Forced "new light", but only slightly

[Shiwiii]

3 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Reporting to authorities has now been endorsed.

Sadly it has taken the secular courts in many countries to force this to happen. Not by the desire to protect,  not the pleas of the victims, and not because of what is right, it is solely because of the loss of money. 

 

[Shiwiii]

3 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

But the cops might be immoral too, or even pedophiles also.Who knows. Would create a bigger problem.

 

But it is their job right? They are trained professionals,  right? Unlike any person called a wt elder. 

[Jack Ryan]

To be clear:

The new rules now allow elders (para. 15) to go to the authorities once an allegation of CSA has been made without fear of retaliation by headquarters. AND two witnesses aren't needed to do this (even though two witnesses are still needed for judicial action🙄). In addition to this, emphasis is given that the reporting party will not bring reproach on jehovahs name. Para. 14- "But what if the report is about someone who is a part of the congregation and the matter then becomes known in the community? Should the Christian who reported it feel that he has brought reproach on God’s name? No. The abuser is the one who brings reproach on God’s name."

[Jack Ryan]

And it took how many years for their "Guardians of the Doctrine" to realize things weren’t right with this issue?

[Jack Ryan]

Why the heck is WT trying to assert the clergy-penitent privilege to allow elders to NOT report to authorities?

Exhibit A: (State of Delaware v. Laurel Delaware Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, Joel Mulchansingh and William Perkins)[https://law.justia.com/cases/delaware/superior-court/2016/n14c-05-122-mmj-0.html).

Relevant quote from the case, the JW crew being the defendants:

Defendants assert that all communications among the Elders, Juvenile Member, and Adult Member are subject to the clergy/penitent privilege. Additionally, Defendants argue that the State's claims are barred by the First Amendment to the United States and Delaware Constitutions. Finally, Defendants argue that they are exempt from a reporting duty pursuant to Section 909.

Does that sound like the organization is 'endeavoring' to report abuse? They are 'endeavoring' to legally NOT report abuse. That's how the hell they're trying to comply with secular laws.

I'm sorry for the language, but these *%&$*()*$ are writing articles to the general JW with the obvious intent of making it look like they're TRYING to report abuse and they're not. They're simply not.

[Srecko Sostar]

8 hours ago, Anna said:

What he said was that us denying there is a problem, and ignoring child abuse, is apostate lies.

 

3 hours ago, Witness said:

He said, "As an example, think about the apostate-driven lies and dishonesties that Jehovah’s organization is PERMISSIVE” toward pedophiles.”

S. Lett delivered message how WT and JW members are "holy people" who respecting Bible moral standards and teachings about sexuality. By that reason JW people condemns depravity as pedophilia. 

What S. Lett didn't said is, that WT policy and rules, instruction how to handle inside cases when own members molesting JW kids, are very questionable and how such weak, inadequate, misguided approach to pedophiles, shows that WT is not capable of solving problems in their own home. 

Another thing that S. Lett didn't said is, from where coming expression "permissive". Who, what ex-JW individual or group used terminology "permissive" in this context? What You-Tube video or individual letter accused WTJWorg for "permissiveness" about pedophiles? 

As i can conclude from YT videos i saw, ex-JW or pedophiles victims talking about wrong treatments of elders and WT rules that are in fact working in favor to wrongdoers and leaving victims without "justice", and even put victims to be as guilty part because they are not "able to prove accusations", or even contribute to be a victims.

Such WT policy can be seen as "permissive", and it is, no matter what was the intentions of WT Creators when making rules about how to handle and processing child molestation accusation. 

S. Lett, (with some other TV preachers on JWTV) made another manipulation on Public JWTV. Never told about Court cases and out of Court deals, and how much money WT gave, by Court decision or by settlement, to victims. Omitting to talk about it, on JWTV as worldwide instrument to share spiritual food and instructions to Brotherhood, WT leaders showed and still showing sort of "permissiveness", not so much to pedophiles, but to own Wrong Ideas and Teachings and to themselves as Pioneers who created bad administrative regulations on issue, and now they do not want to admit their own guilt.

[JOHN BUTLER]

8 hours ago, Anna said:

I am assuming you are talking about your personal experience in your congregation hiding an abuser?

I am sorry John, but you make it sound like there is a pedophile lurking in every congregation. Let’s get real here, people from the “outside” are more at risk of being raped and their children molested than inside a congregation. Also, most of the cases have been familial, as you mention later on, which means it would have happened regardless of being part of a congregation or not. Just because someone claims to be a faithful JW doesn't make him so.

First of all, to be effective in being against something you have to have all the facts about that something. It’s no good throwing accusations around based on limited information. Then you’d be like the tabloid newspapers, all about sensationalism and misleading selective quotes. And no matter how much objective information you've read, and how many court cases you've studied, you still will not have all the facts. You'd only have those if you were a fly on the wall.

So are you here talking about your congregation? Or in general?

I disagree with you there. I am not sure how you dealt with it, I know you wrote a letter, but did you give the elders a chance to explain themselves? No one is disfellowshipped for being worried and showing genuine concern. Especially when they take this worry and concern to the elders, rather than the congregants. It’s the elders who are responsible for the congregation. They are the ones who need to know.

