Doing the Right Thing, Making a Choice (shunning)

by Simon 71 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Giordano

  I am passionate about this issue of shunning as well.......The responsibility lies with the WTBTS almost totally. It has a draconian policy that enforces it's DF DA policy by threatening additional punishment for anyone baptized who does not shun. There are no what ifs or possibilities or exceptions. You can in turn be DF if you are known to be in contact with a DF or DA person repeatedly and not engaged in 'family business' whatever the hell that means.

  when religious groups shun their members, more is at stake than the religious freedom of the group. Each member of the group has free exercise rights at least as compelling as the group that shuns them. The test of Sherbert v. Verner' 75 should be applied with this guiding principle in mind. When courts ignore the free exercise rights of individuals and look only at the religious claims of groups, they elevate the group's religion over the individual's religion. This is a dangerous path to follow. It gives religious groups virtually unfettered coercive power over their members and former members and blocks dissent and doctrinal development.

  http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3827&context=penn_law_review

  As discussed previously they use coercion to enforce their policy. Coercion is a criminal act meaning it is against the law of most every country .......which in my opinion makes the Society a criminal organization.

  As practiced by some of the religions that shun...... every one gets punished including the person who sinned or DA, including their close family with a lack of contact. And the shunning punishment continues for life even for non scriptural reasons like smoking etc.

  So this organization denies a person the right of free speech as well as the right to close family ties.

  I expect that we will see tort reform that will be aimed at shunning since it clearly is a denier of the right of freedom of religion which means you can pick and choose another religion should you want to. It also imply's freedom from a religion.
  

  If you asked anyone in the belief could you torture a JW sinner they would answer............. NO! But shunning is a form of torture and the law will start to catch up to this form of torture.
• 

  Simon

  Insofar as I'm concerned it is morally acceptable for one person to shun another if the individual knows precisely the conduct at issue and has made a personal choice to shun based on that conduct.

  I agree, I was just trying to point out that it muddies the water and may turn the discussion into something else, i.e. what crimes are valid, whether it's about making the crime known etc...

  But, it just got too painful and I got more and more detached. Finally, I had to let go so I could focus on my own family.

  Sadly, there is never going to be even close to 100% success rate. But the more we can make people make the right choice, the more bricks come out of the wall and the more it weakens.

  I think it depends on how much the individual believes that the shunning rule comes from God or not. How they perceive the GB and elders... do they speak from God and therefore should be obeyed. Or are they just imperfect men and we should follow what we believe ourselves to be right or not.

  Yes, as Marvin says - this is not about whether they have the right to shun for valid reasons. But it is about making them aware of the choice and that they are making it. Instead of shirking the responsibility at least if we make them think about and admit the reasons there may be a chance the realize that they are simply following men, don't know why and are making a bad choice.
• 

  nicolaou

  The ones that believe God is working through the elders, then they must be obeyed, as disobeying them is tantamount to disobeying God.

  Kindly make the point that they still have a choice and must still take responsibility for that choice. According to that mostly fictional work, the Bible, Abraham was told directly by God to kill his child - Abraham had a choice and he blew it.

  It's no defence to say God and/or his representatives must be obeyed, obedience is a choice.
• 

  Simon

  I am passionate about this issue of shunning as well.......The responsibility lies with the WTBTS almost totally. It has a draconian policy that enforces it's DF DA policy by threatening additional punishment for anyone baptized who does not shun.

  As I said in the OP, it's not excusing or minimizing the WTS stance ... but having them 100% responsible helps anyone how exactly? What changes?

  I think it makes the shunning easier for people to conduct.

  As discussed previously they use coercion to enforce their policy. Coercion is a criminal act meaning it is against the law of most every country .......which in my opinion makes the Society a criminal organization.

  Unfortunately, whatever our opinion doesn't stand up in a court of law and this has been found to be legal many times. It is not going to be changed by the courts any time soon IMO.

  So this organization denies a person the right of free speech as well as the right to close family ties.

  Free speech doesn't mean anyone is going to force someone to listen to what you want to say. Trying to make it so would mean the same laws would force everyone to listen to the JW message too.

  How can the organization deny the right to family ties? Does it have the power to grant them do they? No - only the family does. It is their choice and they should be reminded of that.

