Jump to content
The World News Media

Jehovah's Witnesses under pressure over handling of sexual abuse claims


Ann O'Maly

Recommended Posts

  • Member
7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Also, exposure of all accusations (within reason) will also help a congregation learn that not all accusations are immediately credible....

I would say the policies of the WTS are already doing that.  The victim is not believed unless the accused confesses.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 5.6k
  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yes, this is true of JWs and true of so many other organizations too. One might argue that the reputation of the organization is even more critical among JWs because we are dependent on reputation for

What has that to with the price of beans? Again, instead of having a rational discussion about how the Org. has historically dealt with and presently deals with child abuse allegations, you resort to

Jehovah's Witnesses under pressure over handling of sexual abuse claims Organisation faces fight to prevent Charity Commission examining its records of abuse claims aft

Posted Images

  • Member

So your response, Allen, to my question about how to better safeguard children in the Org is basically,

  • Divert attention away from JW Org own failings and point at other religions' failings;
  • Disfellowship and remove unrepentant wrongdoers in line with scriptural guidelines.

Isn't that pretty much why the Org. is getting hammered with lawsuits and negative publicity on this issue in the first place? 

What if the wrongdoer isn't disfellowshipped because the elders believe s/he is repentant? How can the congregation's children be protected while s/he continues as a member? 

What about notifying child protective services or the police when an allegation comes to light? Do you think this should be included as standard procedure to improve safeguarding practices?

Lastly, do you think it is the course of wisdom for the Org, rather than point the finger at what other religions have or have not done, to look candidly at itself, acknowledge its failings, and implement policies and procedures that raise the standards in keeping with current best practice as recommended by the secular authorities? (Luke 6:41, 42)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
14 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Wrong! that's all you O'maly

What's 'all me'? After sifting out all the raving, this was the sum of your post.

Quote

The WTS is getting hammered just like any other religion and institution by a bunch of ambulance chasing lawyers.

Is that what you think the lawsuits are about? 'Ambulance chasing lawyers'? Victims' suffering and their wanting redress for institutional negligence resulting in their harm means nothing to you?

Quote

And when a government changes their laws, the WTS through their Branches will make changes to comply with those new laws by “means” of those Branches. 

Are you, then, of the same mindset as the elders questioned at the ARC, that governments have to legislate to make 'God's organization' do the right and moral thing?

Quote

You seem to think; the Branch Offices have no authority to make adjustments that would pertain to a specific Country. 

You seem to have made an erroneous assumption about what I think.

Quote

This hypothetical only works if you have concrete evidence that “all” Elders run a Judicial Committee in the same manner as thought by the ARC. However, they found out...that supposed “fact” was false. Now, I know your stance…as indicated by your replies in other apostasy websites, that’s what all ex-witnesses believe, however “wrong” they are.

I cannot understand the gobbledegook you just wrote there. I'll try again:


What if the wrongdoer isn't disfellowshipped because the elders believe s/he is repentant? How can the congregation's children be protected while s/he continues as a member?


Can you manage to respond with something half-coherent this time?
 

Quote

How do you know emphatically, it isn’t a standard now? 

I know because of what is contained in the elders manual and the latest BOE letters on child abuse. Have you read them?

Quote

Funny, how only 1 witness came forward in Australia, only 1 witness has come forward in the UK. 

'1 witness'? What nonsense!

Quote

Perhaps…those Elders didn’t use their best judgement, but as I recall, in the Australia case, that 1 witness “begged” the Elders NOT to turn her father into authorities. Are you suggesting by any means and force?

Are you suggesting that an abused and traumatized child should make decisions about whether her/his abuser parent should face criminal justice or not? Are you insane? 

Quote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Convention_on_the_Civil_Aspects_of_International_Child_Abduction


Do you see Australia and the UK in this list? What you are suggesting, that the WTS be ignorant of every other law enacted to satisfy your need, since forcing the child to the police department would constitute child abduction by a third party (Elders). The Mother could have done it, but she would also be at risk for child abduction, since she didn’t want to get her father involved by their secular authorities, and her “mother” did nothing to have her daughter comply when the Elders advised her that’s what she needed to do.

Complete and utter bunkum.

Quote

So how do you handle a situation like that O’maly. Give us your wisdom, and discernment, since you know so much, and know the hearts of all human beings. 

