5 ms·

People I know personally were strongly ostracized after leaving Jehovah's Witnesses (in the US) and the Catholic church (in Latin America). Cut out of their exi

People I know personally were strongly ostracized after leaving Jehovah's Witnesses (in the US) and the Catholic church (in Latin America). Cut out of their existing social circles, immediate family members refusing to attend their wedding over it, etc.

groundzeros2015 24d ago
If that’s the definition both political parties are included.
- cogman10 24d ago
  Not really. Both mainstream political parties don't like each other, but by and large they don't attack someone for leaving the party (from what I've seen). Perhaps if you are saying attacks of politicians switching parties, which I could see. But I don't think I've ever heard of republicans talking about exrepublicans or democrats talking about exdemocrats. I personally have switched from voting republican to voting democrat. It's not something my family really cares about and I still have good relations with them even though a number of them are pretty MAGA. Cults will actually have lessons and classes about the evils of ex members. Someone brought up JWs and that's a pretty good example of what I'm thinking of.
  - groundzeros2015 24d ago
    I think you’re correct that mainstream leaders of the parties try not to talk about each other in that way and mostly succeed. But I absolutely do know family members and friends treat it with that level of zeal.
    - kstrauser 24d ago
      I think that's true of just darn near everything. People are tribal and tend to get uncomfortable when people around them change: * Their political parties * Their religions * Their diets (meat => vegan, or vice versa) * Their music * Their computer OS None of those compare to cult shunning, which is more systematic and absolute. I mentioned in another comment that my parents were sad when I stopped going to church. That's got nothing on having one's entire family and support groups ceasing to publicly acknowledge their existence.
      - groundzeros2015 24d ago
        > None of those compare to cult shunning I absolutely disagree. I’ve seen cult shunning and if there is a version which has mass appeal now it’s politics.
- etc-hosts 24d ago
  I think a difference would be a Cult focuses on making the cult congregation member feel like their real family is the Cult, which could or could not be related to your biological family. Leaving whatever you define as your family is always difficult. The rhetoric from the DNC and Republicans can get pretty out there but I don't think anyone thinks of DNC or Republican party members as their actual family ( I hope )
kstrauser 24d ago
JW was the first one I thought of by that definition. I was raised Southern Baptist. When I stopped going, the church contacted me a couple of times to say they missed us and asked if everything was OK, and to say they'd love to have us back if we wanted to come back sometime. My parents weren't thrilled but that's less religion, more family dynamics: it was much the same when they found out I didn't support their preferred political party anymore. That was about it, though. The church didn't lean on us in any way, or tell people to stop talking to us, or use any other means to cajole or punish us. My thinking on cults is very similar to all this, plus another distinguisher. A cult typically requires you to join before you get all the information about what you're signing up for. I've never been a Muslim, but know that if you walk into a mosque, someone will cheerfully greet you and load you up with a Koran and all kinds of other reading material. Same with any mainstream Protestant church, or the Catholic church, or Hindu, or Buddhist, etc. In fact, many/most churches won't let you join until you've shown that you understand that church's beliefs. Compare and contrast with, say, Scientology, which is notoriously different.
- astura 24d ago
  >The church didn't lean on us in any way, or tell people to stop talking to us, or use any other means to cajole or punish us Southern Baptists officially teach that eternal damnation is a literal, conscious, and everlasting punishment in Hell for anyone who dies without personal faith and salvation in Jesus Christ. If the threat of eternal torment is not coercive control, I'm not sure what is. I also disagree that Catholic church happily gives you all the information upfront. I didn't grow up Catholic but my parents did, and at least back then Catholic teachings (they both went to Catholic school) very heavily discouraged individuals from reading the Bible. My parents also grew up going to mass in Latin, a language they don't understand. Things are different nowadays.
  - prussia 24d ago
    Southern Baptists don't specifically believe you have to be a Southern Baptist to be saved though, do they? And they believe in salvation by grace alone. Plus, the whole "once saved, always saved" thing. It's hard to argue it is coercion if they say you can be saved independent of being a Southern Baptist or obeying them, because they don't seem to be holding a whole lot of power then.
piperflatline 24d ago
Born and raised JW, and yup they're the first that popped to mind.
graemep 24d ago
JWs do i as a matter of policy, but I would not call them mainstream. Not my experience of the Catholic Church at all, having left it myself (and getting married in a registry office etc.), and having friends who have done so in more than one country. Not one of us as had any friend or relative hold it against us. It might be a feature of a particular region or culture, or reflective of controlling family, but not of the Catholic Church in general.
- CrazyStat 23d ago
  My ex-Catholic's friend's mother refused to speak to him until his first child was born, at which point the draw of a grandchild overcame her aversion I guess. They've (mostly) reconciled now.

