Jump to content
The World News Media

I Almost Wish That There Was More Public Kickback From WT Regarding CSA Charges


Recommended Posts

  • Member

If there has been kickback on manipulation and ‘control’ charges, and if there has been kickback on ‘flip-flopping’ charges, then I would like to see kickback on charges that Witnesses ‘cover up’ child sexual abuse. A good place to start is by pointing out that leaving reporting up to the involved parties is not the same as ‘covering up.’

Instead, the Witness organization states that it “abhors child sexual abuse,” which, in combination with its reluctance to go there otherwise, is spun by determined enemies as though they love the stuff. Not all will do what reporter Elizabeth Chuck did 

    Hello guest!

Why do they not respond in more detail? It may be that the sheer wickedness of the charge takes their breath away and makes them look like deer caught in the headlights. Yes, they know well the verse, “every sort of wicked thing will be lyingly said about you” but this—this is the wickedest thing of all! And the proactive arrangement started with such good intentions. Not so many years ago the notion of a religion “policing its own” was lauded as the ultimate in practicing what one preached. 

It wouldn’t be hard to do—to provide a brief defense of criticisms leveled at them. It might start with points such as:

  1. “Covering up” is not the same as leaving it to the digression of ones affected to report.
  2. There wouldn’t be anything to be accused of covering up had not the Witness organization practiced what almost nobody else did—policing its own. Countless persons are arrested with regard to child sexual abuse. Their religious affiliation or lack of is never reported. The reason that it is so with Witnesses is that they tried to do something about it among their own.
  3. Unlike virtually anywhere else, where the leaders of an organization are themselves the abusers, the leaders of the Witness community are accused of botching the handling of instances—bad, perhaps—history will judge—but nowhere near as bad as being the ones who commit it.

That’s a few for starters. More could be added, such as

  1. The current “gold standard” of child sexual abuse to “go beyond the law” will inevitably cause you problems with those who, not surprisingly, expect you to abide by law.
  2. Child sexual abuse would appear to be the primary gross planetary product—30 years into all-out war against CSA and barely a dent has been made. Therefore efforts to prevent it ought to be given at least as much creedence as efforts to secure the barn door after the cows have fled. Nobody, but nobody, has done what the Witness organization has done, gathering every member in the world to consider detailed scenarios in which child sexual abuse might occur so that parents, obviously the first line of defense, can be vigilant. This was done as part of the program of the 2017 Regional conventions. 
  3. The reason that the greater world will never make inroads with regard to child sexual abuse it that it feeds with one hand what it is trying to punish with another. The TicTok app taking young people by storm has been described as a pedophile’s dream come true. Though it is parallel and thus not exactly the same thing, the 2020 NFL halftime show demonstrates that objectifying woman is the force that makes the world go round—the MeToo movement is doomed from the start. 
  4. The matter of CSA does not go away. It is not being solved. Rather, each month brings some new revelation of how the very elements of this world keep it firmly entrenched as a societal ill. It’s intricate involvement with the Child Protective Service agencies recently was reviewed in a story I must have missed. “We have 

      Hello guest!
    ” said Newsweek in January 2018:

    And the latest scandal—pediatricians! “Sheds light on a problem that could rival priest scandals,” 

      Hello guest!
     just how many there might be. And to think I got into a squabble with that nasty O’Mally, determined to put down the Caleb and Sophia video “Protect Your Children,” while she heralded one that specifically said that it was okay for a doctor to touch you in private areas. “Ask the young women of the U.S. Gymnastics Olympic team which video they think would have offered them more protection,” I told her.

    Just a few basic tenets of defense for those who would like to have some response to when workmates, schoolmates, or neighbors hit them over the head with what they just saw on TV. It doesn’t cover every tiny thing—just the general outline. The nature of critics everywhere is that they would like their complaints on center stage, to the exclusion of whatever else used to be there. Maybe its not a good idea to indulge them so. Maybe it’s enough to correct matters that need it, such as making it crystal clear to members

      Hello guest!
    to police, since the abuser has already brought about the reproach. Maybe it is enough to focus on creating an atmosphere where CSA is less likely to happen. 

