How to sue the WT over shunning policy. It CAN happen! (page 17)

MeanMrMustard

@poopie:

The Constitution binds government, not private institutions or individuals - “Congress shall make no law....”

That is, you are allowed to purposefully shut someone out of your life. That might make you a jerk, or it might not (maybe you consider the person a jerk). But in any case, people have that right.

In the end, this boils down to your family. The rules of the group were set out long before they joined. They have the right to speak with you, to invite you over, to eat with you. They just choose not to because they are convinced their religion is right and you are wrong. They chose the religion over family. They are convinced God wants it that way. Don’t take away their agency in this.

Also, we should minimize OUR own agency in this matter. We made our choices. At one point we all got baptized. If you were a minor and made that choice, can you honestly say that you didn’t see and understand what disfellowshipping really was? Can you honestly say you didn’t witness first hand the consequences of leaving?

And more importantly, don’t run to the government, feeling hurt, looking for blood, and advocate for a legal precedent that undermines freedom of association.

StephaneLaliberte

People have the right to shun whoever they want.

The issue with JWs, is that only a minority would actually put it in practice if it was considered a conscience matter. We all know that “left to the conscience” is synonymous with “Yes! You can do that!” to most JWs.

When the WT presents the shunning practice to the courts and tell them that it is a personal religious practice that must be protected, they are lying. People who do not comply with the rule or simply talk against it can be excommunicated and become victims of shunning. If JWs want to prove that this is indeed what individual JWs want, they will need to make it a conscience matter.

Sadly, the only way for this to happen is likely government intervention.

StephaneLaliberte

Also, we should minimize OUR own agency in this matter. We made our choices. At one point we all got baptized. If you were a minor and made that choice, can you honestly say that you didn’t see and understand what disfellowshipping really was? Can you honestly say you didn’t witness first hand the consequences of leaving?

I saw and practiced disfellowshipping as a minor, and I was too young at the time to understand what it really was and what were the consequences.

StephaneLaliberte

don’t run to the government, feeling hurt, looking for blood, and advocate for a legal precedent that undermines freedom of association.

Please explain how preventing the JWs from ENFORCING the shunning practice (that is, excommunicate people who do not practice it) would undermine their freedom of association. Then compare this to the freedom of association of the people being shunned by their entire social circle all at once.

Please be cautious of getting lost in the terminology: For JWs, excommunication, which should be a basic right for any association, goes hand in hand with shunning. This is what causes problem and makes it abusive.

JC323

Stephane you constantly state that if only the court would see it. I have shown you a number of cases where the courts have seen it. In the exact way that you want them to see it and each time they turn it down.

StephaneLaliberte

JC323: All I see is that several judgements rely on the judgement made in the Paul vs WT case. If you actually look at that case, you will see that they asserted that the shunning teaching is religious freedom, they did not discuss anything about enforcing it.

Also, that judgement was made 40 years ago

1) when Bullying and Harrassment was not taken as seriously as it is today.

2) They also didn't have access to scientific studies concerning the practice of shunning

3) The case that they had in front of them was a very poor representation on the impact of shunning.

I still believe that there is a difference between the teaching and the enforcing of it.

How to sue the WT over shunning policy. It CAN happen!

Share this