Russian supreme court bans Jehovah's Witnesses

[Goaty Bill 2]

Not my thing personally but...
Like any move to restrict personal beliefs and practices, I find this a disappointing step by a government that should know and understand through it's own recent history why this is wrong.

“incitement of….religious discord” doesn't really seem sufficient excuse.

Russia bans Jehovah's Witnesses after supreme court rules Christian sect 'extremists'

[Goaty Bill 2]

gadgetmac said:

JW's are a special case. They would quite willingly refuse their children blood transfusions and allow them to die in line with their perverted beliefs.

fk 'em.

All religions / belief systems are 'a special case'.
I'm with you on the blood transfusion thing, and I don't think they are alone in that one.
I presume preaching against military service would be on the Russian list as well, but the Quakers have always been pacifists too.
They have a fair few Muslims in Chechnya, (and a history of problems), yet I don't think they've banned Islam.

I've had some pretty good debates with JWs over the years. At least they (the ones I spoke with) were polite and reasonable in presenting their arguments, and in listening to mine.

Love 'em or hate 'em, I object strongly to banning on principle.

[Goaty Bill 2]

gadgetmac said:

I'm torn. On the one hand 'freedom of speech' etc but on the other there's the indoctrination of their Children into the cult which is dispicable but doesn't only apply to JW's.

I can't blame the Russians for going down the proscription route.

But this is how it starts,
Call something 'hate speech' and people don't mind you banning it.
Pick an obscure religious cult - same result.
Later someone calls something no one ever thought of as 'hate speech' and suddenly people are being prosecuted for something no one ever previously thought of as hateful.

Soon the state is controlling all that you say, and not just what you can't say but the very words you must use when speaking.
The Russians know this as well as any country in the world, and better than most, yet it begins again...

The count of Russian citizens in the gulags at the end of the Stalinist period, for simply making a joke that the state found offensive, was in the millions.
Before long, simply speaking the truth can become impossible, words become forgotten or their meanings twisted out of recognition.

The place and time to stop, is before it begins.

[Goaty Bill 2]

glazbagun said:

gadgetmac said:

Yeah, its a fair point. But then so is the protection of children from those who would stand by and watch them die in the name of religion.

We ban lots of things you know.

They weren't banned because of their beliefs on blood transfusions though, were they? They were banned because their pamphlets are apparently extremist hate speech because they believe that their religion is right and all the other ones are wrong..

Nothing to do with the fact that they view the Orthodox church as false perversions of Christianity and are happy to explain why to anyone who will listen, don't vote in elections so are useless as a voter base, eschew nationalism, politics and are pacifists so are useless as soldiers or propaganda.

They're basically a low-hanging fruit and a thorn in the side of Orthodox church. The same fair and impartial thinking was surely behind the over to expel the Salvation Army from Moscow at the Turn of the millennium.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/04/20/russia-court-b...

For a former communist country, the church seems to be quite powerful over there. They're waging war on pornography IIRC, too.

I've got no axe to grind with Russia. Not these days. They have their positives and negatives like all countries.
The resurgence of Christianity in Russia is quite remarkable, but I'm not sure it's the Orthodox church behind this. If it is, then shame on them. The memory of their own persecution is in that case far too short.

Our freedom of speech and expression including the freedom to follow ones own religious (or otherwise) beliefs is the critical basis of all of our freedoms.

The measure of ones dedication to freedom is traditionally defined something like; The willingness to defend the rights of people you entirely disagree with to speak freely, express themselves and believe what they believe, in spite of what you think of them or how those things they say and believe make you feel.

Complaining about it here, will of course, make no difference at all.
I strongly suspect Vlad doesn't look in on us very often in any case.

[Goaty Bill 2]

Mr Tracy said:

Given that they believe only 144,000 thousand of them will ascend to heaven (to be protected from the complete destruction of the earth by Satan during Armageddon) I'm surprised they go house to house to recruit. Surely that just creates more competition for the available slots

That has remained a mystery to me.
As I understood it, the 'list' was pre-selected, which would on the face of it also negate the need for preaching and converting.