To answer that, refer to these websites:


http://www.acf.hhs.gov/cb/faq/can6


http://www.americanhumane.org/children/stop-child-abuse/fact-sheets/reporting-child-abuse-and-neglect.html


I see you ignored my last question by embarking in a senseless ad hominem rant. I guess you believe the Org is better continuing to dig its heels in, point fingers elsewhere and resist correction. I would have to disagree.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 8/17/2016 at 5:14 AM, AllenSmith said:

If that’s all you took from it, then I would suggest you see a psychologist.

Proverbs 18:1-3 Context: The Unfriendly Pursue Selfishness

1He who separates himself seeks his own desire, He quarrels against all sound wisdom. 2A fool does not delight in understanding, but only in revealing his own mind. 3When a wicked man comes, contempt also comes, and with dishonor comes scorn.

What has that to with the price of beans? Again, instead of having a rational discussion about how the Org. has historically dealt with and presently deals with child abuse allegations, you resort to ad hominem and deflection. I think our conversation must soon come to an end if you continue to be incapable of rational discussion.

Quote

Of course, legitimate cases mean everything to me, and the WTS. It’s only people like you to think we don’t. 

My questions resulted from your own words where you said the WTS and other institutions are getting hammered and negative publicity, not because of their failings but, because of "ambulance chasing lawyers." 

Do you think the dozens upon dozens of lawsuits in recent times are down to "ambulance chasing lawyers" and are not 'legitimate' cases? Which 'legitimate' cases have you followed?

Quote

However, what’s further interesting…the senseless rhetoric exploits of a situation, when the WTS did make such decisions back in the 80’s and 90’s, “didn’t” make the news, and the WTS would be sued for breach of confidentiality, by disgruntled witnesses.

What are you babbling on about? Which disgruntled witnesses? The abusers? When did the WTS or congregation elders notify the authorities about allegations of child abuse in the '80s and '90s? In Australia, according to the evidence brought out at the Royal Commission, the elders did not notify the police about the crime once in all 1000+ cases in the past 50 years.

Quote

Didn’t we already surmise this with your flip-flop attempt to put words on other people’s mouth. 

Who's 'we'? Your duplicate accounts don't count.

Quote

First you say for the WTS to obey Caesars laws, then you say it takes Caesars laws to be compliant. 

I asked you a question. Do you know the difference between a statement and a question? You stated that the WTS will make changes through the Branches to comply with new government legislation. This prompted my question to you about whether you believe governments have to legislate to make 'God's organization' do the right and moral thing?

So what do you think? Do governments have to legislate so that 'God's organization' is made to do the right and moral thing? Or should the Org's own sense of morality and justice make it proactive rather than reactive when formulating its child safeguarding procedures?

Quote

Wow! To normal people, they wouldn’t venture into judging in a few cases to condemn the entire organization. However, that’s Modern Ideology Right! Not that these Elders are bad apples to condemn the entire barrel. But, by your own admission, then this WHOLE WORLD is GUILTY. Like I said…a Remarkable A GOD! Since you adversely continue to single out the WTS, and have NO consideration for the other victims of other religions and secular institution.

Again, you are wanting to bend the discussion away from the issues and make it about me or other institutions. To steer you back on track, a reminder: the article in the OP is about JWs. This thread is in the JW section. Ergo, we are discussing how JWs deal with child abuse within their organization. 

Court case after court case after public inquiry after court case has shown there is a pattern in how disclosure of abuse has been mishandled by the Org. The directives to the BOE as well as JW culture explain why this pattern exists. There are huge flaws in the Org's approach that desperately need addressing.

Quote

Are you referring to, in general or a single case?

 In general. Now you have that clarified, 

What if the wrongdoer isn't disfellowshipped because the elders believe s/he is repentant? How can the congregation's children be protected while s/he continues as a member?

Your suggestions please.

Quote

Your distorting facts between criminality and civil culpability, that has no bearing in spiritual forgiveness. The same ignorance ARC Mr. Stewart displayed.

Do you not think child abuse to be a crime? Do you not think that negligence and failure to provide a duty of care to vulnerable members of a faith community should be brought to civil court? 

