Moscow bans Jehovah's Witnesses

[Judi Lynn]

Last Updated: Friday, 26 March, 2004, 23:45 GMT

Moscow bans Jehovah's Witnesses

The group's lawyer says the Orthodox Church encouraged the ban
A Russian court has barred Jehovah's Witnesses from operating in the capital, Moscow.

The court ruled that group's practices broke up families, encouraged suicide and threatened its members' health by not allowing blood transfusions.

Lawyers for the group said the ruling was a step back for democracy and was reminiscent of Soviet rule.

They said they would appeal the verdict both in Russia and to the European Court of Human Rights.
(snip/...)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3573721.stm

[0007]

1. I do too!

[opihimoimoi]

2. me too, those jw s are a step backward for humanity.

[caledesi]

79. I lost my step-daughter to these creeps 2 years ago! (sad) nt

[opihimoimoi]

96. Sad indeed. The jw's go about trying to be innocuous but with one intent

to capture MINDS and Souls for their congregation.

They are just like other religions who have a need to grow. But they are the stealth mind theives of all time.

The lower guys are brain washed beyond belief. Its a friggen CULT brought on by their intensive door to door campaigning. Look at heir membership, its a bunch of mostly LOLOs, minds stolen.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

7. Ban JW's?

Count me in!

[Gildor Inglorion]

51. Interesting discussion...

very! There must be some way to respect the free speech/religion rights of others while protecting yourself from annoyance. How about putting up a "No Soliciting (Including Religious)" sign at your doors? Surely this would stop their proselytizing. By the way, I've heard that the Jackson (5, Michael, Janet, LaToya, et al) family and the artist Prince are JW's. Does anyone know if it's true?

[caledesi]

80. Jacksons were raised JW. Also the Williams sisters (tennis)

[displacedtexan]

3. I notice that the Russians never say: You can't worship, JWs!

The Russians just don't think their citizens should have to put up with those annoying door knockers in serious black clothing shoving cheaply printed propaganda in people's faces.

My mother used to close the drapes and turn off the lights if she spotted them in the neighborhood. Once, we were caught off guard, and the JWs wanted us to give them $ so they could pray the soul of someone's stillborn baby out of purgatory.

My mother blew a gasket and asked what kind of perverted God would send a stillborn baby anywhere but to Jesus.

Then my mother slammed the door, and we baked cookies.

[Nobody]

6. I've been accosted

at a bus stop while waiting for a bus, and while walking down the street as a car pulled over to me. I thought the driver was lost, and instead of asking directions, I was asked if I wanted to buy a copy of "Watchtower".

Worship what you want, but I hate being a captive audience. Can't just walk away when you're waiting for the bus to take you to work.

[ze_dscherman]

38. Sorry, but this is pure BS

JW's don't believe in hell, nor in purgatory. They don't believe in the soul, and sure they'll never ask for money to pray for anyone. It would be agains their faith. You must be confusing them with some other religion.

My parents and sister are JW's, so I ought to know - and no, I have nothing in common with that religion.

[yardwork]

63. I thought they believed in hell?

The Jehovah's Witnesses who come to my door keep trying to sell me reading material about how I will go to hell if I don't become a JW. They are usually elderly and I worry about them. I usually offer them a glass of water but I'm not interested in their religion.

Freedom of speech and freedom to worship as we choose are the foundations of the U.S. Constitution. It's very disappointing that Russia is falling back into old ways by outlawing certain religions.

[ze_dscherman]

72. No hell

They believe Armageddon will come soon (and have been wrong with the date several times, then God will kill everyone except the true believers (hopefully them). Those killed will not be punished - they just vanish.

Those that died *before* Armageddon are just dead and feel nothing. No afterlife. But all pre-armageddon dead will be resurrected on a paradisical earth after Armageddon and live forever in paradise (unless he choses otherwise in a final decision to be made 1000 years after Armageddon). No hell, but heaven only for a very limited number - just 144000. Most seats are already occupied, so there's a very small number of chosen ones who "know" they will go there.

Now this sounds strange, but it is certainly much less cruel than a god that will torture sinners in burning pitch for eternity ...

In order to save as many people as possible, they try to preach to everyone. That's why they can't and will never accept the ban on preaching - it's a central doctrine of their faith.

[Endangered Specie]

88. And the fun part is, there are more than 144,000 Jehova's Witnesses...

SO the next time they come to your door, tell them that recruiting JW's reduces their chances of getting into heaven.

[whistle]

4. Didn't the Nazis do the same thing in Germany...

...before WW-II under Hitler? I believe they did and they actually placed Jehovah's Witnesses along with Jews, gypsies, homosexuals and the mentally retarded and handicapped in concentration camps for extermination. This was done to preserve racial purity as the Nazis defined that concept. :wtf:

[displacedtexan]

5. Nazis didn't allow Jews and JWs to worship. Big difference.

The Russians aren't stopping the JWs from worshiping. They, like lots of other countries, don't want JWs to annoy people.

Look, I have no problem with people believing or worshiping anything; however, I should be able to do the same without their personal in-your-face marketing strategy.

[JNelson6563]

8. that's right

The Watchtower is a distructive cult that actively and aggressively recruits new members. They encourage folks to "pioneer" full-time and to "get money from Caeser" (a.k.a the government) to exist while spreading the good news. Their special brand of good news is that any day now, 99.9% of humanity will be obliterated and only the JWs will survive to see paradise Earth.

