I am posting a link as to being legally bound to JW rules at time of baptism. I only did a quick skim, but what I gathered is interesting, and what it says about 1985 may be of use to some hoping to just fade and not be bothered. In 1985, the questions were changed at baptism for legal purposes so they could have causation to defend themselves should you decide to sue for whatever reason. ( in other words, you legally agreed they can do as they wish with you after 1985 ) check out the link...I didn't have time to absorb all of it...https://www.nairaland.com/3846473/verbal-legal-contract-called-baptism
1985 and baptism...I wish I had read this before today
by enoughisenough 34 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
truth_b_known
Interesting.
I was baptized after 1985 and the newer legalized questions were administered to me. I do have an interesting question to add to the discussion -
What if the baptismal candidate was a minor at the time of baptism and unable to give legal consent to enter into a contract with a corporation?
-
Lee Marsh
They don't care about the age of majority. They just want numbers and slaves
-
Foolednomore
I like to see them try an enforce it. They can kiss my azz!
-
Sea Breeze
It doesn't really matter. I have friends who grew up JW and didn't get baptized. They are shunned just the same as if they were baptized and faded or got disfellowshipped.
This is what is so hard to understand because it is so contrary to nature: If you grow up in a JW family you WILL get dumped by your practicing JW parents. I know there are exceptions, but I don't personally know of any.
The WT is God to practicing JW's for all practical purposes. Remember, they are appointed over all of God "belongings". That means everything including you. -
BettyHumpter
What were they afraid of being sued for? It's not illegal to cut people out of your life. Was it the public announcement part? Defamation of character or something?
They don't care about the age of majority. They just want numbers and slaves.
They may not care, but that doesn't change the fact that a minor cant enter into a legal contract. I think. -
enoughisenough
foolednomore, what makes you think it isn't enforced? they can kick you out if you don't abide by the rules. If you disassociate, the R and F treat you like scum...the only way to get out unscathed is to fade, which if you stay in the same place isn't that easy.( watched a video the other day of an old sister, who didn't go to the invited judicial meeting and later learned she had been df. The way I read it is those who got baptized 1985 and after unquittedly accepted a legal agreement with the JW-accepting the practices of JW.
-
BettyHumpter
"watched a video the other day of an old sister, who didn't go to the invited judicial meeting and later learned she had been df. The way I read it is those who got baptized 1985 and after unquittedly accepted a legal agreement with the JW-accepting the practices of JW".
I'm still not getting it. What legal remedy did a pre-1985 person have?And why would it matter? You can't sue someone into being friendly with you... -
Smiles
Even if some commitment from a child, such as religious baptism, is nonbinding to the child, it may eventually become binding if that child willingly & knowingly carries on with that commitment into adulthood.
Generally, for an underage person to nullify out of a commitment, that person must seek release while still under the minimum age of legal consent.
This is another reason why JW parents and guardians grooming children into an underaged baptismal commitment to WT corp is an appalling loophole of society.
Even if this is explained to a child, children cannot fully comprehend the potential future ramifications of JW baptism.
WT is nonetheless overjoyed to exploit young children for the sake of membership and "salvation", despite there being no clear evidence of child baptism practices recorded in the bible.
Sickening
-
enoughisenough
BettyHumpter ....
The introduction of the second baptismal question - “Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah's Witnesses in association with God's spirit-directed organization - was designed by watchtower lawyers. The watchtower introduced this question to protect themselves legally in case of lawsuit from those who become subject to their shunning policies and seeks to restrain them. It was simply design in such a way that members cannot simply leave them without either being disfellowshipped or disassociated, with the whole object of humiliating any that leaves and shunning them.
It is interesting to note that those Jehovah’s Witnesses who were never administered the 1985 question can leave the organization without them forcing their shunning policies on them. The individual simple needs to remind the elders that they never told the 1985 oaths. ( copied and Pasted)If I had read that before, I would not have written a disassociation letter. You can't make people be friendly towards you, but you may be able to keep them from shunning you. I would have come up with a different strategy. ( not sure what and it doesn't matter now )