Billions of persons have read the bible, many have believed it to be the Word of God and more or less inspired, and the beliefs or opinions they have arrived at have of course varied considerably.
Merely reading the bible, or believing in it, does not qualify a person for "membership" in a group which holds a certain body of beliefs and practices if that individual doesn't agree with that group AND if the group holds as one of its tenets that membership is contingent upon agreement.
The bottom line is that any group has the right to hold rules of what will qualify as membership in good standing and to hold those members to those rules. I actually don't think many people disagree with that fundamental principle.
Similarly, I would assert that it is the inalienable right of any individual to decide for his or herself whether he or she wish to associate with another person or not. In my opinion, Jesus encouraged us to find the proper balance between nonjudgment acceptance of all persons and avoiding intimacy with wickedness or corrupting influences.
Thus in my opinion, the principle of disfellowshipping is acceptable both from a social (or organizational) angle and from a scriptural one.
What most persons, like myself, have issues with when it comes to the practice of disfellowshipping among JWs are:
1) the actual procedures and practice are unscriptural, being secretive and often biased. The scriptures clearly show that similar processes or condemnation whether in OT or in NT were open and public.
2) the imposition of the judgment of a few upon the individual consciences of the flock. Each individual should choose whether to cast his or her stone, i.e. whether to associate with someone or not should be purely a matter of individual conscience.
3) the lack of experience and information conveyed to the young and converts regarding disfellowshipping. Never enough education in this area.
4) very questionable disfellowshipping "categories" such as dissent over doctrinal matters or the lumping of various activities under the "apostasy" umbrella
5) the use of disfellowshipping as a mechanism or tool for silencing criticism, debate and dissidents.
6) and finally, the lack of efficacy as a means to achieve its stated aims, namely either the "correcting" of the person or the "(spiritual) fortification" of the disfellowshipped person. (this seems especially true when the situation is that the person is disfellowshipped for some transgression apparently resulting from "weakness" or sin. The opposite approach would seem more efficacious of bringing the person into closer association so that their faith and desire to behave rightly can be upbuilt.)