I suspect there must a bit more detail that to it that I never got a clear understanding of.

[Goaty Bill 2]

Bill said:

Pastor Niemoller had something to say about this.

and I did not speak out-
Because I was not a Jehovah's Witness...

[Goaty Bill 2]

Tom Logan said:

Many many years ago I had some friends in the Whitby area who were JWs, lovely people who would do anything to help people and certainly not doorknockers or preachers to the unconverted. Very entrenched and unwavering in their views though.

Are they a Christian sect as the OP states? I always thought that their beliefs pre-dated Christianity and were more akin to OT stuff.

1870s according to Wiki
They are and they aren't 'Christians' in the traditional sense.

The distinction based upon their text here, is along the lines of rejecting the Holy Trinity.
The early Christian church had considerable discussion about this as well, so their belief is not without precedence.

[Goaty Bill 2]

ollie05 said:

BlackLabel said:

You'd be opening a Pandora's box if you went though them all to see which ones to ban.

Ban them all load of absolute drivel/bullst

While there are only five officially communist states in the world today, I think North Korea is the only one currently up to your standards.
It may yet be possible for you to apply...

If they aren't forthcoming with a response, I suggest simply travelling there and taking a few photos. You'll be a full time resident in no time at all

[Goaty Bill 2]

ollie05 said:

Goaty Bill 2 said:

While there are only five officially communist states in the world today, I think North Korea is the only one currently up to your standards.
It may yet be possible for you to apply...

If they aren't forthcoming with a response, I suggest simply travelling there and taking a few photos. You'll be a full time resident in no time at all

Lol what an odd response. I don't want a communist world, my point is if all religions were globally scrapped, there would be far less conflict/hassle.

As you can tell, I'm an atheist

Indeed, it usually quite easy to spot one

Goaty Bill 2 said:

Bill said:

Pastor Niemoller had something to say about this.

and I did not speak out-
Because I was not a Jehovah's Witness...

[Goaty Bill 2]

hidetheelephants said:

No need to be authoritarian and ban them, just relieve them of their tax breaks and get rid of the ludicrous concept of religious offence; any religion that needs legal protection from ridicule is not robust enough to exist.

I'm not aware of religions in Russia being protected by blasphemy laws, but if you know better, please do tell...

The logic behind tax exempt status is that it theoretically removes the right of the church to lobby voters to vote for a particular party.
Which would you prefer, a tiny amount of tax revenue, or freedom from their political lobbying?
I know which I prefer, even if it hasn't worked all that well in the not so distant past.

Original reply had an unintentionally grumpy tone.

Edited by Goaty Bill 2 on Sunday 23 April 10:01

[Goaty Bill 2]

br d said:

Only in religion could someone with so little credibility still be revered.

10 years of Tony Bliar would seem to indicate otherwise.

ETA
Yes, some people are still listening to him too.

Edited by Goaty Bill 2 on Sunday 23 April 10:33

[Goaty Bill 2]

We don't need to ban people / groups that say 'stupid' things.

We need to allow them to speak.
If the things they say are truly foolish, if they tell lies, they will soon enough expose themselves for what they are.

Perhaps the word 'ban' could be removed from the English language and replaced by a word of 18 syllables, and include letters from the Cyrillic and Arabic alphabets, plus a few scientific or mathematical symbols.

Perhaps then, we would be less inclined to use it so frequently and so easily.

Edited by Goaty Bill 2 on Sunday 23 April 10:44

[Goaty Bill 2]

hidetheelephants said:

Goaty Bill 2 said:

I'm not aware of religions in Russia being protected by blasphemy laws, but if you know better, please do tell...

The logic behind tax exempt status is that it theoretically removes the right of the church to lobby voters to vote for a particular party.
Which would you prefer, a tiny amount of tax revenue, or freedom from their political lobbying?
I know which I prefer, even if it hasn't worked all that well in the not so distant past.

