Posts by OrphanCrow

48

Disfellowshipping decision to go before Canadian Supreme Court

by Simon in

high court will examine whether judicial review applies to membership decisions made by religious groups.

the supreme court of canada has agreed to hear an appeal involving a calgary man who was kicked out of his jehovah's witness church.. randy wall, a real estate agent was "disfellowshipped" from the highwood congregation for being drunk on two occasions and allegedly verbally abusing his wife.. as a result, he says his clients refused to do further business with him, so he argued his property and civil rights were affected.. after losing three internal church appeals of his expulsion, wall made an application with the court of queen's bench in calgary which ordered a hearing to first determine if there was jurisdiction for the court to hear the application.. decisions and appeals.

a judge decided the superior court did have jurisdiction to hear the application.. the church then appealed wall's decision to the alberta court of appeal, which upheld the court of queen's bench, affirming the court has jurisdiction to hear the matter.. one of the three appeal court judges dissented — arguing that congregations are private organizations akin to bridge clubs, whose decisions "are not enforceable promises and have limited, if any, impact outside its small circle.".

OrphanCrow

search: Just to add clarity:
This case is about two simple things:
- Did the Judicial Committee follow the "principles of natural justice"? - A requirement in Canada.
- Did the Judicial Committee follow its own internal rules (eg. in The Shepherd the Flock of God book)?
The statements made by Gnam and MacEwan as to freedom to associate, etc. are superfluous, strawman statements.
(And, no, Richard Oliver, I am not a wife-beater).
Randy

Thank you for that clarity, Randy. And best of luck as you proceed. You are taking a big bite and have got this far. It is monumental, really. Well done.

As far as the one judge's comments about likening the JC/shunning process to a "bridge club"...he is way off base. A bridge club that has affiliation with an official body (and, the JW congregation has affiliation with an official body that links them together with the WT organization, however loosely), must abide by "principles of natural justice" when they consider banning a player for impropriety. For example, in the world of ACBL sanctioned bridge club hearings, the accused is entitled to representation at the hearing, among other things, that distinguishes them from the JWs on how they handle judicial matters.

I will be watching for updates. Again, good luck. Eat well and get lots of sleep. Do happy things when you can...you have a long road ahead and you will need your strength!

48

Disfellowshipping decision to go before Canadian Supreme Court

by Simon in

high court will examine whether judicial review applies to membership decisions made by religious groups.

the supreme court of canada has agreed to hear an appeal involving a calgary man who was kicked out of his jehovah's witness church.. randy wall, a real estate agent was "disfellowshipped" from the highwood congregation for being drunk on two occasions and allegedly verbally abusing his wife.. as a result, he says his clients refused to do further business with him, so he argued his property and civil rights were affected.. after losing three internal church appeals of his expulsion, wall made an application with the court of queen's bench in calgary which ordered a hearing to first determine if there was jurisdiction for the court to hear the application.. decisions and appeals.

a judge decided the superior court did have jurisdiction to hear the application.. the church then appealed wall's decision to the alberta court of appeal, which upheld the court of queen's bench, affirming the court has jurisdiction to hear the matter.. one of the three appeal court judges dissented — arguing that congregations are private organizations akin to bridge clubs, whose decisions "are not enforceable promises and have limited, if any, impact outside its small circle.".

OrphanCrow

For background and more details on the case:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/jehovahs-witness-court-of-appeal-supreme-court-jurisdiction-1.3759026

from the article:

The 1992 Supreme Court decision regarding a Hutterite man who was expelled from his Manitoba colony noted that the courts "are slow to exercise jurisdiction over the question of membership in a voluntary association, especially a religious one."
The exception was when property or civil right hinged on membership.
Since 1992, there have been other cases that set the precedent for courts to have jurisdiction when "there has been a breach of the rules of natural justice or the complainant has exhausted the organization's internal processes."
Wall argued the internal process was unfair — that the church's framework for expulsion was unclear.
He submitted that he wasn't told whether he could retain a lawyer, if there would be a record of the proceedings, the details of the allegations against him or whether there would be written reasons for the committee's decision
On the basis of those allegations, and because Wall had exhausted all avenues of internal appeal, the panel found the Court of Queen's Bench has jurisdiction to hear the application.