We can add other atrocities, incurable ailments, and all kinds of tragedies. This is the legacy that Adam and Eve have left mankind. Remember, the whole world is lying in Satan’s power. No one is immune.

True, you can talk all you like, but it’s not going to be effective if no one listen, is it? And I thought that was your motive, for people to hear you.

 

@Anna It feels to me as if you are angry with my comments and therefore need to tear them to shreds.

Dissecting my words does not make them less true. 

The sun is shining here and I'm going out in my classic car, I'll answer comments later after the sun has gone down  

 

 

[Witness]

6 hours ago, Witness said:

Anna, were all 1006 perpetrators disfellowshipped?

Nope.  Would there have been an inquiry by the ARC if all were disfellowshipped?  Would there be one lawsuit against the WT if a victim's plea for justice was well respected, and decisions were made according to Christ's words to "love your neighbor as yourself"?  

Keep reminding God’s people of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen. 15 Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth. 2 Tim 2:14-16

However, is the GB "ashamed of their detestable conduct? No, they have no shame at all; they do not even know how to blush. So they will fall among the fallen; they will be brought down when they are punished, says the LORD."   Jer 8:12

 

 

 

[JOHN BUTLER]

15 hours ago, Anna said:

I think you must have missed my post about that.

Lett didn't say child abuse was apostate lies and propaganda, he wasn't denying there was a problem. What he said was that us denying there is a problem, and ignoring child abuse, is apostate lies.

I will reply to the rest of your post later. I can't right now.

Arrived home 2pm, 52 emails in my 'box'. don't know where to start. 

I'll quote your bottom line  "I will reply to the rest of your post later. I can't right now. "  

[JOHN BUTLER]

11 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

In fact, the problem is solved and everyone not completely unhinged knows it.

Witnesses have always been free to report. The unsettling aspect of the CSA cases is that many chose not to do it because they thought they might be bringing reproach on God’s name. Now, beyond any possibility of misunderstanding, it is spelled out for them and for elders that they are not. The problem is solved.

There are always going to be ‘What ifs.’ At some point one must have some confidence in the power of parents to be concerned for their children. It is not easy to get between a mama bear and her cub. You make it sound like a walk in the park. Reporting to authorities has now been endorsed. The two witness rule becomes irrelevant, as it always was to outside authorities 

In the rare situation that nobody has payed the slightest attention to Christian values taught, if wrath or revenge is feared, mama bear may have to flee the house. This has always been the case with in abusive families. The point is that she now knows she has a green light to do it, and can summon whatever authority there is for domestic violence and she need not think she is failing God, the congregation, her family, or anyone else.

Sometimes I think that these virulent opposers will not be satified until there is a cop stationed in every Witness home.

Quote "The unsettling aspect of the CSA cases is that many chose not to do it because they thought they might be bringing reproach on God’s name." 

The unsettling TRUTH is that it seems that MANY were TOLD it WOULD bring reproach on God's name. Now who would tell them such things ? Elders maybe ? 

Quote "It is not easy to get between a mama bear and her cub. You make it sound like a walk in the park. "

Now i'm sure most of you do not believe a word I say, or even a word any victim says BUT It seems to have been proved in court cases that Elders take children on the ministry, and, Elders do private Bible study with children. 

The JW Org gives the appearance of being a 'Safe Place To Be'. A place where people can be trusted because they are 'serving God'. 

So, people trust others to spend time with their children. So yes it can be a 'walk in the park' for a prdophile. 

Quote "The two witness rule becomes irrelevant.. " How blind you pretend to be.

In places where reporting Child Sex Abuse is THE LAW, it would rely on that Two Witness rule.  Because the Elders would say 'no  case to answer' without Two Witnesses, so the Elders would say 'nothing to report'. 

And of course you end your comment with sarcasm, trying to belittle us that complain and to mock the situation.

Unfortunately i'm seeing that as typical JW stance now. 

But that W/t is proof that the GB are worried, not about people of course, about the money it's costing in fines. 

[JOHN BUTLER]

11 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

But the cops might be immoral too, or even pedophiles also.Who knows. Would create a bigger problem.

 

Um, Scripture, SUPERIOR AUTHORITIES ARE IN PLACE BECAUSE GOD WANTS THEM THERE. THEY ARE DOING GOD'S WORK IN THIS OLD SYSTEM OF THINGS. THEY ARE THERE TO PUNISH THOSE WHO BREAK THE LAW. 

Sorry it's all capitals but you seem a bit blind. 

[JOHN BUTLER]

9 hours ago, Anna said:

 adjective: permissive

1. 1.

   allowing or characterized by great or excessive freedom of behavior.

   "the permissive society of the 60s and 70s"

   synonyms:

   liberal, broad-minded, open-minded, nonrestrictive, free, free and easy, easygoing, live-and-let-live, latitudinarian, laissez-faire, libertarian, unprescriptive, unrestricted, tolerant, forbearing, indulgent, lenient; More

 

No, Jehovah Witnesses have never been permissive or tolerant towards immorality of any kind. Anyone practicing these things is disfellowshipped.

 

 

 

 

@Anna  you live in a dream world, brainwashed, deluded, by the JW Org. 

 I wish i had a much better memory,  because I thought it was you, a long time ago, that was telling me about cases you have known about.