Jump to content

ASF-37

Member
  • Content Count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ASF-37

  • Rank
    Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

32 profile views
  1. Correct. I was not implying the Awake! Articles were submitted as a defense for or against legal standings. I submitted them as a realization into certain implications and dangers attached to the action of child abuse. The term “grooming” was added as a substance to the broader types of child abuse in 2009 by the U.S. federal mandate. The comparison of the two was to illustrate that the Watchtower was well aware of certain conditions existing in society, before the term grooming became part of a legal remedy. Certain concerns were raised here, that made my submission; relevant to that concern. Child Pornography and Sexual Grooming 2009 Sexual Grooming Grooming behaviour can share a relationship with the wider phenomenon of child sexual abuse; research has shown that an opportunity to sexually abuse a child is more likely to emerge following an act of grooming. 30 Grooming can be conceived as a predatory act committed in order to facilitate sexual abuse and, thus, the issue of context – particularly the motivation behind the behaviour – is highly relevant. P.32 ‘Grooming’ and the Sexual Abuse of Children 2012 The Extent of Grooming The covert nature of sexual grooming makes it difficult to pinpoint yet alone quantify such behaviour. While the scale and extent of grooming locally, nationally, and internationally is ultimately unknown (Kosaraju, 2008), a range of both quantitative and qualitative sources collectively provide some representation of the nature and extent of sexual grooming. These have included studies of the disclosure process in children who have been abused (eg Hunter, Goodwin, and Wilson, 1992; Watkins and Bentovim, 1992; Berliner and Conte, 1990, 1995; Sas and Cunningham, 1995), of offenders in treatment programmes (eg Budin and Johnson, 1989; Conte, Wolf, and Smith, 1989; Christiansen and Blake, 1990; Elliott, Browne, and Kilcoyne, 1995; Smallbone and Wortley, 2000; Beckett et al 2004; Hudson, 2005) and of both taken together (Phelan, 1995). P.32 Those articles come to show the Watchtower made a concerted effort to address a danger before it had become an official mandate by law. When parents become the first line of defense for their children, it is important for witnesses to properly do their own research starting with Watchtower publications. This measure of diligence should be part of any caretaker's daily routine.
  2. For you that are debating bylaws and secular law? This might shed some light on several points raised as a concern for the term grooming. *** g04 12/8 p. 20 The Internet—How to Avoid the Dangers *** Children are even more vulnerable to exploitation and harm by “computer-sex offenders.” Using “crookedness of speech” and “deviousness of lips,” pedophiles target inexperienced children. (Proverbs 4:24; 7:7) Engaging in a practice known as grooming, they shower the child with attention, affection, and kindness to make the youngster feel special. They seem to know everything a child is interested in *** g 10/07 p. 6 How to Protect Your Children *** In time, the molester will begin grooming the child for abuse. He gradually becomes more physical with the child through innocent-looking displays of affection, playful wrestling, and tickling. He may give generous gifts and begin to separate the child from friends, siblings, and parents, in order to spend time alone with the child. Officially, that term “grooming” has been attached to several circumstances. To that extent it was used in combination for the term “child abuse” as part of a legal argument that wasn’t used in the U.S. until 2009. The consideration is with timeline. The Watchtower, without being obligated or forced by reform, mentions in earlier articles addressing the problem of “grooming” in 2004-2007 that became the extent of the law in 2009. Any former member would then need to answer this fundamental question when this defense is offered, why wasn’t the child’s parents or close family member, didn't take precautions by reviewing prior Watchtower articles addressing such a danger?
  3. Srecko, The “question” I asked, how many other religious websites do you personally go into on a daily basis to argue child abuse?
  4. Srecko, How many other religions do you go into their forums to argue child abuse? I’m not referring to how many religions you combine here but instead go directly to the hundreds of other religious websites and daily barrage them with questionable content that is being supplied on the internet, that is apparently accepted by Jehovah witnesses here in order to agree with persons that impugn and repudiate their religious bylaws? Why then, are you not satisfied that there are many Jehovah witnesses here, in agreement with ex-witnesses; that you have a need to continue with such conduct?
  5. I hope you have firsthand knowledge and the information wasn't given to you by a third party that you submitted. That kind of exposure can have consequences. However, concerning the letter. The point to consider is no new investigations are being conducted in their inquiry.

×
×
  • 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.