Leaving the faith for societal reasons acceptable or is there another way?

[nobspeople]

Kudos to him!
https://www.yahoo.com/news/mormon-billi ... 58255.html

If you disagree with your faith's views on things like women's rights, LGBTQ+ issues, race issues, etc., is this the best thing to do, or is there another way you can stay in your faith (rather or not you stay in your 'church') and still be a champion to these issues, or is this the best way?

[tam]

[
But there is a big price to pay when one recognizes they were mistaking about accepting the teachings of JWs or other Christian sects that practice shunning or excommunication or whatever it is that JWs call shunning.

If by that you are implying that Jehovahs Witnesses shun/ disfellowship members because they choose to leave our religion that is incorrect. Anyone that is a baptised member can simply stop coming to our church and after 6 months is no longer counted as a member.



FURTHER READING

Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Shun Those Who Used to Belong to Their Religion?
https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES , SHUNNING and ... CHILD ABUSE

If someone leaves your religion (by resigning/disassociating or by joining another denomination), are you saying your religion does not tell its members to shun such a person?

The following article makes a distinction between a person who is inactive (not attending meetings or preaching) and a person who actually leaves the religion. The person who leaves the religion is to be shunned.

https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/resign/

See also:

Relatives Not in the Household: “The situation is different if the disfellowshipped or disassociated one is a relative living outside the immediate family circle and home,” states The Watchtower of April 15, 1988, page 28. “It might be possible to have almost no contact at all with the relative. Even if there were some family matters requiring contact, this certainly would be kept to a minimum,” in harmony with the divine injunction to “quit mixing in company with anyone” who is guilty of sinning unrepentantly. (1 Cor. 5:11) Loyal Christians should strive to avoid needless association with such a relative, even keeping business dealings to an absolute minimum.​

and,

The term “disassociation” applies to the action taken by a person who is a baptized Witness but deliberately repudiates his Christian standing by stating that he no longer wants to be recognized as, or known as, one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Or he might renounce his place in the Christian congregation by his actions, such as by becoming part of a secular organization that has objectives contrary to Bible teachings and therefore is under judgment by Jehovah God.​—Isa. 2:4; Rev. 19:17-21.

31 Concerning those who renounced their Christian faith in his day, the apostle John wrote: “They went out from us, but they were not of our sort; for if they had been of our sort, they would have remained with us.”​—1 John 2:19.

32 When a person disassociates himself, his situation before Jehovah is far different from that of an inactive Christian, one who no longer shares in the field ministry. A person may have become inactive because he failed to study God’s Word regularly. Or perhaps he experienced personal problems or persecution and lost his zeal for serving Jehovah. The elders as well as others in the congregation will continue to render appropriate spiritual assistance to an inactive Christian.​—Rom. 15:1; 1 Thess. 5:14; Heb. 12:12.

33 In contrast, if a person who is a Christian chooses to disassociate himself, a brief announcement is made to inform the congregation, stating: “[Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.” Such a person is treated in the same way as a disfellowshipped person.

You have to watch out for the way the WT magazines word things, and for the way that some respond to questions (or rather misdirect and respond instead to a different question). Lots and lots and lots of words in those magazine articles, so many that often you may not realize the question you asked was never answered. You were just misdirected. A person who is baptized who leaves the religion is shunned. I have found that there is rarely a direct and honest answer given to the public on that matter. Instead, the public is misdirected to something else... such as someone who is still a member but who is just 'weak in faith'.

The fact is that a person who LEAVES the religion is indeed shunned, treated in the exact same manner as a person who is disfellowshipped. There is no exception made for a person who realized they made a mistake in joining that religion, and wish to correct their mistake.

I find the 'bait and switch' tactic extremely deceptive. The magazines assist/promote that deception, but the reality is that a disassociate person is indeed shunned for leaving the religion.

A person could leave the religion because they have come to understand that it is not true, in the same way that a person could leave the RCC because they have come to understand that IT is not true. The WTS would still demand that person (who left their religion) be shunned. A person could leave these religions in order to follow Christ. The WTS will still demand that such a person be shunned.

