TD
Ethics 101: Manipulate someone into doing something morally wrong regardless of whether it be through inducement or coercion and you are guilty too. Their agency does not diminish your responsibilitly one whit.
A hallmark of JW's and kindred groups is a rules based system of ethics and a resultant fascile grasp of personal responsibility. Are you sure you've truly left this group mentally?
Hi TD,
But moral is fluid. What you consider morally wrong, is morally right in another culture. Who finally defines what is right or wrong? In our society moral is more or less defined by what the mayority prefers. Mostly influinced by (inter alia) history and the example of charismatic leaders. The WTG point for their system of ethics to their understanding of the Bible. And because people have the right of freedom, they can. And JW submit themselves to that system. Now, you should consider that the leaders are subject to peer pressure, maybe even more than regular JW because of their prominent position. So the leaders will on their turn submit themselves to the group. Probably not in every aspect, because they most show some leadership. But the changes they introduce, will hardly cause any uproar.
So practically: the GB cannot change the blood doctrine. Any GB member that will try to change the doctrine, will be removed and replaced by a member that does reflect the historical system of ethics that the group as a whole excepts. So, sure, they are guilty according to your moral. But they are trapped too.
adamah
I can point out MANY examples of ex-JWs who say they would THANK the elders for DFing them, as it ultimately allowed them to cut the umbilical cord wrapped around their neck which kept them from breathing on their own, and allowed them to free their minds from the cult (partly via participation in discussion forums such as this). Some would look back and say it was the best thing that ever happened, since it taught them a valuable life lesson ("that which doesn't kill us makes us stronger").
There's an old adage from customer service that customers who are unhappy with some service will complain loudly to ten others, whereas the larger silent minority of 'satisfied customers' won't talk about their happy experience to only one or two; it's an asymmetrical response, since it's human nature that people like to complain more than praise. So that's going to bias the appearance of ANY forum, since those who want/need to vent will speak out moreso than the others (like 1099). [..]
The problem though, is that a 'religion' is comprised of people who share a certain flawed BELIEF. You cannot punish a CONCEPT, but only the individuals who ACT on that flawed belief. So the key is individuals must accept their responsibility for the harm inflicted as a result of their PARTICIPATION in an organization that shares the belief, EVEN IF they weren't directly involved in the incident.
Few are willing to do the mental work required to see that level of shared responsibility, since they're paradoxically morally-handicapped by accepting that ALL morality comes from God, and He cannot do ANY wrong. It's simply an excuse to get away with harming others, and blaming it on their loyalty to God.
The appeal for action is based on the ULTIMATE appeal to authority ever devised (an appeal to God's authority, ie "God wants me to do X, so I will"), and the BLAME for any resultant harm is ALSO put on God's shoulders ("I was only doing God's Will"). It's that TOTAL externalization that makes religion so ripe for manipulating others, since the one who TELLS YOU what God wants is able to control the followers as if they're marionettes.
hi adamah,
Thank you. That's nicely worded. I agree with every word you said.