And, most hilariously, are you really suggesting that a professional lawyer with 20 years experience is ignorant of the difference between 'criminality and civil culpability'? xD

Quote

 

What you are suggesting is the use of FORCE!!!

When should an Elder FORCE a 30-year-old mother with a 4-year-old child that was abused by her uncle?

When should an Elder FORCE themselves against the wishes of a 17-year-old who was abused by her father?

When should the Elders take the “LAW” into their own hands, when a 10-year-old boy is being abused by both parents, yet “ALL” the uncles and aunts are aware.

 

Historically, the Org's elders have already been 'taking the law into their own hands' by investigating and passing judgment on child abuse allegations internally within the congregation. This is why so many cases have been grossly mishandled, pedophiles had opportunity to abuse more JW children, and victims were further harmed and traumatized.

Regarding your nonsensical objection about 'forcing' - reporting to the police or child protection services is forcing a criminal act to be exposed and stopped, and the perpetrator of that crime to be called to account and punished. 

What should the elder do if he suspects child abuse and/or neglect?

"If you suspect a child is being harmed, or has been harmed, you should report your concerns to the appropriate authorities, such as child protective services (CPS), in the State where the child resides. Each State has trained professionals who can evaluate the situation and determine whether help and services are needed. Most States have a toll-free number to call to report suspected child abuse and neglect. Child Welfare Information Gateway, a service of the Children’s Bureau, Administration for Children and Families (ACF), provides a list of State child abuse and neglect reporting numbers and information on how to make a report in each State.

"Another resource for information about how and where to file a report of suspected child abuse or neglect is the Childhelp® National Child Abuse Hotline. Childhelp® can be reached 7 days a week, 24-hours a day, at its toll-free number, 1.800.4-A-CHILD® (1.800.422.4453)." - http://www.acf.hhs.gov/cb/faq/can6

Quote

ARC: Bro. Jackson: “No, Mr Stewart, if I could just ‐ what I'm trying to highlight is there are several factors that make it hard for a minister of religion to make a clear‐cut or quick decision on this matter. Obviously, I think, again, what has been highlighted to the Commission, the elders should encourage the guardian of the child, or whoever is in that family arrangement that is not the perpetrator, to notify the authorities.”

"Anyone can report suspected child abuse or neglect. Reporting abuse or neglect can protect a child and get help for a family it may even save a child's life." - https://www.childwelfare.gov/topics/responding/reporting/how/

"Anyone." Rather than dump all the responsibility of reporting the crime to a frightened and perhaps dysfunctional family, the elders can take the initiative to report themselves. 

What if the crime wasn't child abuse but murder? Should an elder keep an allegation to himself about a murder having taken place thinking, 'It's the victim's family that has the responsibility to notify the authorities - not me"?

Quote

Example: If a 14-year-old girl goes to the Elders with an allegation of sexual abuse? Then they find out…that allegation was for, improperly touching this girl, by a 15-year-old boy…And the girl forgives the accused, does that merit the local authorities to be called. If secular authority is called, and they come to the same conclusion, what can they do? If the accuser doesn’t want to press charges. But that boy’s name goes into a mandatory registry.

The article in the OP is not discussing this type of scenario but that of adults abusing minors. Besides, the latest August 2016 BOE letter clarifies what the Org. means by 'child abuse' on p.3:

10. Congregation Considerations: When discussing child sexual abuse from a congregation standpoint, we are not discussing a situation in which a minor who is a willing participant and who is approaching adulthood is involved in sexual activity with an adult who is a few years older than the minor. Nor, generally speaking, are we discussing situations in which only minors are involved. (See paragraphs 24-25.) Rather, we are referring to an adult guilty of sexually abusing a minor who is a young child, or an adult guilty of sexual involvement with a minor who is approaching adulthood but was not a willing participant.

Quote

Now, if the authorities are alerted, and no action is taken by the authorities, the accused name is placed on a mandatory sex offenders list ... [Allen's imagination runs wild] 

Baloney. You have to be convicted as a sex offender to be put on the sex offenders list.

Quote

Then you’re a brilliant mind reader to think, you know the minds and hearts of every Elder in this world ... [ramble, ramble]

Elders are required to follow the Org's instructions. No mind-reading was involved. 