It is a sick twisted world they live in and it is wise to protect the vulnerable from their "message" whenever possible.

Julie

[i_c_a_White_Ghost]

9. One of my ex's was a JW

they are twisted...

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Muddleoftheroad]

15. Depends on the topic

I try not to judge folks religious views for instance -- including those who have none.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[0007]

28. I think most of us all try not to be judgemental, don't you?

I've heard your views on those who have "none" --

[Muddleoftheroad]

29. Only in resopnse to attacks

I don't care if someone worships Odin, Buddha, their lawn ornament or nothing at all. I care how they interact with others and I will defend their right to hold those beliefs.

However, there are a few die-hard ANTI-religious folks here and they have made me cautious of atheists as a result.

[RapidCreek]

90. Is that right?

When's the last time an athiest came to your door and bothered you about your belief in God? After he has invaded your privacy has one ever insulted you by suggesting he or she was going someplace special after he died and you were not...unless you aquiesced to his way of thinking. How many have knocked on your door and asked you to buy a periodical that says the same thing?

I'm guessing not one, and one never will.

RC

[Muddleoftheroad]

94. Just knock on my door here

And here is where I responded.

[JNelson6563]

18. Share with us what you know of JWs

and how you came to know it. Then I'll be happy to tell you my sources of info.

I know what I am talking about. I suspect you do not know what I am talking about.

Julie

[Muddleoftheroad]

19. I believe in the freedom of religion and speech

How does your knowledge trump those?

[JNelson6563]

26. No one denies JWs the right to worship

They are denied the right to push their printing company's crap and the right to recruit members to the cult-like printing company we all know as "Watchtower".

BTW, facts top opinion every time.

Julie

[Muddleoftheroad]

27. So they are denied free speech as well it seems

But as long as it's for a religious group, folks here will always defend it.

[JNelson6563]

34. I think you wouldn't be so sympathetic

If they had ruined the life of someone you love.

They are a very destructive group. They are not preaching charity, kindness or love for fellow man. They are not coordinating efforts to help the downtrodden or the community. This is the sort of activity normally attributed to Christian reach-out programs. As far as JWs are concerned, those of you calling yourselves "Christian" that are not one of them, you are evil infidels and they look forward with great anticipation to your obliteration.

Please, tell us more about this wonderful group Muddle.

Julie

[Muddleoftheroad]

41. Anything can be destructive

You appear to have a personal complaint involving one person. That does not indict an entire group.

[JNelson6563]

66. Wrong again Muddle

I've known many and have talked to literally hundreds. My understanding of the dynamics of this group is broad and deep.

Any more mis-judgements from you?

Julie

[Muddleoftheroad]

69. Refer to the posts from a former member

And back to you.

[ze_dscherman]

45. Harsh judgement

Julie,

I personally know many JW's - my parents and other relatives belong to the cult, and I split with them when I was a teenager. So I know what I'm writing about. I got a pretty hefty dose of their indoctrination when I was a kid, and although I don't believe anything of their cult since many years, I probably still got a pretty good insight.

I do agree they have some very destructive tendencies, but I have also seen their good sides - and charity, kindness and love are of high concern to them. They have a very strong sense of community, support and trust each other. As well, they frown on any kind of nationalism,
militarism, racism, corruption and dishonesty.

But they also live in a strange "us against them" kind of world. The world outside of the cult is seen as completely ensnared by Satan, so they must keep their distance, and won't mix much with non-followers. There's a strange mixture of contempt and haughtiness towards the "infidels". All their preaching is meant to save them, because "soon" god's wrath will destroy them. And of course, there's much hidden aggressivity in this anticipation of the end of the world.

Also, all the warmth and care that exists inside their group will suddenly stop when someone disentangles him/herself from their teachings. Even when they still have emotional relations to an ex-follower, most cut or severely curb their attachment to an ex-follower. This behaviour has been much, much stricter in past decades - I have got the impression they somehow "normalized" a lot.

I also think that it is the best way to deal with them to treat them as normal as possible. If you don't want any of their propaganda, just tell them frankly, but friendly ( they feel hurt as well) that you definitely don't want to be visited again. They are told to respecht that wish. If you got someone that's a 200%-JW-zealot and won't respect this, tell 'em you are an ex-JW that has been barred from the cult. They won't mess with you again.

For those that have relatives and friends involved into the cult - now that's a tough trial.

Fighting against it, or arguing, usually won't help. Prosecution is seen as honor and will only reinforce their belief. I do not anymore expect my relatives to leave their religion, and I had to learn much tolerance and patience. Relations have been getting much better over the course of many years.

Finally, I do think that many common kinds of behaviour are much more self-destructive than this cult. And who am I to decide what puts relief to the tormented souls of someone else?

[JNelson6563]

65. Not harsh, accurate

You yourself have admitted you have reason for emotion to play into this. You have family in the cult so they "can't be all bad".

While it is true about the clannishness of the members, it is out of necessity more than any brotherly/sisterly love. You are strongly discouraged from mingling with "worldly" people so who does that leave?

