaps this former sister looked like a witch that should be shunned.
• 

  freemindfade

  Data, technically on jaydoubleyu.org it says they do shun. After some twisting of words and making it seem like you are free to leave, they then talk about disfellowshipping and do use the word shun
• 

  tim3l0rd

  Actually they do admit to shunning.

  From their FAQ:

  If, however, a baptized Witness makes a practice of breaking the Bible’s moral code and does not repent, he or she will be shunned or disfellowshipped.

  What they don't answer and spin is shunning of those who left and shunning of family members. While not saying that they don't shun family members, they present one situation where a family member would not be shunned. They say they don't shun ones who drift away but make no mention of ones who da.