Quote

When the Christian arrangement came about, with our Lord Jesus Christ giving us direction, the Christian church does not have the authority to throw people into prison, to execute or to do anything to them.

Exactly. The governmental authorities have those processes and powers. This is why they have to be called on to act when crimes have been committed. As the apostle Paul said,

"Everyone must submit to governing authorities. For all authority comes from God, and those in positions of authority have been placed there by God.  So anyone who rebels against authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and they will be punished.  For the authorities do not strike fear in people who are doing right, but in those who are doing wrong. Would you like to live without fear of the authorities? Do what is right, and they will honor you.  The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong.  So you must submit to them, not only to avoid punishment, but also to keep a clear conscience." - Rom. 13:1-5 (NLT)

Quote

So the judicial system in the Christian arrangement involves the spiritual cleanliness of the congregation, and the rules of evidence remain the same all the way through.”

And what 'rules of evidence' does the congregation employ in its handling of child abuse allegations?

Shouldn't 'evidence' rather be collected by professional police bodies rather than by untrained, volunteer leaders?

Quote

Are you not arguing the same post? “that the Jehovah’s Witnesses had failed to protect a woman” To me, “A WOMAN” is singular not plural. The Australia Commission was defined by 1 case.

Actually 2 cases - 2 victims who, out of more than 1000 recorded cases by the Australian Branch, were brave enough to relate their experiences before a public inquiry. 

Quote

Does this mean the high court has made a decision? Or does the mean, it’s OK for the lower court to continue with their INQUIRY. The same as the Australians.

It means that the UK WTS have been unsuccessful in blocking the Charity Commission from investigating how the UK congregations deal with child abuse allegations. The Commission can now go ahead with their inquiries. Read the article.

Quote

 

[Ann O'Maly] Are you suggesting that an abused and traumatized child should make decisions about whether her/his abuser parent should face criminal justice or not? Are you insane? 

[Allen] No, you are for thinking it. Was the ARC referring to a 4-year-old, or a 14-year-old child. However, I believe the MOTHER that was right there, was much older.

 

Backing up to your initial statement, namely ... 

"as I recall, in the Australia case, that 1 witness “begged” the Elders NOT to turn her father into authorities. Are you suggesting by any means and force?"

... You were implying that, if a minor victim begged the elders not to turn in her father to the authorities for sexually abusing her, that the elders should comply; that the elders should not 'force' that action upon her. Hence my question about your mental state. Your suggestion is extremely irresponsible and dangerous, for such compliance would further enable the abuser to continue abusing. It's astonishing that I should have to spell this out to you as if you were a child yourself.

Quote

 

[Ann O'Maly] Complete and utter bunkum

[Allen] Yes, I have already established you have NO CLUE, and would much rather have WTS break every other law to satisfy your argument. The complete and utter bunkum is the nonsense you write about.

 

You are projecting once again. What was complete and utter bunkum was your argument that 'forcing the child to the police department' - whether by the elders or the child's mother - would amount to 'child abduction.' This fancy of yours is totally ludicrous. 9_9

Quote

Do you know how to read? NOT everything is about child sexual abuse. 

Well duh. And your point is ...? 

Quote

The worst offenders ARE Australia and the UK. But you don’t see the MEDIA criticizing their own government, it takes outside sources to do that. Does that make “governments more credible and more reliable for the safety and welfare of “all” their women and children? NO! as seen by the recent Australian legislation, is…to “PREVENT” workers at detention centers from informing the proper authorities of sexual abuse of women and children in detention centers. Your continued ignorance…is to sensationalize 1 organization you despise. That’s why I disagree with your tactics. To ignore everyone else and just concentrate on one. Widen your scope if you wish to be effective, thus far zero!!!!

Aaaand another senseless ad hominem rant. Your trademark. To repeat:

The article in the OP is about JWs. This thread is in the JW section. Ergo, we are discussing how JWs deal with child abuse within their organization. 

Do you get how topical sections in a discussion forum work?

Quote

The effort is to “help” all those who have a legitimate claim of abuse. Not someone who after 40, 50 years later decide by the aid of corrupt lawyers, and recent enacted civil laws passed to make these types of claims, make it much harder for an honest victim to pursue justice, without all the red tape these cases have added to civil legislation.

So you believe historical child sexual abuse cases are not 'legitimate'? 