I view most JWs as victims of the WT cult. The love, charity and sense of community are strictly conditional. I know of too many instances where people fond themselves with no friends or family after a star-chamber disfellowshipping. Add to that the time the WT learned the nasty lesson of naming a date for the wildly anticipated battle of Armaggedon. "Stay Alive In '75" ring any bells? Look into it. See how many quit jobs, sold houses and gave all to "preparing for the end" & "saving as many as possible at the last minute". Both of those tasks translate into "sell as many WT rags as possible" & "recruit as many WT rag-sellers as possible".

The WT is a publishing company with a completely volunteer workforce. Even those at the publishing house, "Bethel" (their equivalent to the Vatican), work for no pay or benefits. Since they are so poor they qualify for Medicaid etc. They contribute nothing to the communities around them like charitable work. When's the last time you saw a Watchtower food pantry or any other kind of community project?

There is a great deal the rank & file members do not know about their religion (or, "organization" as they prefer). I tell you, to spend a few hours with some former members who were at Bethel would give the devout JW a heart attack.

The more members you recruit and/or hours you pioneer (closely tracked, reported monthly, and very important to your social standing in your congregation) the higher in the pecking order you were. Ask a lot of questions, don't do many pioneering hours or have difficulty making the many meetings a week and see how you're treated.

If you really want to learn how conditional the love among the JWs is, get a blood transfusion to save your life or be seen smoking a cigarette. I know a lady who's teenage son killed himself after being disfellowhipped for smoking. To be cut off from family and lifelong friends forever was unthinkable but to know he'd be obliterated "any day now" by his conditionally loving Jehovah was more than he could handle. 17 years old. The lady experienced an epiphany and is no longer a JW.

Sorry, but you'll not get me to ever consider that maybe the good that you think comes from the WT outweighs the bad by any stretch. What I list here is merely the tip of the iceburg.

Julie

[Muddleoftheroad]

70. Shunning

Shunning is not the exclusive territory of JW. Many other groups do it and, on a smaller scale, so do many families. If a person is a part of a group, then they accept the rules of that group. If they leave, that is their choice, but it's a bit unfair to expect those members to still hang out with him or her.

[RapidCreek]

91. Yea that's all fine and good

they can keep their shunning to themselves....I don't need the fuckers interfering with my privacy and interupting my day to do it to me.

RC

[Muddleoftheroad]

93. Free speech has its downside

You get to be inconvenienced at times.

[ze_dscherman]

74. Our experiences may vary

I have any reason to be emotional about JWs, and I have experienced much of their darks sides. This faith has f***ed up much of my childhood and teenage life. There are scars left until today, almost 25 years later. I have been very hurt, very angry and bitter about this, but were able to come to terms with the past.

What you write about that teenage boy is a very sad story and definitely shows the cruel mechanism of disfellowship. But if he still believed in the cult - why didn't he repent? I'd think they would have been eager to get him back ...

For me, it was different, because I just did not believe any more what was brainwashed into me as a child. The "coming out" about this, knowing how much it would hurt, was the hardest part. But I never regretted the choice I made, and would encourage anyone to do the very same.

Getting along with my family was very difficult in the beginning, but, in the end, they have never let me down. They also learnt a lot of tolerance - maybe one of the hardest things for JW ... Undoubtedly, this has shaped my current view on this religion. I completely disagree with their faith and with most of their values, I see the harm they may cause and how they are misled. Still I respect their choice to be what they are. And that's why I defend their right to preach.

A final word - I don't deem them worse than most other fundies, and in comparison to what has been done by established churches, they're pretty harmless fools.

[PassingFair]

86. Sounds like...

Branch Davidians to me...
:crazy:

[neverborn]

81. JW's are as bad...

as Church of Scientology from what I've read.

I despise Co$.

[ze_dscherman]

39. NO, they don't expect their followers to "get money from Caesar"

While I agree with you that they have a kind if sick world view (but not worse than most of those Xians waiting for the "rapture") I will defend them in this case. Those who work full time for their cause get aid from their fellow believers. Taking money from the state for that case would be against their strict moral codex.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

71. Taking money from the state

Given their stance regarding “Caesar,” J W’s would, if they had a shred of integrity, stand up and loudly reject tax-free status. In taking money from the state there is more than one way to skin a cat!

[JNelson6563]

78. they wrote a brief for Jmmy Swaggart

when his religion for profit business was having a go-round about his tax exempt status.

Read the JWs propaganda about how they shun the world and her governments. Then read all about the brief filed on Swaggart's behalf by the WT's legal team, trying to help him maintain tax-exept status, so as not to set a legal precedent that might threaten theirs.

Alas, Swaggart lost and because of the SC ruling the WT had to change the way it did business. No longer could they print a "suggested retail price" on their litter-ature. Now it has to be a "free will offering".

Here's how this little scam works. The worker bees (r&f JWs) show up at the hall before "pioneering". They have to make a "free will donation" for the litter-ature. Then they go out and schlepp WT rags all day and any donations they were able to solicit they come and put into the pot too, on top of what thye've already contributed. It's a pretty slick operation. The WT gets rich and lots of unfortuante souls get to go to sleep knowing that "soon" 99.9% of humanity will be obliterated but, because of their WT rag schleeping efforts, they're safe.

Oy!

Another time I'll tell you about the Kingdom-Hall-building scam Bethel (WT headquarters) pulls on its congregations....

