drwtsn32- Decent enough link, but all of those warning signs might just as easily apply to any other religion. I like to compare lists like this against the largest Christian denomination, the Catholics, and see how they hold up.
1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability. Papacy
2. No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry. The One True Church
3. No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement. Who can count that high? Real estate, antiquities, etc
4. Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions. Hellfire
5. There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil. Must practice confession & eucarist for salvation, Excommunication, etc
6. Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances. Abuse, too much focus on doctrine, hypocrisy of members, etc
7. There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader. Pretty much any weeknight on the History Channel
8. Followers feel they can never be "good enough". "Catholic Guilt"
9. The group/leader is always right. Infallibility of the pope
10. The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible. Doctrine of... some Latin thing! "Mother Church"
Happy Guy- It's not hard to imagine a few staunch Catholics in a church every bit as dogmatic as your worst elderette. Some people just want to be controlled. If one were to consider everyone ever baptized as a Witness, add that to the figures for what the WTS calls active publishers, then figure in the stragglers who come to memorial, and call these people Jehovah's Witnesses, you'd get a much different picture of the Dub community. I posit that the "core members" (JW publishers) of any religion are a group that wants to be told what to believe and how to act. Most religions place a measure of conrol over their members. Some just take that measure more seriously. Why are there no old cults? Everything defined as a cult is a new religious movement. The term "cult" is used maliciously by established religions to keep their theological monopoly over the masses.
As far as Rutherford, the reason I would quote him is for the irony of his statement. It's ironic for all the reasons you cite. It's not just for the irony that I like this quote better than, say, Marx's "Religion is the opiate of the masses;" "snare and a racket" just has a nice ring to it!
I don't think his opinion on any subject would carry the slightest bit of weight or credibility except perhaps to those he brainwashed.
Surely you don't think that! That's a classic ad hominem argument. Just because someone is a bigot that doesn't mean EVERYTHING they do or say lacks credibility.