IICSA: survivors speak of influence of religion

[Thinking]

17 hours ago, Anna said:

Habakkuk 1:2-3

How long, O Jehovah, must I cry for help, but you do not hear? How long must I ask for help from violence, but you do not intervene? Why do you make me witness wrongdoing? And why do you tolerate oppression? Why are destruction and violence before me? And why do quarreling and conflict abound?

We're all familiar with Habakkuk's plight and we can add our own sentiments; "how much longer do we have to watch people suffering because of the things he mentioned, but also because of disease, starvation, old age etc.". My mother in law is 90, and is in severe pain from arthritis every day. Two of my friends died a horrible painful death from cancer. Small children dying of cancer and other diseases... everywhere you look there is SO much anguish and suffering. We ask the same questions as Habakkuk did 2600 years ago.... and Jehovah has had to watch mankind's suffering since the inception of sin. I have to keep reminding myself that Jehovah is the wisest being in the universe, also just and kind. Only he knows the perfect time to step in. Then also if we compare a lifetime of suffering of 80 years or so, and then eternity of mental peace and happiness and physical health, the suffering then is short lived and pales into insignificance.

It's a little easier to bare things if you know they are temporary....

I’m guessing it will go so far as tho we may feel we have been deceived or tricked....or he has completely  forgotten us....

I hope not but I often wonder if we will be tested as Jesus was...

Mathew 27:46

My God My God why has thou forsaken me....

( how utterly terrifying to feel that ) and STILL REMAIN faithful to A God who you think has left you..

[Arauna]

12 minutes ago, Thinking said:

our policies have changed because of the ARC....

As I said before -  JWs had to get by without proper government laws.  Now that governments were at last  taking their responsibility seriously,  to have an inquiry to see how they can close the loopholes in the laws. Now we can use this to improve the outcome of these matters. The ARC came way too late... there were many loopholes in the law.... same as in USA.

[Thinking]

On 2/26/2021 at 10:55 AM, Anna said:

Love reading your experiences!

We have discussed this issue a number of times on here. Jehovah reads hearts.

Also, what about all those people who have never heard the good news? And since time does not stand still, there will always be those who have never heard, because people are being born and living through the stream of time, so people will not all be in exactly the same position when Armageddon comes. There will always be someone who may have accepted the truth had they learned it sooner, but then Armageddon came....will Jehovah say sorry, too late?....For sure he will not because he is a just and loving God. So when we say only baptized JWs will be saved, it cannot be true...

He will probably treat them like he did the thief on the stake next to him but the thing is he repented at the last moment...where as the other fellow didn’t ......so what happens to him....wouldn’t he be covered by Jesus ransom...?

[Thinking]

9 minutes ago, Arauna said:

As I said before -  JWs had to get by without proper government laws.  Now that governments were at last  taking their responsibility seriously,  to have an inquiry to see how they can close the loopholes in the laws. Now we can use this to improve the outcome of these matters. The ARC came way too late... there were many loopholes in the law.... same as in USA.

Arauna I agree with so much of what you say...but as a people we shouldn’t have needed the ARC..to do the right thing....that’s what some are arguing here.

And they are right....BUT..we have corrected  the error..even if it was forced on us....our policies have been updated..and this would never happen again...it will never be sorted in house or quietly .

we are under Jehovah’s Laws...and there are no loopholes with them...but he taught us...thru the ARC.

[TrueTomHarley]

1 hour ago, Thinking said:

but as a people we shouldn’t have needed the ARC..to do the right thing.

It depends upon what you define as “doing the right thing.” In the eyes of are determined critics, we still are not “doing the right thing” and will not until any so much as a hint of CSA allegation is immediately forwarded by elders to the police—effectively making them an arm of the state. It is not for elders to make any judgment as to credibility or severity. Send any allegation to police. 

We may think we have settled matters by making clear there is no stigma in affected or knowledgeable parties going to police with CSA allegations “unproven” or not.  But they will not think so.

Sometimes I think these matters of who is mandated to report and who is not would be best settled by extending it across the board. At present, clergy, or in our case those who parallel them in some respects, are called upon to “do the right thing.” Doctors also are called upon to “do the right thing.” Extend it to lawyers that they also must “do the right thing”—send any admission or suspicion of CSA straight to police—and the entire mandated structure of other parties might reverse.