Are the government-led inquiries into institutional historical child abuse, because the cases may include instances that occurred 40, 50 years ago, likewise not 'legitimate' and are decided with 'the aid of corrupt lawyers'?

Are you aware that many countries have a statute of limitations that bar victims from making civil claims for sexual crimes after a set amount of time? So, a victim would be unable to civilly prosecute somebody 40, 50 years later. Are you familiar with the controversy surrounding Bill Cosby and why it has been so difficult to prosecute him due to the time that has elapsed since his alleged crimes?

Quote

it takes a tremendous amount of inner strength for a victim of a heinous crime to come forward as it is, and now…they have to prove in top of that, their claim is legitimate.

This is the most sensible thing you have said in the whole discussion. However, evidence gathering is done by the police and forensic teams, and the legal system decides whether there is enough to potentially secure a conviction in criminal court and/or a favorable judgment in civil court.

Quote

As I said, your abatement is within criminality and civil culpability, and spiritual cleanliness.

Huh? What does that even mean?

Quote

Proverbs 29:8 Context: The Stiff-Necked will Be Destroyed ...

Yeah whatever. This scripture has no bearing on how best to safeguard children now.


    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Who's 'we'? Your duplicate accounts don't count.

LOL! Hilarious response to AllenSmith (and JWTheologian).

I was thinking about the reasons for the use of duplicate accounts by Allen. Anyone here who has the IP address displayed already knows for a fact that AllenSmith and JWTheologian are the same person. Not that anyone actually needed specific evidence since Allen has also used these same two names (among a couple of others) in the JW-Archive forum. And he ties them together with a unique vocabulary including the same misspellings, and the unique use of words like "recreants" etc.

But what actually ties them together even more clearly is the fact that he regularly resorts to using the language of abuse and bullying. On the jw-archive forum, in fact, his new names were used specifically so he could continue his abusive behavior when prior user names had reached the limits of the abuse allowed by moderators.

I did a little experiment with Allen that might seem either funny, revealing or embarrassing. I'll explain below:

As many people know, Allen's prime use of the two names on this forum is not so much to allow him to hide his abusive behavior. After all, both names are still in use, both have been equally abusive, and I'm sure that AllenSmith is aware that the two names don't really fool anyone here who is involved in dialogue with him.

In fact (and this may be the primary use) both names: AllenSmith and JWTheologian have been used to bolster the reputation of each other. AllenSmith very often give "likes" or a "reputations" to his own posts of both names. And JWTheologian has also given "likes" or "reputations" to his own posts of both names. In fact, for most of his posts that have been given a like or reputation, he is the only one who likes them.

Knowing this, I wondered how important that self-made reputation was to Allen. I decided to give a "Down-vote" as a "reputation" which hurts AllenSmith's and JWTheologian's overall numerical "reputation." But I only gave that "down-vote" to a small number of his posts. (In fact there have been a couple of posts in the past where I have given a "like".) I only down-voted a few of the posts where AllenSmith and/or JWTheologian had already boosted his own reputation by giving himself an up-vote AND where he was being nasty, abusive, or was clearly using an ad hominem.

The experiment worked. Both AllenSmith and JWTheologian quickly came back at past posts of mine under several topic areas. He left some with a "minus one" reputation and some where he just knocked a point off the overall count where others had already up-voted my post.

It seemed a bit ironic in topics like this one where one of the sub-topics is a discussion of how and why a society or entity will cover up abuse for the sake of "reputation." My own view has always been that I should do my best, where possible, to expose this kind of problem, whether I would learn of evidence of it in a local high school, or a sleazy photographer surreptitiously taking pictures of children in our local park, or even our own Organization. Exposure is the best solution that most of us can help with.

And now, I've also done my small part to expose the abuses of an individual perpetrating abuse, ad hominem and bullying on this forum while simultaneously trying to boost his own reputation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

The experiment worked. Both AllenSmith and JWTheologian quickly came back at past posts of mine under several topic areas. He left some with a "minus one" reputation and some where he just knocked a point off the overall count where others had already up-voted my post.

your as ignorant as your rant JWinsider. Have you ever considered, that Allen Smith is my Brother? Proverbs 13:16

16Every prudent man acts with knowledge, But a fool displays folly.