Julie

[JNelson6563]

77. haha Maybe in your world

Checkout a few of their DBs, if you can get in. Even in real life I have been there when this was encoruaged.

They have no qualms taking form the government. Just like they send their volunteer workforce from Bethel to community clinics and the welfare offices if they need help.

I have no reason to lie. It's the facts of the matter. Sorry.

Julie

[orthogonal]

83. Protecting the Vulnerable from Destructive Cults

The Watchtower is a destructive cult that actively and aggressively recruits new members.... it is wise to protect the vulnerable from their "message" whenever possible.

And, meaning no offense to you or to anyone, at one time Christianity was a cult that actively and aggressively recruited new members. Or at least that's what (now Saint) Paul's Epistles (to the Romans, the Corinthians, the Ephesians, the Philippians, the Colossians, and the Thessalonians) suggest.

Despite Paul's recruiting, the Christian cult -- or religion as it's now more usually referred to -- is very often credited with many fine accomplishments.

Speaking as an atheist, I have no particular axe to grind when it comes to debating the merits of one sect over another -- no sect has and none likely will overcome my incredulity. So believe me when I say that I am not enraging in any special pleading for the Jehovah's Witnesses.

As Christ said, the poor will be always with us (paraphrasing Matthew 26:11), and just so the vulnerable also will be with us always.

Protecting the vulnerable from used car salesmen (and I'm particularly vulnerable here) or spammers is one thing; but protecting them from the expression of beliefs, political ideologies, and indeed, theologies, smacks of condescension: if they are so vulnerable that they can't be trusted to determine their own faith, how can we trust them to decide their country's future in the voting booth? Shall we (re-)institute a literacy tests at the polling place and religious tests for office?

How shall we determine --and who shall determine -- what constitutes a "real" religion and what is an objectionable "cult" from which the vulnerable are to be protected? I have here some nominees for the position of Defensor Fidei, "Defender of the Faith": perhaps that Roman so unimpeachable that he was asked to be Governor of all Judea, Pontius Pilate? No? How about the well respected Jewish High Priest, Caiaphas -- he has some strong opinions on what's a real religion? No? Perhaps Uncle Joe Stalin -- he has some equally strong opinions about cults, especially cults of personality? No again? Is perhaps having a Defensor Fidei not so appealing when he's not of your sect?

And where does it end? Even if we agree that Jehovah's Witnesses are "bad cultists" -- and the Russian Orthodox Church, according to the article, very much agrees -- what about other Protestant splinter groups? As recently as 1770, the Colony of Massachusetts seized 400 acres of Baptist land -- in order to build a State-established church. Perhaps the Primates of the Russian Orthodox Church see the wisdom of the town fathers of Boston?

And what of those Latter Day Saints -- more popularly known by the derisive name "Mormons"? Are they a "cult" too? As late as 1846 the Saints were forced out of their community at Nauvoo, Illinois for -- among other things -- their "unnatural" practice of polygamy. Perhaps their habit of missionary work had something to do about it. God knows, it's up to us to fight for the sanctity of marriage against those dirty homos -- uh, I mean, religions founded in, even if no longer practicing, polygamy.

Of course, those Catholics are also not to be trusted, are they? Did you know that the Pope plans to subjugate this country, by a steady influx of Catholic immigrants! Or so the Know-Nothing Party told us (no, I mean the real Know-Nothing Party, not the party of George W. Bush!) as late as the 1850s. But even as late as 1928, anti-Catholic prejudice -- slanders that he was for "rum, Romanism, and rebellion" -- helped to ensure that Al Smith wasn't elected president. Instead, lucky us, we got Herbert Hoover.

On reflection, it seems that there are so many religions to protect the vulnerable against, doesn't it?

But perhaps the real message, the real "Good News", is that it's precisely this persecution of minority religions -- derisively called "dangerous cults" -- that led to the United States enshrining in its secular Bible, the Constitution, an absolute right of religious freedom. It's no accident that Baptists have historically -- despite the recent behavior of the Southern Baptist Convention -- been strong proponents of religious freedom: they have a equally long history of persecution.

There's also a reason why religious freedom and political freedoms like that of speech, assembly, and petitions for redress are tied together in the same Amendment: because once any government begins to presume to police the innermost dictates of your conscience -- your religious beliefs -- that government is also well on uts way to telling you for whom to vote -- or well on its way to declaring that there's no need for you to vote at all.

So we should not fear just for the Jehovah's Witnesses in Moscow, we should fear for Democracy in Moscow. And the Russian Orthodox Church should remember, as it suppresses the Jehovah's Witnesses in favor of the Orthodox Church, that not too long ago the State's power was use to suppresses the Orthodox Church in favor of official atheism and Joseph Stalin's Cult of Personality.

Finally, let me point out that despite that glorious First Amendment, religion persecution -- official, government sponsored religious persecution -- still goes on in this country (just as the First Amendment did little for the Mormons in the 1830s). As an atheist, I see my faith -- for the lack of faith is, at base, a faith too -- derided every day that Congress opens with an official prayer -- a practiced recently declared constitutional by a Federal Court (but then, it was a (Supreme) Federal Court that decided Dred Scott and Plessy, too).