    Maybe. But sometimes you do wish there was more (or any) of a public response.

    I did like the WT attorney’s words at the reversal of the Montana verdict. “There are no winners in a case involving child abuse. ‘No child should ever be subjected to such a debased crime....Tragically, it happens, and when it does Jehovah's Witnesses follow the law. This is what the Montana Supreme Court has established.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Views 1.1k
  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

If there has been kickback on manipulation and ‘control’ charges, and if there has been kickback on ‘flip-flopping’ charges, then I would like to see kickback on charges that Witnesses ‘cover up’ child sexual abuse. A good place to start is by pointing out that leaving reporting up to the involved parties is not the same as ‘covering up.’ Instead, the Witness organization states that it “abhors child sexual abuse,” which, in combination with its reluctance to go there otherwise, is spun by

What puzzles me TTH is, you want people to show you their false representation of facts, yet Anna, JWinsider and even you have never submitted the following from the Watchtower, why is that? That would be my question. In rare instances, one Christian might commit a serious crime against another—such as rape, assault, murder, or major theft. In such cases, it would not be unchristian to report the matter to the authorities, even though doing so might result in a court case or a crim

JWI wants nothing of the sort. But if you are going to do one of these things where you go on an attack with false "facts" again, then someone ought to point out at least a couple of them. First of all, you are conflating the Bible Students and the JW's if you think that the cross and crown was a view noticed "since 1950." The cross-and-crown pins were declared to be objectionable as early as 1928. The English Watchtower got rid of the symbol from its covers in 1931. The pin was objectionab

Posted Images

  • Member
5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

If there has been kickback on manipulation and ‘control’ charges, and if there has been kickback on ‘flip-flopping’ charges, then I would like to see kickback on charges that Witnesses ‘cover up’ child sexual abuse. A good place to start is by pointing out that leaving reporting up to the involved parties is not the same as ‘covering up.’

You are right in conclusion how "involved parties" are those who may decide.

WT elders, when came to position to hear about something  comes to be also "involved parties" because they have information. Even more, they alone examining such information and classified them into "truth" or "lies". Well, if this serious men, elders, have such crucial knowledge about crime act, what making them to be without responsibility toward - truth, justice, involved parties and victim first?

Do we have to mention advice's made by many of this same elders, not to go to "worldly courts" because of god's name and organization honor?

Perhaps "public" is all those people who don't know nothing or not know enough about CSA and Court cases in JWorg? Then will have at least two class: 1) JW people Public and 2) Worldly people Public. Which of this two groups will be more devastated after WT "kickback"? Or will these WT kickback be presented in two envelops, one for worldly public and one for JW public?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member

Oh dear @TrueTomHarley I quote  " Countless persons are arrested with regard to child sexual abuse. Their religious affiliation or lack of is never reported. 

But then I quote " Unlike virtually anywhere else, where the leaders of an organization are themselves the abusers.." 

Um, Catholic church comes to mind Tom. But Tom you said  "Their religious affiliation or lack of is never reported." .... So if their 'religious affiliation' is never reported, then how come the Catholic church was being reported on long before the JW Org ?  

Quote : The current “gold standard” of child sexual abuse to “go beyond the law” will inevitably cause you problems with those who, not surprisingly, expect you to abide by law.

Which law Tom, God's or man's ?  Those people that love God and Christ would expect the GB and it's Org to obey God as ruler rather than men.  Whose 'law' and 'rules' and 'principles' do you live by Tom ? God's or man's ? 

Quote  " Therefore efforts to prevent it ought to be given at least as much creedence "

TOM, wake up. It hasn't been efforts to prevent it. It has been efforts to hide it. Elders have been allowed to remain in their positions even though it was known that they had been and still were sexually abusing children. 

Tom you are back to your old trick, but it does not work. There is NO POINT AT ALL comparing the GB and it's rotten Org to the world which belongs to the Devil. You should compare them to God's standards required for His people.  

Quote: .Tragically, it happens, and when it does Jehovah's Witnesses follow the law. 

Which law Tom, God's or man's ? And which law should they be following ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
2 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

Oh dear @TrueTomHarley I quote  " Countless persons are arrested with regard to child sexual abuse. Their religious affiliation or lack of is never reported. 

