When you are 10 years old, contrary to what the WT teaches, you are not old enough to make life-long commitments, you cant decide to join a religion, a political party you cant legally in many places sign a contract. You need your parents or legal guardians to do it for you or on your behalf.Well your example in the OP implied parental consent? But it isn't a lifelong commitment. You can leave. They can't hold you to any promise made when you do leave. If this was a mobile phone contract, you'd be right. But it's not seen in that way in the law. It's a private members' club or a sports club. You join. You leave. Morally, absolutely you're right because the consequences of leaving some religions are so grim. But that's not the same thing as how the law sees it because ignoring people isn't illegal, and you're not forced to remain inside if you choose to leave. Just saying how it is really, fully empathise with the point you're making.
Mephis
JoinedPosts by Mephis
-
32
legal action to Baptism of minor annulled?
by cyberjesus inlet's imagine that a 10 year old gets baptized.
parents split and kid never goes back to the hall again.
15 years later kid celebrates christmas and gets df since some dub saw him celebrating.
-
-
Mephis
-
46
Should doctors tell JW patients that there is disagreement about Watchtower's blood policy.
by Lee Elder inthis has been a controversial issue among doctors and medical ethicists.
i think it basically comes down to the fact that physicians have a responsibility to establish the presence of informed consent.
is it really possible for a person to give informed consent if they are not accurately informed?.
-
-
Mephis
Have seen that correspondence before. Still not sure what I think. Slimboyfat covers several of the things which it makes me consider.
I have no problem with medical staff trying to find ways round the issue with treatments. And I really have no problem with even providing information to patients to present a different opinion. Just with this issue, I'm not sure how effective it will be to hand out something which the JW will label apostate, and trigger the local JW blood issue fire brigade to increased efforts.
This is built up as modern-day martyrdom for JWs so I'd think finding ways to ensure privacy for the patient/doctor discussion on options may be more effective to find out if there is flexibility for that individual beyond what Brooklyn permits. An honest chat on what blood is and whether they knew seems fine, but ultimately it's always going to be in the patient's hands without a court order.
-
32
legal action to Baptism of minor annulled?
by cyberjesus inlet's imagine that a 10 year old gets baptized.
parents split and kid never goes back to the hall again.
15 years later kid celebrates christmas and gets df since some dub saw him celebrating.
-
-
Mephis
if the wt refuses can this be taken to court?
Brass tacks with baptism is that in common law countries it's seen in the same way as joining your local swimming club or golf club. The courts can be asked to make a ruling if the rules of the club aren't followed, but, providing there's nothing illegal going on, then it won't interfere with the application of those rules.
In terms of consent, it's not only the minor expressing consent but also the parental consent too. You can't undo what's been done really, unless it's part of the rules of the club. It's not seen in the same way as a business contract. It's a consensual relationship which ends when it ends. They can't take you to court for not following your baptism vow, you can't take them to court for saying it.
-
14
ultimatum stop the practice of shunning or lose your charity status.
by joe134cd injust curious what would wt do if a government said reform your policy on shunning or you will lose your charity status.
we will also be monitoring your reforms and there will be consequences if not brought up to our standards.
-
-
Mephis
They were meant to have functional child protection policy already, but is this the third time the Charity Commission are onto them about it?
They dissemble and doublespeak their way out of it. One of the big things which came out of ARC, for me, was outsiders who could penetrate through the hazy statements to how things were done and what needed to change.
Personally agree that the 'public good' test does need revision for charitable status. But I do feel slightly queasy about the thought of JWs doing cackhanded outreach work with vulnerable people, because that would seem a logical response to any changed requirements.
-
13
Has Watchtower financial strategy taken a very dark turn?
by slimboyfat inas shepherdless pointed out on another thread, the watchtower business model of using free labour to produce and sell books and magazines for profit started to break down when charging for the literature ended in 1990, and has now begun disintegrating completely in the face of the internet and declining donations.
over this same period there has been a noted increase in hardline rhetoric on disfellowshipping and pushing early baptism.
might these hardline trends actually be related to their money woes?
-
-
Mephis
Agree with Xanthippe. Think it's a consequence of ramping up the control method rather than the intention of doing it. Don't think it makes it any less cynical or dark for being that. I never liked how they pushed the legacy stuff onto older people in the 80s and 90s, that part of it has been there for a while, and I felt for those who'd been told not to marry and/or not to have kids and who were left alone with just the borg to pass things onto. -
14
ultimatum stop the practice of shunning or lose your charity status.
by joe134cd injust curious what would wt do if a government said reform your policy on shunning or you will lose your charity status.
we will also be monitoring your reforms and there will be consequences if not brought up to our standards.
-
-
Mephis
In Britain? They'd run to European bodies/courts screaming that their religious freedoms were being harmed. Much as they have been doing about Sweden refusing to give them funding as a religious order there. I couldn't see them changing policy in a meaningful sense - they'll fudge things to a point, but not to any meaningful change (eg blood transfusion = DA not a DF).