I see my faith dismissed on every piece of U.S. Currency, with the words "In God We Trust". and worst of all, I see young children coerced every day they go to State schools, to pledge a loyalty oath that includes a reference to a monotheistic God. I see that no one in the U.S. House or Senate professs my faith -- and that no member of the U.S. Supreme Court has ever been one of my co-religionists. And indeed, my people are all too often accused of being members of a dangerous cult, too.

I only hope there are a few historically minded Jehovah's Witnesses, Baptists, Latter Day Saints, and Catholics who might understand that neither my faith nor theirs is safe so long as a tyrannical majority can decide what is, or is not, suitable belief -- whether suitable belief for them, or me, or Michael Newdow's daughter.

[Freddie Stubbs]

32. Should the same apply to political speech?

If it 'annoys' the majority?

[QC]

47. Ahh--that's the question no one wants to touch.

I asked it hours ago (see below).

As I said then, if the price of free speech is dealing with the occasional Mormon or Jehovah's Witness, then that's a very small price to pay.

Unfortunately, some here have let their kneejerk contempt for religion overrule their good sense. We on the Left have far more to lose than most people if mere annoyance becomes a reason to abridge free speech.

[EdGy]

10. banning missionaries is a good idea

anyone who has to go around trying to convince people that their religious beliefs are wrong, and that there is only one true way have a kind of mental illness.

Missionaries who go around trying to convert people are wrong. This is not a step back from democracy.

If they want to see things reminiscent of Soviet rule they should come to the US and see the way the Bush regime and its lackeys at Fox are behaving.

[QC]

12. What about banning folks from going door to door for the Democratic Party?

I'm sure a lot of Busheviks would gladly support that rule, since they have made it clear that anyone who does not share their political beliefs is, in their opinion, either suffering from a kind of mental illness or just immoral.

I have Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons come to my door from time to time, along with the occasional Baptist, and I just tell them I'm not interested. If they're persistent, I just shut the door. I've never had one of them try to force his way into my house, pull a knife on me, or anything like that.

In the US, at least, proselytizing is protected on free speech grounds. As annoying as being the subject of that sort of thing can be, it definitely beats having the government decide which opinions we can and cannot freely share with others. As I see it, having to deal with a smiling Mormon once every two or three years is a small price to pay for being able to speak my mind whenever I please.

Unfortunately, the reasoning behind most of the responses in this thread is "Free speech for me, but not for thee."

[Roaming]

85. Agree with your post wholeheartedly. And the concept of free speech

really goes both ways. If a JW comes to my door, assuming I have the time, I will gladly engage them in debate to present to them my views and present evidence to them as to why I believe THEY are mistaken. A great site that lays out JW beliefs is at: http://www.carm.org/witnesses.htm

[yardwork]

64. It sounds like you are against Free Speech.

If you or anyone else can say that some kinds of "going around trying to convince people of...." is wrong, then what is to stop the government from preventing us from talking about Shrub, for instance?

I'm sure that many in the Shrub administration would love to close down DemocraticUnderground and arrest those of us who say mean things about their beloved leader.

I agree with the above post that says that allowing people to express their opinions, even if the opinions sound wacked or hateful, is a very small price to pay for freedom of speech. Even the KKK has a right to march and talk about their beliefs. The law draws the line when they do something illegal.

For instance, if the Jehovah's Witnesses tried to burn down your house, you would have the right to defend yourself. But if all they want to do is talk, then close the curtains and ignore the doorbell. I have done this many times! I find it works even better to answer the door and tell them "no" very firmly.

They may be a little odd, but they aren't violent.

[UpInArms]

11. I have found the most effective way

to deal with the JWs coming to my door :D

When they show up, I point to the end of my driveway and the road that connects it to my property -

I then say, see that road and see that driveway?

Your right to "free speech" ended when you pulled onto my property. Now you are going to listen to what I have to say and I launch into a tirade about George Bush and Rev Moon.

They get a horrified look on their faces and run, not walk, back to their car and zoom away from me :D LOL!

I think that they have now crossed off my house as a prospective party to "witness" to - I am so happy and I look forward to my next visit from the next fool.

[BiggJawn]

20. I invited a coupla sweet old ladies to join our Sweat Lodge...

When I got to the part about getting naked and crawling inside they all of a sudden remembered that they left cookies in the oven or something...:-)

Weren't the JW's banned during the Soviet era? Can somebody ask Condi? She's an EXPERT about All Things Soviet..(and I'm an expert on damped-wave radiotelegraphy<spark gap> both of us are experts on useless obsolete knowledge)

[ze_dscherman]

46. Yes, they were banned

As in many other countries as well. They are claiming to have some of their highest growth rates in the ex-soviet area. If people are desparate, they just want to believe.

[blindpig]

33. snakes work real well too

on 2 occasions I've had the pleasure of answering the door with a couple of my snakes draped upon my shoulders and running my mouth about the old gods. Works like a charm.

[BonjourUSA]

16. It's a decision of public healthfulness

[Muddleoftheroad]

17. Freedom of speech is a decision of public health?

[ET Awful]

22. In the case of Jehovahs Witnesses, in a manner of speaking . . .

yes.

The religion prohibits blood transfusions and, believe it or not, teaches that blood transfusion is akin to cannibalism.