Now, what were you saying some time ago, about such experiments being a kind of “Deception”. I see you don’t heed you own words JWinsider. And you call yourself an ex-bethelite. Buddy, you should have been disfellowshipped long ago!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

LOL! Hilarious response to AllenSmith (and JWTheologian).

I was thinking about the reasons for the use of duplicate accounts by Allen. Anyone here who has the IP address displayed already knows for a fact that AllenSmith and JWTheologian are the same person. Not that anyone actually needed specific evidence since Allen has also used these same two names (among a couple of others) in the JW-Archive forum. And he ties them together with a unique vocabulary including the same misspellings, and the unique use of words like "recreants" etc.

But what actually ties them together even more clearly is the fact that he regularly resorts to using the language of abuse and bullying. On the jw-archive forum, in fact, his new names were used specifically so he could continue his abusive behavior when prior user names had reached the limits of the abuse allowed by moderators.

I did a little experiment with Allen that might seem either funny, revealing or embarrassing. I'll explain below:

As many people know, Allen's prime use of the two names on this forum is not so much to allow him to hide his abusive behavior. After all, both names are still in use, both have been equally abusive, and I'm sure that AllenSmith is aware that the two names don't really fool anyone here who is involved in dialogue with him.

In fact (and this may be the primary use) both names: AllenSmith and JWTheologian have been used to bolster the reputation of each other. AllenSmith very often give "likes" or a "reputations" to his own posts of both names. And JWTheologian has also given "likes" or "reputations" to his own posts of both names. In fact, for most of his posts that have been given a like or reputation, he is the only one who likes them.

Knowing this, I wondered how important that self-made reputation was to Allen. I decided to give a "Down-vote" as a "reputation" which hurts AllenSmith's and JWTheologian's overall numerical "reputation." But I only gave that "down-vote" to a small number of his posts. (In fact there have been a couple of posts in the past where I have given a "like".) I only down-voted a few of the posts where AllenSmith and/or JWTheologian had already boosted his own reputation by giving himself an up-vote AND where he was being nasty, abusive, or was clearly using an ad hominem.

The experiment worked. Both AllenSmith and JWTheologian quickly came back at past posts of mine under several topic areas. He left some with a "minus one" reputation and some where he just knocked a point off the overall count where others had already up-voted my post.

It seemed a bit ironic in topics like this one where one of the sub-topics is a discussion of how and why a society or entity will cover up abuse for the sake of "reputation."  

Your post has cleared up a lot of things for me.  Thanks.  I was wondering if maybe they believed bullying, abusive speech, and unkindness make JWs look good.

Quote

My own view has always been that I should do my best, where possible, to expose this kind of problem, whether I would learn of evidence of it in a local high school, or a sleazy photographer surreptitiously taking pictures of children in our local park, or even our own Organization. Exposure is the best solution that most of us can help with.

And now, I've also done my small part to expose the abuses of an individual perpetrating abuse, ad hominem and bullying on this forum while simultaneously trying to boost his own reputation.

Does that mean that if you found out a JW had abused a child, would you go to the police or the elders, or maybe both?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
5 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

So what do you think? Do governments have to legislate so that 'God's organization' is made to do the right and moral thing? Or should the Org's own sense of morality and justice make it proactive rather than reactive when formulating its child safeguarding procedures?

   

Great post, Ann.

If the WTS was really God's organization, it would have set the moral standard for all the other organizations to follow long ago. Instead it has reacted in such a way that protects itself and the predator, at the expense of the victim, the endangerment of the congregation, and abandonment of the elders who can be found individually culpable for not reporting this crime to the police.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On August 13, 2016 at 10:54, JW Insider said:

The most surprising aspect of child abuse (to me) is the fact that this crime is apparently commonly related to "authority." The higher the "authority," the more common the crime. It's not limited to religious authority; it occurs via the levels of authority with family, teachers, bosses, boy scout leaders, military authority, etc.