Details of Randy's disfellowshipping procedure:

In 2014, Wall was accused of "alleged wrongdoing involves drunkenness" and was directed to appear before the Judicial Committee of the Highwood Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses. That committee was composed of four elders.
Wall told the panel his behaviour stemmed from stress related to the expulsion of his 15-year-old daughter who he and his wife were required by the church to shun.
The congregation had already kicked the teen out of the community and as a result, even though she was a dependent child living with her parents, the family was pressured to evict the girl from the home, leading to "much distress."
At the meeting, Wall admitted he'd been drunk twice that he'd verbally abused his wife once.
The judicial committee found Wall was "not sufficiently repentant" and he was disfellowshipped, a decision that then compelled his wife, children and other Jehovah's Witnesses to shun him.
Wall appealed that decision and a panel of three elders was selected and asked to consider "the mental and emotional distress he and his family were under" following his daughter's disfellowship but the committee sided with the original panel's decision.
Finally, Wall sent a letter of appeal to the Watch Tower and Bible Tract Society of Canada but he was told the Canadian Branch would not overturn the decision.
After exhausting the church's appeal avenues, Wall made an application with the Court of Queen's Bench in Calgary which ordered a hearing to first determine if there was jurisdiction for the court to hear the application.
A judge decided that the superior court did have jurisdiction to hear the application because "he was satisfied the disfellowship had an economic impact on [Wall]."
The congregation and its judicial committee then appealed Wall's right to have a Court of Queen's Bench judge hear his application.
One of the congregation's arguments was that the Court of Queen's Bench judge erred when he found the religious practice of shunning infringes civil and property rights.

It appears that the JWs internal judicial process will be examined at the Supreme Court hearing.

At question will be if the JC proceedings violated Randy's basic rights.

8

Biased report of JW trial in Russia

by Citizenfour in

i'm pretty sure most of us are keenly following the trial in russia via twitter or perhaps some other means, and are awaiting the results of the trial.

after the weekend, and what i presume to be a memorial break, the hearings resumed today.

i noticed however that unlike previous days, when it finally got to the prosecutor's moment to examine 4 ex-witnesses testimony on extremist behavior, the twitter feed relaying the trial information "suddenly" lost contact.

OrphanCrow

dsp: Actually I just thought that @SimonBotes was tweeting in English a summary of what was being posted in Russian on jw-russia.org??
He doesn't appear to be tweeting anything 'original' including the photos he's tweeting??

That sounds like Watchtower approved tweeting only.

Nah, not cult-like...

8

Biased report of JW trial in Russia

by Citizenfour in

i'm pretty sure most of us are keenly following the trial in russia via twitter or perhaps some other means, and are awaiting the results of the trial.

after the weekend, and what i presume to be a memorial break, the hearings resumed today.

i noticed however that unlike previous days, when it finally got to the prosecutor's moment to examine 4 ex-witnesses testimony on extremist behavior, the twitter feed relaying the trial information "suddenly" lost contact.

OrphanCrow

steve: My response: Russia JW defense team allege - shock, horror - that the ex-JWs who provided testimony against the organization were "prepared witnesses". And that these ex-JWs were "repeating arguments of the so-called sectological literature."
Huh?! That's the JW defense team's response? I would have thought that, since this is before one of the highest Courts in Russia, the JW defense team would actually address the ex-JWs' testimony rather than state the obvious. How does being "prepared" to provide testimony against JW organization and "repeating arguments aired elsewhere" negate or call into question that testimony? It doesn't . This is the kind of predictable counterarguments advanced by JW apologists: Don't address the testimony - just cast those providing testimony in the most negative light short of slander.