-
9
Jephthah's atrocity
by opusdei1972 inin judges chapter 11 we read that jephthah committed an atrocity by offering his daughter in sacrifice.
however, the watchtower, study edition of april 2016, reads:pages 6 and 7:not only was jephthah a mighty warrior but he was a student of gods dealings with his people.
jephthahs thorough grasp of israels history gave him a clear picture of what was right and what was wrong in jehovahs eyes.
-
-
Mephis
Clearly Jephthah did not burn his daughter alive, because that would be wrong, instead he lovingly forced her into a life of celibacy and servitude she'd otherwise not have chosen. What a loving provision by Jehovah.
Snark aside, it is reasonable to read it as meaning the whole mourning thing was because it was temple servitude and ended the family line etc. Irony of the man named 'God opens [the womb]' using God to prevent his daughter having kids and all that. Personally think it still seems probable the original story compiled was about human sacrifice but it's another of those moments when flat out admitting it doesn't fit the narrative because 'God' accepted the sacrifice and he continued to be Judge.
-
25
New BBC article on JW abuse
by snare&racket inis religion doing enough to root out abuse?.
he would go upstairs, on the premise that he was saying a prayer with his niece, then sexually abuse her.
mark sewell was sentenced to 14 years in prisonafterwards, the elders told her that as it was only her account against that of sewell, nothing more could be done.
-
-
Mephis
it's not a bad religion or a 'cult' (using Cult in a negative way)
I use cult in a descriptive sense and I see many aspects of a cult in how they operate. They even have had the charismatic leader model in the past, although not at the moment. But high control group is not overstating how JWs work. Any group which insists that one should automatically assume negative information is a lie, which is what JWs do, is not coming from a good place. No-one would disagree that the Catholic church also has totalitarian tendencies too.
the majority of elders are not trained policemen or trained counsellors but men who are trained in biblical matters and it's hard for them sometimes to come up with the right answers and they should go to the Governing body where research is done to help them find answers to whatever problem comes up.
Disagree. They should go to the police, and, where appropriate, child protection agencies. This shouldn't be complicated. If Jackson's view, as given to the Australian Royal Commission, that elders should follow their own consciences to report is correct, then there really shouldn't be an issue in this being explicitly stated in the policies they send out. It's simple, it's common sense, it's morally the right thing to do with serious crimes, and it ensures the safety of not only the congregation but also the wider community. There are no excuses not to do this. None. And when called to court to testify, they should be willing to go on oath and say what they know. There should not be an unseemly rush to claim First Amendment protections (in the US) or ludicrous attempts to extend that to jurisdictions which do not recognise clergy privilege in the same way.
I'm sorry that you were abused within the Catholic church. What you describe of how difficult it would have been for you to report is very similar to how survivors from JWs and other institutions describe it too. I'm sure you'd support action taken to help remove or at least reduce that problem by having a reporting system where the assumption is not that the child is lying but one which provides a safe space for the child to report. That's really where people are coming from with their criticisms of JW policies. The effect of what they do is to discourage children from speaking out. One has situations where teenagers are disfellowshipped for an adult abusing them. That is just unacceptable. This should be dealt with by the appropriate and qualified authorities rather than an unqualified, and typically cackhanded, investigation into 'sin' based on iron age evidential standards.
-
63
Watchtower crackdown on anointed expansion - are they reaching for a solution to the expanding numbers problem?
by slimboyfat inif this has been discussed i missed it.
i think the january study watchtower is a concerted attempt to reduce the numbers claiming to be anointed.
but i love the sneaky way they go about it this time.
-
-
Mephis
Possum wrote: Mephis/talesin ditto totally agree............makes you wonder for all the individuals obviously suffering some sort of religious mania or undiagnosed/untreated mental illness who profess to be anointed.
It's obviously a sensitive subject/issue, for a number of reasons generally with religion/mental health stuff, and especially with the GB explaining the increase in numbers as being a result of mental health problems. But the definition they themselves are giving there of someone who is a 'genuine' partaker is of someone who could likely benefit from seeing a mental health professional. 'Genuine' anointed have to be delusional to partake, but if you're delusional and partake you're not 'genuine'. It's quite the catch-22. But turtles all the way down I guess.
-
63
Watchtower crackdown on anointed expansion - are they reaching for a solution to the expanding numbers problem?
by slimboyfat inif this has been discussed i missed it.
i think the january study watchtower is a concerted attempt to reduce the numbers claiming to be anointed.
but i love the sneaky way they go about it this time.
-
-
Mephis
Elders count partakers on memorial, including those they visit who aren't well enough to attend congo one. They're allowed to ignore anyone who does the crispy bread and wine thing who they don't think should be doing it.