Many people have died because they refused to accept blood transfusions due to their religion, many children have died because their parents refused to allow blood transfusions due to religion. This is NO different than the religious sect members in Massachusetts who starved their children to death because of a "vision from god," etc.

In their religion, if someone is disfellowhsipped (excommunicated), NOBODY in the congregation is permitted to speak with them or associate with them in any way, this includes family members. I have seen people completely disowned by their families and friends they'd known their whole lives. You can be disfellowshipped for such things as divorce, alcholishm, drug addiction, or questioning the teachings of the church.

Their views on womens rights are as whacked as any fundamentalist church, even more so. I know of a case in Arizona where a young girl was molested by an elder of the church, not only was he not punished, but the crime was never reported, and the girl was forced to tell the congregation that she had made up lies. I know of other cases where women that were raped were told it was their fault for enticing the men and that they had nothing to complain about.

Do I think the group should be outlawed? No more than I think that Scientology, the Moonies, the Hare Krisnas or any other group should be outlawed. Do I think they deserve extremely close scrutiny and watching? You're damn right I do.

[Muddleoftheroad]

23. Ah, "close scrutiny and watching"

The hallmarks of freedom.

[ET Awful]

30. Tell you what. . . .

When you have some personal experience with any of these groups, let me know.

[Muddleoftheroad]

31. They have come to my door

I have meet JWs, Moonies and Scientologists and my beliefs, my home and my pocketbook are all in tact.

Back to you...

[ET Awful]

43. I'm not talking about seeing their public face.

I'm talking about seeing for yourself what these people actually do.

They knocked on your door. . . big deal.

I suggest you do some research on these groups and find out what they actually do, not your "they knocked on my door."

Do some research on family members of people that are still in these groups or perhaps people that have broken away from these groups and are still suffering thanks to the shit they went through.

You'll find that the Catholic church's clergy sex abuse scandal pales in comparison.

[Muddleoftheroad]

44. So you clearly don't like them

That is a personal conflict, not a reason to ban them.

[ET Awful]

56. Good job of putting words in my mouth. . .

Please show me where any of my posts said they should be banned. Actually, I specifically stated they should NOT be banned.

[Muddleoftheroad]

57. You didn't, Russia did

The context of this entire thread.

[ET Awful]

58. You specifically stated in your post. . .

that my personal feelings weren't a reason to ban them.

I had never said they were, you implied that I had.

[Muddleoftheroad]

62. Personal feelings were given as an explanation

And I said that was insufficient cause.

[PassingFair]

87. Strange...

when most of your arguments for belief in the supernatural are based wholey on personal feelings....

[Muddleoftheroad]

89. My beliefs in God are my beliefs

Not a reason to ban someone else's beliefs.

[ze_dscherman]

49. Do you have personal experiences?

Or have you just "researched" what others write?

In my very personal experience I've never seen any hint to sexual abuse. This is something that is very much against their sexually very repressive codex. BUT I do think that, should abuse happen, it is not something that should be dealt only within the community. It's a severe crime, and it needs to be reported to the authorities.

[ET Awful]

55. I was raised as one of Jehovahs Witnesses from age 7-14

Yup, they refer to themselves as "one of Jehovahs Witnesses" not a "Jehovahs Witness."

So yes, I have personal experience. I have a very good friend who was molested and the church concealed it. They prefer to handle things internally because they consider all law enforcement and government to be "worldly" and not godly. This girl ended up dropping out of school and last I heard she was living on the streets in Los Angeles.

I also know a lady who was divorced and rather than being comforted, was ostracized by the church (despite the fact that the lady in question obtained a divorce because her husband was a drug addict and could not provide for his famil). This person was cut off completely from her friends and people she'd known for years would no longer speak to her or associate with her. The lady? My mother.

I'd say I have personal experience.

[RapidCreek]

92. I don't want them in my lawn....

they are unclean...I shun them.

RC

[ze_dscherman]

48. Wrong about disfellowship

They still are allowed to speak to ex-followers - the rule you cite as been given up decades ago. Now they are told not to have "spiritual community" anymore with an ex-follower. This will usually mean that friendships are destroyed, but not always. I can tell you because I know the situation myself - I grew up in a family of JW's, split with them when I was a teenager and was officially disfellowshipped. A tough thing to go through, even if it was my own decision to leave the cult, but it did never mean the end of relations to my family. Although this happened quarter of a century ago, some members of that congregation still send me greetings.

The blood thing is something different. I have accepted that it is the free will of my parents to choose not to have a blood transfusion - and that decision has been made several times when they had very dangerous operations. Although I think it is madness, I'm not in the position to decide for them. Luckily, their doctors have always been able to provide other means of stabilizing their blood circuit.

It is a different thing if they decide for their children. I do think that in such an extreme case a state should be allowed to interfere.

About women, I mostly agree with you. But I do think the case you cite is extreme - molesting women is extremely frowned upon in their culture. And no, they don't excuse rapes.

[ET Awful]

59. I spent much of my childhood as one of them. . .

My own mother was ostracized and became pretty much an outcast as a result of their treatment of people that were disfellowshipped.

I speak from personal experience.

[ze_dscherman]

76. Different experiences

If you read my other posts, you'll see that I did experience disfellowshipment myself. It was my own choice to leave the religion my parents had raised me in, I declared that I was out, and was disfellowshipped some time later. I don't even know the reason why, because I refused any discussion with the "elders". It still hurt, and I lost many childhood friends.