"repeating arguments aired elsewhere"

I am so glad they brought that up. Doesn't that allow every "apostate" and exJW story, of those who have been harmed, to be entered into evidence?

I would say that adds weight to the Ministry of Justice's case. I have a feeling that the JWs are going to be facing the same fate as Scientology did. They will be declared a cult that harms people. A harmful organization.

The report from the Moscow news agency fills in the gaps that the JW report left out. The reporting coming from that source has painted the Russian judiciary system as being ill-prepared. I think they are just getting started.

One thing is for certain. The Russians have have satisfied the two witness rule.

I wonder what the Russian courts would think if they knew that the night before, the JWs had all met and only special ones had been allowed to partake of the blood of Christ?

The viewpoint/argument has been made that the Russian Orthodox Church is the biggest influence on these proceedings. If that is indeed, the case, refusing the blood of Christ would be a difficult doctrine for those of the Orthodox faith to understand. Jus' sayin'

51

RUSSIA: (7 April 2017) Day 3 - Jehovah's Witnesses hearing under way

by Drearyweather in

jw
friends

in moscow, a soft rain drizzles.

along the facade of the supreme court stretched a large queue of those who came to the process as listeners.

a large bus is parked at the courthouse on povarskaya street, full of obviously bored police officers.

OrphanCrow

This report from Moscow news agency:

http://tass.com/world/941007

8

Biased report of JW trial in Russia

by Citizenfour in

i'm pretty sure most of us are keenly following the trial in russia via twitter or perhaps some other means, and are awaiting the results of the trial.

after the weekend, and what i presume to be a memorial break, the hearings resumed today.

i noticed however that unlike previous days, when it finally got to the prosecutor's moment to examine 4 ex-witnesses testimony on extremist behavior, the twitter feed relaying the trial information "suddenly" lost contact.

OrphanCrow

Damascus, thanks for those links to Tass site.

Today's testimony from the exJWs appears to have put shunning directly on the table.

Other issues too.

And I like the photo at the end of the article

It looks like a crow was checking in on things over there...

51

To those taking a stand and not attending the Memorial tonight

by doubtfull1799 in

i salute you.

many of you, like me, are probably under enormous emotional pressure, whether from a lingering false sense of guilt from your indoctrination, whether from "invitations," and assumptions that you'll naturally be coming, or whether from outright emotional blackmail, even begging and pleading.

i am thinking of you whoever you are, all of you, even though i don't know you in person.

OrphanCrow

Nathan: I do not agree with the claim that "the rejection of blood transfusions is consistent with the rejection of the blood of Christ." Convince me.

Nathan, I have found someone who has written a bit about how the JWs view of Christ's blood is linked to their refusal of blood transfusions. The author touches somewhat on what I was trying to convey. Sort of...anyways.

(I just ignore details like getting the version of Bible wrong and things like that - I don't expect an 'outsider' writing about the WT to keep up with all its twists and turns and such - mistakes about details that don't effect the thrust of what is being said don't really count)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3934228/

Jehovah’s Witnesses are a group of non-conventional millenarist and fundamentalist Christians who believe literally the “Word of the Lord” reported in the Gideon Bible, which is a part of the actual Catholic and Reformed Protestant Bibles. They pay great attention to the last Book, called “Revelation”, and otherwise known as the “Apocalypse”. In the main body of the Bible, especially the Old Testament, there are words against the absorption of, or contact with blood, a widespread cultural thought among the Hebraic and ancient Judaic populations. This is in sharp contrast to the credence of conventional Christians, who value the salvaging power of the Holy Blood (of Jesus Christ) differently. All blood apart from Christ’s blood is considered by Jehovah’s Witnesses to be a vector of sin. In contrast to conventional Christians, they do not believe in the forgiveness of sins by confession or self-conscience examination. Sinning thus irremediably compromises the eternal life (of the soul). Jehovah’s Witnesses think that a very limited number (144,000) of believers will be saved, which is an infinitesimal proportion if one considers the number of human beings having ever existed on earth. Any compromise regarding sinning abolishes the rare chance of being saved: “What means 80 years of life on earth, i.e., in this valley of tears, compared to an eternity in paradise (as opposed to hell)?” One has to understand that this view is deeply entrenched among Jehovah’s Witnesses and they sincerely believe there is no matter of debate or compromise or otherwise there would be absolutely no chance for redemption.