Pussy Riot got flung in clink for what amounted to a blasphemy charge; as the defacto state religion Russian Orthodox christianity gets a free ride. The major religions are represented directly in the HoL and I suspect they indulge in plenty of lobbying of a soft nature, certainly in recent years religious heidbummers like the Archbishop of Canterbury et al have been quite happy to make very political statements. As for the 'tiny' amount of tax revenue the established religions are extremely wealthy despite shrinking church attendances. A good look at the indoctrination of children is probably due too, in some circumstances it probably amounts to psychological abuse; if religions were prevented from proselytising to impressionable young minds the whole ghastly fiction might fade away and be consigned to history as it deserves to.

While I am quite familiar with Russia's historical abhorrent practice of using 'catch all' legal clauses (Section 58s being the 'classic' of the Soviet era ). I would agree that entering someone's private property and staging a performance might reasonably classed as 'hooliganism' (these things rarely translate well), regardless of the Orthodox clergy's opinion.
If someone were to enter a private business for a similar purpose, I would imagine similar laws would be used to prosecute them. I would not be at all surprised if to find that churches are protected from this sort of intrusion in the UK as well.
None of us can of course speak for the motivations of others.

Yes, the good old Archbishop should keep quiet on political matters, but perhaps less so on matters purely of conscience, but that may be a difficult thing to define, so better complete silence on political matters. I find that I rarely agree with him myself.
Regardless I am entirely in favour of the complete separation of church and state.

Taxes are generally levied on profits. I doubt that you'd find many churches in the west making actual profits amounting to much, though there may well be exceptions. There's hardly an Anglican church in the UK that isn't desperate for a new roof, or new plumbing, brick or stone work, repairs to graveyards.
As for council tax, they are unoccupied, thus dodging that, and vicarages do pay council tax as/when they are occupied.

I have no idea what churches may be guilty of "psychological abuse", but that's a pretty hefty charge, and you may well be able to provide examples. If it's true, then it should be looked into in the same way any other institution should be looked into if guilty of such things.
If there is a case for investigating establishments for their employees telling 'lies' then I would have a pretty good case against the majority of the educational institutions I attended. The times I was taught details as 'settled facts' that were anything but, would amount to nothing short of institutional fraud.
When my son was attending college I had to correct a number of falsehoods, and that was IT based.

The resurgence of religion in places like Russia and China should be a practical lesson in trying to repress religions. It never works, much like most other forms of repression that ultimately fail.
Whatever interpretation 'enlightened' people choose to give to that, it remains a fact. Adults choose religion too, as remarkable as that may seem to you and I.

Let us not forget that freedom of religion also includes freedom from religion.

Freedom is what this thread was about

Edited by Goaty Bill 2 on Tuesday 25th April 18:06

[Goaty Bill 2]

Mr Tracy said:

Goaty Bill 2 said:

I have no idea what churches may be guilty of "psychological abuse", but that's a pretty hefty charge, and you may well be able to provide examples. If it's true, then it should be looked into in the same way any other institution should be looked into if guilty of such things.


Let us not forget that freedom of religion also includes freedom from religion.

Freedom is what this thread was about

Edited by Goaty Bill 2 on Tuesday 25th April 18:06

Teaching children that if they don't believe in God, they will burn in hell ...... for eternity

As I stated in another post, I had two grandfathers and an uncle that were all ordained Anglican ministers.
I was never once in my life told that by them or any other Anglican minister to the best of my recollections.
Trust me, I sat through a lot of sermons as a kid.


However, you really are not going to draw me into that argument.

I suggest you take a teacher of that belief to court.
You only have to prove two things;
- God doesn't exist and therefore neither does Hell
- it was actually psychologically damaging

Best of luck with it

[Goaty Bill 2]

Hayek said:

hidetheelephants said:

Derek Smith said:

not telling lies to children,

That rules out all of them.

Rules out atheists too...

And politicians...