  If you asked anyone in the belief could you torture a JW sinner they would answer............. NO! But shunning is a form of torture and the law will start to catch up to this form of torture.

  It is not torture of a kind that anyone will act on and will never be stopped by the courts. If you think it can, come up with some legislation that you think would be solid and could be passed.

  I'm not saying it's right or good, just what the situation is. I think the only way to make progress is to stop these attempts at making it illegal because it's simply never going to happen in the current climate and focus instead on the people we can influence - the friends and family that decide to shun. They are after all the ones doing the shunning that we have a hope of convincing.

  Lots of other religions do far worse things and there is nothing being done to change those - why do we perpetuate this fantasy that somehow a couple of JWs not talking to each other is of paramount importance to the world? It's important to the people concerned but isn't going to be changed by any legislation IMO.

  That's why I think attacks on the WTS for shunning are rather pointless and they at least do no good but possibly actually do harm because of the reasons I've already tried to describe.
• 

  Simon

  The ones that believe God is working through the elders, then they must be obeyed, as disobeying them is tantamount to disobeying God.

  That would be the thing to attack - the idea that Elders are god's spokespeople. Ask if the elders have ever done or said the wrong thing ... then ask if that means god did it?

  It's not hard to drive a bus through the idea that elders are inspired and infallible and must always be obeyed. There are even scriptures of people rightly disobeying the divinely appointed rulers of the day who were doing the wrong thing.

  What need is there for a bible-trained conscience if they simply have to do what the elders say?
• 

  talesin

  I think there are are least two types of people who shun. There are those that do it because of brainwashing, WT and family pressure - they suffer a lot of remorse, because they are 'forced' to go against their natural instincts. I empathize and feel sorrow for them.

  Comversely, we have the natural sociopaths and narcissists, the abusers, who USE the WT, as do pedophiles, as a cover-up and excuse for their own inclinations towards abuse. They deserve to be exposed for what they are: abusers hiding in a cult, who find easy victims in their children, mates and 'friends'.

  If you have a mother/father/family like that, don't feel guilty because you can't 'forgive' them. In the JWS, as in any cult or closed group, sociopaths will thrive. Be HAPPY they are not part of your life. Realizing this, makes it easier to see and forgive those true 'sheeple' who are just naive, and to know that the 'brothers and sisters' who were kind to YOU when you were growing up, were sincere. Does that make any sense?

  tal ; )
• 

  Xanthippe

  I totally agree that they are choosing to shun. People have refused to hurt or give away their families under pain of terrible torture. Following orders is no excuse.

  Sometimes they won't discuss what they are doing and just expect us to accept our 'punishment'. When they do this, as my family have done, then I think it's time to break ties.

  There are consequences to hurting people. They have to accept these consequences or at the very least we have to show them that they don't get away with cruelty. Being normal and reacting normally to appalling treatment is hopefully the way to reach their authentic self, if that is still possible.
• 

  talesin

  Xan, i recently found out that my mother entered a mental institution, when I finally said "enough!" (albeit in a kind way) to her shunning.

  As I said to my room mate "I guess she couldn't handle it when the truth came up and slapped her in the face."
  
  You are absolutely correct!

  xx

  tal
• 

  Actigall Ur

  @Simon- Well said. As I wrote in another post, this topic is close to my heart because I shunned my sister for 5 years. I made that choice. It was so wrong and evil but I was brainwashed. FU(K THIS CULT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  But it is about making them aware of the choice and that they are making it. Instead of shirking the responsibility at least if we make them think about and admit the reasons there may be a chance the realize that they are simply following men, don't know why and are making a bad choice.

  I've had some success speaking with JWs over the years on this very basis.

  In one instance a JW mentioned to me how hard it was to shun a particular individual. I responded saying" I could understand why they felt that way." This prompted a question to me asking "Why do you say that?" I responded by pointing out the biblical model does in each case of a disfellowshipping (borrowing WTS nomenclature) have elders sharing what act the individual is being shunned for, and when we don't have this information it's much harder to find closure to the event because we are left wondering what happened, why and whether the individual really did something they should be shunned over.

  That prompted a second question of "Don't you trust elders to decide these things." This brought a speedy response of "No. I don't. I've seen too much to be that naive. If I'm going to shun someone then I have know know what they did and why. Only then will I take on the responsibility of whatever harm might be caused by me shunning a person."