What I also experienced was a very difficult time with my family - but in the end, we have found a way to get along nevertheless. Almost 25 years later, and although they know I will never come back, some people from the congregation still are genuinely interested in how I do, and with some I still have occasional contact. But probably this is a rare occasion.

[BonjourUSA]

24. Freedom of speech is not freedom of any speech

[Muddleoftheroad]

25. So what speech would you eliminate?

In America we also have freedom of religion, not always a favorite with some here.

[BayCityProgressive]

37. I think it is wrong

for the government to not step in and order a blood transfusion for a dying child because their parents are in a cult. However, if the JW's feel they are being persecuted it will give them even more fanatical faith and other loose cannons out there who want to feel like rebels will join their cause, potentially radicalizing them even more.

[Muddleoftheroad]

42. Cults

So where would you draw the line?

Should the government force Amish children to ride a bus to school? Should government force Muslim girls to NOT wear head scarves? Should government force churches to have actively gay clergy even if that goes against their religion?

It is not a slippery slope. It is a cliff.

[ze_dscherman]

50. Hi Muddleoftheroad,

strange alliance today ... usually our views are very different (Israel, death penalty, ...) - just wanted to say I appreciate your defense of freedom of speech / freedom of religion also for those we do not agree with.

[Muddleoftheroad]

54. That's what makes DU interesting

You never know who you end up agreeing with.

[mitchtv]

68. I read somewhere that the Russians had banned more than

a very few commercials from tv movies- That is 'free speech' here, but in Russia movies are 'art'and shouldn't be needlessly interrupted. I personally approve of this sort of restrictions on free speech.
I kick my self when I leave the gate unlocked and the JW's get in, but i justtell them I am an opes Dei catholic and I don't accept 'heretics'; unsaid:(Burn 'm at the stake)

[Citizen Daryl]

35. Group Renews Charge JW's Indifferent To Sexual Abuse

http://www.tennessean.com/local/archives/04/03/48864503.shtml?Element_ID=48864503

Group renews charge that Jehovah's Witnesses indifferent to sexual abuse

By BRIAN LEWIS
Staff Writer

Local Jehovah's Witness leaders are ignoring requests to meet with survivors of sexual abuse and their advocates, an organization calling for change in the church's policies on sexual abuse said.

Bill Bowen, national director of Silent Lambs, said sexual abuse in Jehovah's Witness congregations is ''an epidemic that's got to stop. Jehovah's Witnesses provide an excellent example of policy gone wrong.''

He was speaking outside a west Nashville Kingdom Hall, as the Jehovah's Witness churches are called. Silent Lambs also is sponsoring a conference on combating ''ignorance and apathy when it comes to sexual abuse'' tomorrow and Sunday at the Sheraton Music City Hotel, 777 McGavock Pike.

J.R. Brown, a spokesman for the national Jehovah's Witness organization, said that while accusations had been made that the church was shielding pedophiles, they had not been proved. If members commit sexual abuse, they can be excommunicated, Brown said.

The role of a church leader is to help a person spiritually, not prosecute someone for a secular crime, Brown said. Consequently, church leaders report to secular authorities only in states where they are required to do so by law, he said.

''Generally, the purpose of a cleric or minister is to entertain confessions of sin the person has committed and try to help the individual restore their relationship with God,'' Brown said. ''I don't know of any religious organization that has required all of its ministers to report every case of child abuse.''

However, some religious organizations, including the Roman Catholic Church, do require clergy to report all cases of sexual abuse to the police.

Also at the news conference, Silent Lambs presented an award to Jeff Walden of Nashville for speaking out about the abuse that he suffered as a child in a Memphis Jehovah's Witness congregation.

''If you speak out in this religion, you have to leave your life behind you and move on,'' said Walden, who said his experience as a Witness had turned him off to organized religion.

Brian Lewis writes about religion, faith and values. He can be reached at 615-259-8077 or [e-mail].

[Lars39]

60. Hi, Citizen Daryl!

Welcome to DU!!! Another middle TNer here! :hi:

[Soup Bean]

36. This is BAD for Democracy.

Banning a religious group that most people can deal with just by not answering the knock at the door is BAD. Look, I usually hide and don't answer the door when these guys come by, and they always leave without spraying graffitti or burning down my house. I've been outside working in the yard when they've come, and I've told them I'm too busy to talk. They leave peacefully.

Every now and then, I'll talk with them. I like to listen and rebut, and occaisionally agree. They're people looking for sympathy, just like everyone else. ANYTHING can be warped into a cult. Most of these folks are decent people who needed structure in their lives.

Freedom of Speech...ALL speech...is important for a free and healthy society. Banning groups, instead of debating and debunking their ideas is wrong. We have to be able to sort the wheat from the chaff, and being able to do that is the hallmark of an educated person.

Why do you think the ACLU is defending Rush Limbaugh? Because they like what he says? No...they're trying to keep the Gestapo from gaining steam. There are too many creeping police state tactics being used in the world today...I don't like it, and I'll fight it.

[Citizen Daryl]

40. I agree.

If they want to knock at my front door, they have every right to do so. If I want to yell at them, or debate theology with them, or ask them about 1914, or about all those JWs who died before the organization decided to reverse its' ban on organ transplants, or simply slam the door in their face, I have every right to do so.