I was was recently reading a book (fiction) wherein the the victim was a key player in bringing "a whole conspiracy to light. Even now now the whole truth isn't known." In response, the villain replies: "Buried. Because the truth would embarrass important people. It's always been that way."  I retained that quote as salient because of what I had seen and experienced within the organization. An expression in my country is: "Don't expect justice from Bethel." The reason behind that expression isn't that justice is never served, but rather it appears at times to be a matter of who you are or are connected to - who you friends are, what position you have. I would like to emphasize - as always - that not everyone is like that and it would be unfair to present it that way. But there does (at times) seem to be a different standard for those in authority compared to to rest. Those who use their authority to insulate themselves from scriptural accountability are manifesting a lack of faith in their accountability to God. ("Jehovah is not seeing...") It is a manifestly political view of matters that should be viewed from a spiritual, faith-based point of view.  So the idea that people should keep quiet to "protect Jehovah's reputation and his organization" is well, (fill in the blank). The Bible shows that when needed discipline was required for his people, Jehovah didn't hold back because he was afraid of what the neighbors think. That surrounding nations would conclude that their gods were greater after taking his people into captivity, didn't stop Jehovah from being true to himself and his standards. In my experience, keeping quiet (even under threat) only enables and emboldens those who have the most to hide. I've seen whole vicious, lying campaigns launched to discredit individuals who have exposed wrongdoing of the privileged. Still on the other hand, it's important to respect authority - especially within the organization, but not to the point of blind, worshipful obedience. The principle of "relative subjection" applies within the organization as well. Not everyone who has authority are what they may appear to be and even apostates have been able to get away with being such for years. (Should anyone become one simply because someone in authority leads them in that direction? Is that what "obedience" is?)

On August 13, 2016 at 10:54, JW Insider said:

e. Also, hundreds of Bethelites, including me, witnessed the strange behavior of Brother Fred Franz who held a weekly Wednesday-night sauna session where about a dozen naked and nearly naked young Bethelites would act like sycophant disciples to listen to a naked Franz pontificate.

I was aware of your other references, and there is more than innuendo regarding Greenlees. I thought the sauna/pool incidents you mentioned you had previously attibuted to someone else you had described as "the oracle." Percy Chapman perhaps?  Maybe I remember your previous post from last year incorrectly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
56 minutes ago, b4ucuhear said:

Those who use their authority to insulate themselves from scriptural accountability are manifesting a lack of faith in their accountability to God. ("Jehovah is not seeing...") It is a manifestly political view of matters that should be viewed from a spiritual, faith-based point of view.

Amen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
17 hours ago, HollyW said:

Does that mean that if you found out a JW had abused a child, would you go to the police or the elders, or maybe both?

If I had direct evidence that a JW had committed a serious crime (murder, rape, child physical abuse, child sexual abuse). I would definitely report it to the police. My wife, as a school principal has had to report several such instances, even of suspected child physical and/or sexual abuse, because she has always worked in very large school districts, where she has had an obligation under the law to do so..One of those instances involved a JW parent. I have never witnessed or seen direct evidence of a JW committing a serious crime.

I guess, to be totally honest, I should explain what I mean by "serious crime.".I don't consider a typical spanking the same as child physical abuse although I have seen some borderline situations, but have never reported them. In almost 50 years as a baptized JW, I have also heard many admissions of guilt in a congregation setting (admission of smoking, abortion, adultery, etc. - against such things there is no "law."). Outside the judicial setting I have learned of financial fraud, insurance fraud, welfare fraud, shoplifting, theft of services, returning used clothing as new, etc. I have never reported such things to secular authorities, and only reported to the congregation in one case when I knew it was another brother defrauded, and "we" (mostly "I") took it to the other brother first.  In these cases, I expressed my personal disapproval, offered scriptural counsel, recommended confession to the elders, and recommended ways to make amends. I do not think that every such case needs to be reported to the congregation (elder body) by me personally.

When a Bethelite robbed me of a couple hundred dollars, I took it to his congregation elders, not Bethel elders, after warning him that he had 2 months to pay me back. (The kinds of things I believe Paul had in mind that the congregation could try to handle without going to court are internal cases of financial and property fraud between brothers.)

I have turned in a lecherous photographer to park authorities, who was obviously focusing on getting lascivious pictures up little girls' dresses and that sort of thing. I'm almost 100% sure he was not a JW, but it never occurred to me. I would not have asked and it would not have made a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,380

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • JW Insider

      JW Insider 9,694

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • xero

      xero 2,295

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,669
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Miracle Pete
    Joined
×
×
  • 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.