But then I quote " Unlike virtually anywhere else, where the leaders of an organization are themselves the abusers.." 

Um, Catholic church comes to mind Tom. But Tom you said  "Their religious affiliation or lack of is never reported." .... So if their 'religious affiliation' is never reported, then how come the Catholic church was being reported on long before the JW Org ? 

You noticed this very well. Thanks !

How we would know it is about Catholic priests if news reporters didn't mentioned their religious affiliation? :))

Perhaps Tom thinking about rank and file Catholic members ? But rank and file Catholic are mere "laity". Inside JWorg rank and file members are not "laity" :)))

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
19 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

In many court cases world wide, the WTB&T Society has represented, under oath, that all Jehovah's Witnesses are ordained ministers, and are therefore clergy.

... even the newly baptized 8 year old girl, who thinks "clergy" is some kind of nasal congestion.

Yes, and this bring more confusion. JWorg don't have clergy-laity distinction, but have heavenly and earthly class, also have priesthood and not priesthood class, anointed and not anointed class, males as Heads and females as not Heads - BUT all are (male and female) ordained ministers. :))

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
6 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Yes, and this bring more confusion. JWorg don't have clergy-laity distinction, but have heavenly and earthly class, also have priesthood and not priesthood class, anointed and not anointed class, males as Heads and females as not Heads - BUT all are (male and female) ordained ministers. :))

JW Org pretends not to have clergy - laity distinction.

And some of the anointed are female whilst here on earth. It seems that spirit persons do not have a gender.

However, were all angels that appeared as humans on earth, men ?  

Quote Srecko. " BUT all are (male and female) ordained ministers. :))"  Um, but is this after they are baptised, or is it when they put in a Report sheet for doing ministry ? 

The plot thickens. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
3 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

In many court cases world wide, the WTB&T Society has represented, under oath, that all Jehovah's Witnesses are ordained ministers, and are therefore clergy.

The problem stems because the world has no concept of how to do spirituality as Jesus did it. Religion for them is a commodity. It is a product to be hawked, just like one might hawk soap, or used cars, or real estate, or anything. Religion is a career path for them. Your school guidance counselor might advise you, in view of your religious aptitude, to follow the career path to become a church minister or priest. No way would he ever advise you follow the career path to become  an elder or a Bethelite, because it isn’t a career to them—they don’t make any money. 

Go to seminary, take some courses from Professor Ehrman, so that you do not actually believe the stuff, and then go look for a church that will hire you as minister—it is a booming job market out there.

Victor Blackwell called them “mercenary ministers”—they do it for pay. It is the only model that the world recognizes. He would represent pioneers and special pioneers and congregation servants (back when it was 100+ hours) during WWII when they applied for draft exemption due to minister status. Church ministers never had the slightest difficulty in landing such exemptions, he reports. Pioneers, special pioneers, congregation servants, anyone associated with Jehovah’s Witnesses, were invariably denied. Judges recognized only ministers who 1) “had a church” and 2) got paid.

So what do you do when it is necessary to interact with the legal system of the world? In a world where there is some respect for God, the organization role of elders is what will be recognized as the equivalent of clergy, notwithstanding that elders do it for free. But as the world loses respect for God, then it is the salary that becomes the determining factor—do they make a living with it or not.

You’d almost think that one claiming to be a Witness could get his head around the distinction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member

TTH:

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws which regulate an establishment of religion, prohibit the free exercise of religion, among other things.

What this means is that if inside any particular religion they want to believe that God is a flying spaghetti monster, and call their people Giraffes, and slaughter goats and bathe in the blood, or play with snakes  ... the government is FORBIDDEN to interfere with that ... unless ... unless it is against public policy, and is a clear and present danger.

The Governing Body has declared that all Jehovah's Witnesses are ORDAINED Ministers of the Gospel ... a practice I believe was started during the Vietnam War to try and get Draft deferments. At least it was in place when I reported to the draft board in 1965 at the Armed Forces Entrance and Examining Station (AFEES), in Richmond Virginia, and a legal theory that I presented to those from my community who interrogated me in the Draft Board conference room with, if memory serves, 12 people whose job it was to classify me as to my Draft status.