[Crachet2004]

52. We put a Buddha in the front yard...and have not been bothered since!

The spirit of Guatama must be protecting us.

[Chicago Democrat]

53. Banning is quite severe... JW are mostly harmless..

And stupid. I like to close my door to them when they call. But they shouldn't be "banned".

[w4rma]

61. Russia appears to be growing more and more totalitarian, imho. (nt)

[Freddie Stubbs]

73. Still less totalitarian than when it was the USSR

Thoes who differ from the ruling party aren't sent to jsil or the gulag anymore.

[The Animator]

67. The last thing you want after a Friday night Vodka bender...

... it a bright and early Satuday morning wake-up call. I don't think that any religion should be banned. Mornings as we know them, however, need to be irradicated. I vote that mornings should be postponed until mid afternoon.

But seriously. I don't have a problem with people being free to beleive whatever the hell they want to beleive, but when people come knocking on my door and tell me that my religion (or lack thereof) is wrong, they are interfering with MY freedom of religion.

Lead by example, and some will be impressed. Do good things, and others may want to help you. Enlighten people about your beliefs when they ask you about them. Satisfy their curiosity and perhaps the genuinely interested will come to you.

In a way, it's like a sales job. Try to force a product down people's throat, and they will be scared off. High pressure sales will leave a customer disatisfied, especially with his ass being so sore. However, if you take the effort to put out a quality product, it will practically sell itself. Just leave it well enough alone and people who really want it will come and ask you about it.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

75. Don’t want them to come back?

Ask them to produce an annual corporate financial statement from J W Headquarters (Yes J W’s are a legal corporation).
Then write to corporate headquarters with a similar request.

They likely will never trouble you again.

[tlcandie]

82. Personally, I don't like them coming to my door. My response to them

(after watching a documentary on TV) is that when they open up all their private records to the government for them to review the over 23k+ cases or child molestation and sexual abuse, then MAYBE I might allow them at my door.

Their main office for storing all this nasty info is in Manhattan or Queens maybe even..can't remember, but should be here somewhere in this information.

http://www.watchtowerinformationservice.org/childabuse.htm

Elder Leaves Faith to Protest Child Molestation
http://www.watchtowerinformationservice.org/bowen.html

http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/2001/02/04/ky_jeh.html

Just under 24k reported JW molesters on file
http://www.interlogy.com/products/netcard/cards/Watchtower_Bible_and_Tract_Society_-_Jehovahs_Witnesses.htm

http://www.jw-media.org/region/global/english/backgrounders/e_molestation.htm

http://watchtower.observer.org/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=JWANDCHILDREN2

http://www.wate.com/Global/story.asp?S=950427

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2001/004/11.23.html

TONS more if you care to google Jehovah Witness molestations, plus there's a documentary either on FSTV or LINK TV from several months back which followed a report in England on abuse/sexual molestation and then to US where the records are kept in NY.

Edit: Personally, I don't want them or anyone (dems included) coming to my door. My house is my retreat and privacy and I do NOT like answering the door or the telephone to intruders. Whatever they want to spout, yell, etc. in public is their choice and when I go out into the public that is the price I pay.

I do, however, wonder why they are not looked into and taken seriously, prosecuted even, by the government regarding all these claims of molestation, etc. much like the Catholic church. Maybe if it was done they wouldn't be knocking on doors so seriously. :shrug:

[dfong63]

84. if they can ban JW's, then can ban your religion or mine, too

remember Niemoller's words.

First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

95. "Good News?"

orthogonal
Response to Reply #8
83. Protecting the Vulnerable from Destructive Cults
“But perhaps the real message, the real "Good News", is that it's precisely this persecution of minority religions -- derisively called "dangerous cults" -- that led to the United States enshrining in its secular Bible, the Constitution, an absolute right of religious freedom.”
----------------------------------------------------------------
Your Constitutionally guaranteed “right of religious freedom” is viewed as something less than “Good News” by the victims of genocide that make the white man’s “religious freedom” possible.
----------------------------------------------------------------
University of Maine System
Summer 2004 Online Courses
Registration Begins 4/8/2004
Semester Begins 5/17/2004. Exceptions noted.

HTYI 323/SOCI 323 Native American Holocaust
ONLINE
May 17 - Jul 3

Explores historical, sociological, and political foundations for the modern condition of Americas' indigenous peoples. Examines linkages between genocide, population transfer, population incarceration, cultural assimilation, etc. and the construction of the dominant social discourse/reality. Examines power relations' influence on historical and cultural discourse through creation, enforcement, negotiation, and challenge of social meanings. This is a reading and writing intensive course. Online computer use required. Computers are available at locations statewide. http://www.courses.maine.edu Prerequisites: SOCI 100 Introduction to Sociology or ANTI 100 Introduction to Anthropology, ENGI 151 College Composition and an introductory history course. CR 3. Instructor Matthew Johnson
http://www.learn2.maine.edu/isummer.asp?ltr=all
-----------------------------------------------------------------
dfong63
84. "if they can ban JW's, then can ban your religion or mine, too"

Niemoller’s words as applied to the Americas might better read--


FIRST they came for the indigenous peoples,
Then they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.