On March 16, the Court of First Instance in Ghent ruled against the “Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses” in Belgium with regard to the application of the biblical norm of ceasing or limiting contacts with an excommunicated person or having made the decision to voluntarily withdraw from the group. For the first time since the 16th century, a public institution in Western Europe makes it punishable by law to read and follow what the Bible teaches. In a broad sense, this decision constitutes an infringement of the fundamental right of an individual or an organization to decide who he or she wants to meet with.
In addition, this decision of March 16, 2021 goes against the decisions taken by the Belgian Courts of Appeal and by the Court of Cassation on the same subject. On January 10, 2012, the Mons Court of Appeal dismissed the complaint of discrimination against Jehovah’s Witnesses, stating that a religion can determine the rules of conduct. On November 5, 2018, the Brussels Court of Appeal relied on the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and confirmed that a religion is free to determine the rules of conduct and that each member has the right to right to decide to limit contact with a former member. On February 7, 2019, this position was confirmed by the Court of Cassation.
The decision of the Ghent court is a flagrant violation of European laws, repeatedly endorsed by the European Court of Human Rights. On several occasions, the latter has called Jehovah’s Witnesses a “known religion” and stresses that “it is a general hallmark of several religions to determine doctrinal principles of behavior which its members conform to in their private lives.” (Jehovah’s Witnesses of Moscow v. Russia, no 302/02 && 118, 10 June 2010)
Referring to these legally founded principles, Prof. Holly Folk, professor at Western Washington University said, “It is not for government to interfere with decisions made by well-informed adults. Indeed, reality shows that many established religions apply the rule of no longer maintaining close ties with those who have denied their faith.”
Jehovah’s Witnesses encourage each other to apply Bible principles in their daily lives and to live peaceful lives with all humans. They reject all forms of hatred, class distinction, racism, discrimination and violence. They are committed to living by the two greatest biblical commandments: to love God and to love your neighbor as yourself (Mark 12: 28-31).
We will analyze the different legal steps to be taken.
There is a huge buzz on the internet about the Pyramid that commemorates Charles Taze Russell has been removed. This is done by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society according to the cemetery.
A Bible Student class used to care for the monument when they were called about repairs once. That class is old and small now.
There have been many persons visiting the pyramid lately and some are surprised it exists and some are angry. This is idolatry and idol they feel. This seemed to have created too much attention to the cemetery.
It makes sense to remove this idol (not just a headstone).
But what is amazing is the astonishment of those that weren’t aware that it was there. It was spoken of in watchtowers in early history.
And most pre governing body witnesses have always known about it.
I see it as a dismantling of this CREATURE WORSHIP OF A MAN. Good riddance.
This is another great discussion on Shunning that is logical and discusses the different aspects of shunning.
Sometimes you have to just move on and discover other friends and people outside of your little bubble.
It is okay to just stop trying to be around or associate with those that have chosen to cut you out of their lives because of Narcissistic Religious governing body members. These have become christ to your family members so sometimes you have to just leave them alone and enjoy Jehovah’s and Jesus’ gift of freedom to learn about their means of salvation instead of the creator of your religion, 2 narcissistic men and now 9. Cheers!
This is finally being addressed in a court of law, breaking up families.
I agree with the watchtower that if a family member decides they don’t want to associate with a former witness family member that is their choice.
They quote this man and say ones have denied their “Faith”? They are acting as judge.
And why are they quoting a so-called by them “worldly man?
If we were to look up this professor as usual we will fine he isn’t talking about shunning your Momma.
However, the court here realizes it is not their personal decision or choice.
IT IS AN ORGANIZATION RULE TO SHUN ANYONE THAT LEAVES!