I know the Society had to change their wording when addressing the congregation about Disfellowshiping to "no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses."
This has bothered me for a while now. How is this not legal slander? Everyone in the Orginization knows that the new "terminology" means the exact same thing as the old term. I'm not sure why they felt it necessary to change the terminology, I'm not familiar with the litigation that prompted them to make this change.
If it's because of slander laws, then changing it to the "new" term but informing all the members that the action is still exactly the same couldn't possibly solve the legal problem long term?
This has bothered me for a while now. How is this not legal slander? Everyone in the Orginization knows that the new "terminology" means the exact same thing as the old term. I'm not sure why they felt it necessary to change the terminology, I'm not familiar with the litigation that prompted them to make this change.
If it's because of slander laws, then changing it to the "new" term but informing all the members that the action is still exactly the same couldn't possibly solve the legal problem long term?