(a jw who refuses to shun such people can find themselves in a judicial committee and even be disfellowshipped and shunned themselves)



Peace to you all,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[historia]

Or...maybe they should join and try to change that particular POV(s)?

Yes that is of course another option although it seems somewhat "underhanded" to join a religion that with the sole purpose of changing it.

It seems to me that most people who are interested in reforming a particular denomination or religion were raised in that group rather than converted to it.

Religion is often tied to ethnicity and family history, making it more than just about beliefs. Mormons, in particular -- going back to the OP -- form a distinct cultural group within the United States, with the LDS Church playing an outsized role in the lives of people in Utah and adjoining states.

For some disgruntled Mormons, it is not enough just to stop attending church themselves, they want to see the Mormon Church reformed as well, since in their view it is negatively impacting their family, friends, and community.

[JehovahsWitness]

Or...maybe they should join and try to change that particular POV(s)?

Yes that is of course another option although it seems somewhat "underhanded" to join a religion that with the sole purpose of changing it.

It seems to me that most people who are interested in reforming a particular denomination or religion were raised in that group rather than converted to it.

Religion is often tied to ethnicity and family history, making it more than just about beliefs. Mormons, in particular -- going back to the OP -- form a distinct cultural group within the United States, with the LDS Church playing an outsized role in the lives of people in Utah and adjoining states.

For some disgruntled Mormons, it is not enough just to stop attending church themselves, they want to see the Mormon Church reformed as well, since in their view it is negatively impacting their family, friends, and community.

Fair enough; I don't know much about the Mormon religion but if a person feels they must press for reform from within they must follow their heart as long as they are willing to face the consequences. All principled people choose the hill on which they will die.





JW

[nobspeople]

Beliefs can change over time. I'd think if an organization is set on 'finding the truth' and the like they'd be open to potential changes...

Yes absolutely, but one usually joins a religion as it stands at the moment of joining. If one disagree with what said group views as the fundamental tenets of the faith then it would be honest to say so and see if they still will accept you. Or wait until it comes around to your view. Anyway, if all is fair in love, war and religion it comes down to to making whatever choices one is comfortable with.

One would think one would join something with which they agree. But some people.... they want to be more important than others while some just want to 'change the world'.
I wonder, in the mindset of today's world, if more people are joining establishments just to change them to their own POV?

[JehovahsWitness]

One would think one would join something with which they agree.

I would think so too

But some people.... they want to be more important than others while some just want to 'change the world'

Agreed

I wonder, in the mindset of today's world, if more people are joining establishments just to change them to their own POV?

I wonder that too. ..

[nobspeople]

One would think one would join something with which they agree.

I would think so too

But some people.... they want to be more important than others while some just want to 'change the world'

Agreed

I wonder, in the mindset of today's world, if more people are joining establishments just to change them to their own POV?

I wonder that too. ..

All that said, one could make the case for trying to change an organization (from within, perhaps) they see as harmful to others.
Or, they could change their mind while in said organization on one particular thing and want to try to change that organization's POV on that one thing.
Is it wrong to want, and try to, change an organization's view on something one thinks is wrong and harmful instead of just 'leaving'?

[JehovahsWitness]

All that said, one could make the case for trying to change an organization (from within, perhaps) they see as harmful to others.
Or, they could change their mind while in said organization on one particular thing and want to try to change that organization's POV on that one thing.
Is it wrong to want, and try to, change an organization's view on something one thinks is wrong and harmful instead of just 'leaving'?

Not necessarily, like I Said to historia..

... if a person feels they must press for reform from within they must follow their heart as long as they are willing to face the consequences. All principled people choose the hill on which they will die.





JW

[nobspeople]

All that said, one could make the case for trying to change an organization (from within, perhaps) they see as harmful to others.
Or, they could change their mind while in said organization on one particular thing and want to try to change that organization's POV on that one thing.
Is it wrong to want, and try to, change an organization's view on something one thinks is wrong and harmful instead of just 'leaving'?

Not necessarily, like I Said to historia..

... if a person feels they must press for reform from within they must follow their heart as long as they are willing to face the consequences. All principled people choose the hill on which they will die.





JW

Consequences could be grass roots change to the organization. Should the organization be willing to accept this change as well, or die on their own hill?