51

To those taking a stand and not attending the Memorial tonight

by doubtfull1799 in

i salute you.

many of you, like me, are probably under enormous emotional pressure, whether from a lingering false sense of guilt from your indoctrination, whether from "invitations," and assumptions that you'll naturally be coming, or whether from outright emotional blackmail, even begging and pleading.

i am thinking of you whoever you are, all of you, even though i don't know you in person.

OrphanCrow

Nathan: I do not agree with the claim that "the rejection of blood transfusions is consistent with the rejection of the blood of Christ." Convince me.

Lol! Let me work on that one. It is an abstract concept.

I did, though, discover when it was that the WT changed the emblem partaking to only apply to the anointed class. It was in 1938.

The March 1938 Watchtower introduced the doctrine. By examining the yearbooks for the years before and that year, it is apparent that it was at the 1938 Memorial that the emblems became restricted to only those with heavenly hope.

51

To those taking a stand and not attending the Memorial tonight

by doubtfull1799 in

i salute you.

many of you, like me, are probably under enormous emotional pressure, whether from a lingering false sense of guilt from your indoctrination, whether from "invitations," and assumptions that you'll naturally be coming, or whether from outright emotional blackmail, even begging and pleading.

i am thinking of you whoever you are, all of you, even though i don't know you in person.

OrphanCrow

FadetoBlack: As an aside: does anyone know if the jw's have always celebrated a memorial? Was it started in this form back in Russel's day?

Yes, Russell and the Bible Students have always celebrated Christ's supper. However, back in Russell's day, they all partook of the emblems.

http://www.mostholyfaith.com/Beta/bible/topics/Memorial_Meditations.asp

It was later, when the JWs split off and re-invented the wheel, that it was decided that only those with "heavenly hope" could partake of Christ's blood and flesh. I believe that happened around 1935. Or, at least, that is when the "other sheep" class was born. The rejection of the emblems likely happened sometime after that.

Coincidentally, 10 years later, the WT decided to not only block the JWs from partaking of the wine (Christ's blood), they also banned the JWs from partaking of the world's blood supply.

The rejection of blood transfusions is consistent with the rejection of the blood of Christ.

16

Russian Ban exposed but not THE ARC...WHY?

by tor1500 in

jw
friends

just your thoughts....i've been all over this site, everyone says, that if jehovah was backing the org.

then why so many things happen in the org.

child abuse, shunning, and so on....but my question or thought is why is the banning of witnesses all over the media, but the arc isn't wasn't picked up in the media, like this (oh little leaks here and there, but nothing major) nothing like the nyt or any major media venue where the friends would see it and couldn't deny it, even if they wanted to....why does the media care more about banning witnesses than child abuse...i know even if the arc was exposed many of the friends would stay, but would be shamed, because they talked about other religions...or maybe jehovah is bringing the org.

OrphanCrow

Anders: Bashing a former enemy (Russia) is always fun! Especially if it means you don't have to look at your own flaws

Exactly.

Which is why some people like to scream fascism! and point fingers at Chechnya (97% Muslim), accusing Russia of being barbaric for allowing gay concentration camps, while at the same time ignoring the gay conversion camps that are run all across America by Christians who claim to be "exercising their freedom of religion". Except, in America, there are far, far more gay camps than in Chechnya. And, in America, minors are the ones who are targeted for mental and physical torture inside those Christian run gay camps. Children are forced to attend those camps, held against their will, and subjected to barbaric physical torture on a regular basis. Right now, as you are reading this, American children are being held against their will inside gay conversion/concentration camps in the States.

Classic timber and splinter.

Politics disguised as "freedom of religion".