Response:
While I disagree with the beliefs and
practices of the Jehovah's Witnesses, I do not question their right to
practice their religion, and I am glad the U.S. Constitution ensures
that they can. I dislike being handed religious pamphlets or having
people knock at the door to talk about their religion, but I also object
to being solicited outside discount stores by charities, including the
Boy Scouts. Yet I believe that the harm in prohibiting these activities
would greatly outweigh my preference for privacy. In Zen we do not
proselytize because the initial impetus to practice must be discovered
within.
People may be inflamed by practices which differ from their own. At an
office where I worked here in Orange County, some of the staff were
irritated that Jehovah's Witnesses would not participate in the
department birthday celebrations. Who is responsible for the office
disturbance? Jehovah's Witnesses are well known for their refusal to
have blood transfusions, but it may be less commonly known that many
medical alternatives do exist. Neither endangers public health.
If "inflammation of religious divisions" means that missionaries from one
religion attack another religion in order to pirate converts, it easily
applies to individuals from many religious groups. Jehovah's
|
|
Witnesses, like many Evangelical Christian groups,
believe that the example of Jesus and the Bible call for them to preach
the "Good News." Ministry training schools advise them to be polite, to
respect the wishes of those who are not interested, who are satisfied
with their own religious affiliation, or who do not want to be visited.
They know their time is better spent on people who express interest and
are open to learning more.
Jehovah's Witnesses are somewhat unique in that they are politically
neutral. In the U.S. they do not vote or go to war. They do not support
or resist government but wish to live peacefully. In some countries,
failure to support the government may be interpreted as opposing the
government, which may be far more threatening than concern for tolerance
among religions.
The Moscow authorities would be better advised to consider exactly what
threat exists and what specific actions should be curtailed, rather than
prohibiting one religious group from practicing its religion.
- Rev. Dr. Deborah Barrett |