I understand what you are saying, TTH and MOST of it is true, but that is COMPLETELY beside the point.

If you claim to be a hippopotamus, and you are RECOGNIZED as an ordained  hippopotamus,  don't be surprised that you are not allowed to book a room at the local Hotel.

Further, if you claim to be a hippopotamus, the by extension, your children are hippos,  you cannot without being a hypocrite deride anyone for looking at you, and looking at your son or daughter, and observing correctly that you are not.

Particularly ... and most importantly, if the culture of your religion has declared that "hippopotamusity" is a "snare and a racket", and that organized herds of hippos are "Babylon the Great", and that their "ordained" leaders are agents of Satan.

As a teenager, and in my early 20's, my best friend growing up used to Pioneer, and he bragged to me that he could go into prisons almost any time he wanted to "minister" to the inmates there by representing himself as "clergy", which I thought was "juking" the system.

Later, he and my first wife ran off together ... but I digress.

The Governing Body has repeatedly represented themselves to Courts as ministers, and to get special legal privileges, by representing themselves as clergy.

BUT ... you and I have read NOTHING about this in any of the Society's publications .. and heard NOTHING about this at the Kingdom Hall or at any Assemblies or Convention .... while at the SAME TIME telling us that the GB and Elders, and Branch people and we ourselves here at the bottom of the food chain ... ARE ALL EQUAL. (Let's all hold hands in a circle, and sing the Pepsi song).

Either we ARE all equal .... or we are NOT.

If we are in reality (gimmee a break!) then the newly baptized 8 year old girl is not only an ordained minister ... but is entitled to the legal privileges of "clergy", because she is in fact a "clergy person"

Either we ARE all equal .... or we are NOT.

THAT is what we have represented as fact ....under sworn oath before God in courts of law ... when  JWs demand the rights of "Clergy".

So ... on one hand we declare inwardly that we are NOT clergy, despicable agents of Satan as they are, perverting the Word of God, but are all equal ordained ministers at the Kingdom Hall ... from the Governing Body, all the way down to the little 8 year old baptized Sister ... and to the courts we declare that we ARE clergy.

Either we ARE all equal .... or we are NOT.

I guarantee that any rank-and-file Jehovah's Witnesses of my generation that heard that would be ashamed, and nauseous at the very idea that we shared legal privileges with the "serpents and vipers".

According to that ... the little 8 year old Sister has the legal right to be privy to people's secrets of every sort, confessed to her, and is legally protected from divulging those secrets to ANYBODY, if she so decides to do so.

You can't have it BOTH ways.

Can't Have It Both ways.gif

SOMEBODY is being conned ... either the courts ... or us.

There is no third choice.

Either we ARE all equal .... or we are NOT.

You can't have it BOTH ways.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
10 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

What this means

Do you feel that Victor Blackwell was wrong, then, to legally defend my brothers? 

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

He would represent pioneers and special pioneers and congregation servants (back when it was 100+ hours) during WWII when they applied for draft exemption due to minister status. Church ministers never had the slightest difficulty in landing such exemptions, he reports. Pioneers, special pioneers, congregation servants, anyone associated with Jehovah’s Witnesses, were invariably denied. Judges recognized only ministers who 1) “had a church” and 2) got paid.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member

Since the time that the supposed Hunchback of Notre Dame swung from the bells in the bell tower, CLERGY has been afforded special dispensations by the civil authorities.

Even the civil authorities are in many governments referred to as "ministers".

In Richmond Virginia, circa 1965 Pioneers, those who spent 100 hours a month in the ministry .... and BEFORE the idea was promoted that we were "ordained" ministers .... and LONG before the GB started promoting the idea that those involved in lawsuits were "Clergy", these Brothers WERE granted exemption to military service with a "4-D" classification as "Ministers of Religion"

I WAS THERE AND SAW IT.

I was threatened with five years in the Federal Penitentiary, and when I told them I was ready to go ... I got the "I-O" classification, and exemption as a conscientious objector.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.