groundzeros2015 24d ago

If that’s the definition both political parties are included.

cogman10 24d ago
Not really. Both mainstream political parties don't like each other, but by and large they don't attack someone for leaving the party (from what I've seen). Perhaps if you are saying attacks of politicians switching parties, which I could see. But I don't think I've ever heard of republicans talking about exrepublicans or democrats talking about exdemocrats. I personally have switched from voting republican to voting democrat. It's not something my family really cares about and I still have good relations with them even though a number of them are pretty MAGA. Cults will actually have lessons and classes about the evils of ex members. Someone brought up JWs and that's a pretty good example of what I'm thinking of.
- groundzeros2015 24d ago
  I think you’re correct that mainstream leaders of the parties try not to talk about each other in that way and mostly succeed. But I absolutely do know family members and friends treat it with that level of zeal.
  - kstrauser 24d ago
    I think that's true of just darn near everything. People are tribal and tend to get uncomfortable when people around them change: * Their political parties * Their religions * Their diets (meat => vegan, or vice versa) * Their music * Their computer OS None of those compare to cult shunning, which is more systematic and absolute. I mentioned in another comment that my parents were sad when I stopped going to church. That's got nothing on having one's entire family and support groups ceasing to publicly acknowledge their existence.
    - groundzeros2015 24d ago
      > None of those compare to cult shunning I absolutely disagree. I’ve seen cult shunning and if there is a version which has mass appeal now it’s politics.
etc-hosts 24d ago
I think a difference would be a Cult focuses on making the cult congregation member feel like their real family is the Cult, which could or could not be related to your biological family. Leaving whatever you define as your family is always difficult. The rhetoric from the DNC and Republicans can get pretty out there but I don't think anyone thinks of DNC or Republican party members as their actual family ( I hope )

kstrauser 24d ago

JW was the first one I thought of by that definition. I was raised Southern Baptist. When I stopped going, the church contacted me a couple of times to say they missed us and asked if everything was OK, and to say they'd love to have us back if we wanted to come back sometime. My parents weren't thrilled but that's less religion, more family dynamics: it was much the same when they found out I didn't support their preferred political party anymore. That was about it, though. The church didn't lean on us in any way, or tell people to stop talking to us, or use any other means to cajole or punish us. My thinking on cults is very similar to all this, plus another distinguisher. A cult typically requires you to join before you get all the information about what you're signing up for. I've never been a Muslim, but know that if you walk into a mosque, someone will cheerfully greet you and load you up with a Koran and all kinds of other reading material. Same with any mainstream Protestant church, or the Catholic church, or Hindu, or Buddhist, etc. In fact, many/most churches won't let you join until you've shown that you understand that church's beliefs. Compare and contrast with, say, Scientology, which is notoriously different.

astura 24d ago
>The church didn't lean on us in any way, or tell people to stop talking to us, or use any other means to cajole or punish us Southern Baptists officially teach that eternal damnation is a literal, conscious, and everlasting punishment in Hell for anyone who dies without personal faith and salvation in Jesus Christ. If the threat of eternal torment is not coercive control, I'm not sure what is. I also disagree that Catholic church happily gives you all the information upfront. I didn't grow up Catholic but my parents did, and at least back then Catholic teachings (they both went to Catholic school) very heavily discouraged individuals from reading the Bible. My parents also grew up going to mass in Latin, a language they don't understand. Things are different nowadays.
- prussia 24d ago
  Southern Baptists don't specifically believe you have to be a Southern Baptist to be saved though, do they? And they believe in salvation by grace alone. Plus, the whole "once saved, always saved" thing. It's hard to argue it is coercion if they say you can be saved independent of being a Southern Baptist or obeying them, because they don't seem to be holding a whole lot of power then.

piperflatline 24d ago

Born and raised JW, and yup they're the first that popped to mind.

graemep 24d ago

JWs do i as a matter of policy, but I would not call them mainstream. Not my experience of the Catholic Church at all, having left it myself (and getting married in a registry office etc.), and having friends who have done so in more than one country. Not one of us as had any friend or relative hold it against us. It might be a feature of a particular region or culture, or reflective of controlling family, but not of the Catholic Church in general.

CrazyStat 23d ago
My ex-Catholic's friend's mother refused to speak to him until his first child was born, at which point the draw of a grandchild overcame her aversion I guess. They've (mostly) reconciled now.