Nice one @ Terry
From the pages of Crisis of conscience page 122 - 123 issues having to do with supreme court cases worn by the organisation was discussed....
Their decisions were applauded in the Society’s publications.
Sadly, however, the high standards of judgment and the approach to emotionally charged issues shown by these judges often appeared to be on a higher level than that manifested in many Governing Body sessions.
The expression of one Supreme Court justice in a particular Witness case comes to mind. He stated: The case is made difficult not because the principles of its decision are obscure but because the flag involved is our own. Nevertheless, we apply the limitations of the Constitution with no fear that freedom to be intelligently and spiritually diverse or even contrary will disintegrate the social organization. . . . freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.
The confidence that the justice expressed in the ‘existing social order’ and the freedoms it espoused seemed considerably greater than the confidence expressed by some Governing Body members in their fellow Witnesses and the effect their freedom of conscience, if exercised, could have on the existing “Theocratic order.”
If the Supreme Court justices had reasoned as some of the Governing Body members reasoned, the Witnesses would likely have lost case after case.
My take............
The real winners are the judges who worked hard towards the interpretation of the laws as it were then and ensure that freedom of speech and conscience is not deprived.