So desperate is the world to stop CSA, so ineffectual are they at doing it, that the idea has been floated of make any person a mandated reporter.

Of course, in the eyes of our really determined critics, we will not be “doing the right thing” until we cease to exist. It is why I was so taken with Holly Folk’s frank caution: “If you are a past or present JW victim of CSA, be careful that you are not victimized anew by those who feign interest in your trauma so as to use you in their quest to take down a religion they dislike.

 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

10 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Extend it to lawyers that they also must “do the right thing”

Wow, yes please. Then the GB's lawyers might have to tell the truth, but then i doubt it. 

And maye it still boils down to the fact that if an Elder does not believe a victim, OR pretends not to believe a victim or victims parents, then nothing gets done internally or outwardly.  What a BIG loophole that is. 

10 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

and will not until any so much as a hint of CSA allegation is immediately forwarded by elders to the police—effectively making them an arm of the state. It is not for elders to make any judgment as to credibility or severity. Send any allegation to police. 

If the law was that ALL allegations had to be forwarded to the police then it would simply be obeying the Superior Authorities.  

Now if Elders, Circuit Overseers, et al, were not doing the jobs of the Anointed, then maybe the jobs would be done properly. If the True Anointed were in those positions the jobs would indeed be done better.  Because, regarding the Anointed, to whom more is given, more will be expected in return. 

[TrueTomHarley]

13 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

If the law was that ALL allegations had to be forwarded to the police then it would simply be obeying the Superior Authorities.  

Yes. Geoffrey Jackson made that point to the ARC but they didn't want to hear it.

In the Dear Mr. Putin ebook, I included:

"Three times before the Australian Royal Commission, Geoffrey Jackson, of the Witness Governing Body, pleaded for universal, mandatory reporting laws, with no exceptions—if that could only be done, it would make the job of the Witness organization in policing its own without raising the ire of those outside the congregation “so much easier,” he said.

"Continuing his cross-examination, Justice Angus Stewart said: “Leaving aside the question of overriding mandatory law from the civil authorities...” I almost wish that Brother Jackson would have interjected at this point, “I wish you would not leave it aside, for it would solve the problem.” The greater world cannot make a dent in preventing child sexual abuse, and so it puts the onus on those who are trying to do something about it. Alas, our best lines invariably occur to us too late—had Brother Jackson picked up my line, it probably just would have got their backs up—and then (gulp) he would have looked at me with displeasure."

Alas, this passage does not survive into the rewrite, but I'll stick it somewhere.

If only CC could refrain from spewing battery acid on everyone--he really does have some valuable insights here.

 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

@TrueTomHarley Wow, I'm shocked at getting a polite reply as you seem to think i can't 'think my wayf out of a paper bag'.

But the exact point of conflict comes when a person / victim / victim's parent, reports CSA or any other problem to an Elder of a congregation. If the Elder chooses not to act on the report, for any reason, then the report is 'dead in the water',  gone, forgotton.  No matter what laws are in place, the Elders of congregations are the ones, at the moment, to have to make decisions.  So, should it be the victim / victim's parents, that go straight to the Police, without going to the Elders ? 

[TrueTomHarley]

12 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

you seem to think i can't 'think my wayf out of a paper bag'.

Case in point.

(Forgive me. I admit it is a cheap shot.)

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

7 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Case in point.

(Forgive me. I admit it is a cheap shot.)

touche'

[TrueTomHarley]

14 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

So, should it be the victim / victim's parents, that go straight to the Police, without going to the Elders ? 

You either don’t keep up or you deliberately misrepresent. The May 2019 made exactly that point. 

It doesn’t matter what the elders do or do not do. It doesn’t matter what they do or do not believe. A member has every right to go to the police and by doing so, they bring no reproach at all on the congregation. The abuser has already done that. 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

7 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

A member has every right to go to the police and by doing so, they bring no reproach at all on the congregation.

My point was, should the victim / victims parents NOT discuss it with the Elders first ?  I know that victims were 'given permission' to go to the police / authorities, but my point here is, whether the Elders should be informed before or after going for outside help, or should the Elders not be involved at all ?