I wonder how you can tell a parent HOW to discipline their kids
Believe me, minimus, the average person knows the difference between giving a child a light slap and when a child is being beaten. It is interesting that in the US that even the most heinous criminal is not legally punished with any corporal punishment let alone a beating.
Punishment/discipline does not equal hitting. There are many more effective ways.
Just as it is the responsibility of someone to step in when child abuse is suspected, so too physical abuse. And true no one has the power to make anyone do anything.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4343535,00.html
It is too bad no one in the congregation or the family stepped in to help Laurie Slack.
Blondie (will always face up to abusers)
Witness on the watchtower
Stephen Bates Saturday January 26, 2002 The GuardianThe letter from JR Brown, director of the office of public information for Jehovah's Witnesses in New York, spoke fondly of the Guardian, pointing out that "our journals, Awake! and the Watchtower quote from it extensively." Sadly, his opinion had changed as a result of a four-paragraph article I had written last November.
The story was a particularly terrible one. Larry and Constance Slack, a devoutly religious couple from Chicago's south side, had been accused of beating their 12 year-old daughter Laree to death with a length of electric cable, 5ft long and almost an inch thick, after she could not find her mother's coat quickly enough for them go out on time one Saturday evening.
They had beaten her in accordance with Deuteronomy 25, verses 1-3, prescribing 40 lashes' chastisement, minus one, as authorised by Jewish tradition, but then zealously reproducing St Paul's punishment (Corinthians 2:11) by multiplying it three times. The child, whose mother Constance administered some of the lashes, died after being beaten 160 times. Mrs Slack is a nurse.
The couple's five other children - one of whom, an eight year-old boy, was also beaten for being unable to find the coat - were ordered to help hold Laree down. She was gagged with a towel to prevent her screams being heard.
But what disturbed JR Brown about the Guardian's report was not the shocking story itself but the fact that the Slacks were described as Jehovah's Witnesses. He helpfully appended a statement from Leon, Larry Slack's brother, insisting that the couple were not devout witnesses. Although baptised as JWs, "for the last 10 years they have not shared in our worship services, although there were a few relatively short time periods that they would sporadically show up at meetings.
"To physically harm, abuse or kill others is diametrically opposed to the Bible principles we believe in and strive to practice... among the qualities we study about in the Bible... are.... love, joy, peace, long suffering, kindness, goodness, faith, mildness and self-control."
The Jehovah's Witnesses have reason to be nervous about this case. A series of court actions concerning child abuse are pending across the US, and the sect's guidelines are coming under scrutiny because they appear to hinder any investigation of allegations made by children. They recommend, for instance, that complaints be investigated only if abuse is observed by two independent witnesses, and that any documentation arising from an inquiry should be burned rather than shown to outsiders.
The Watchtower does not prescribe 117 lashes for children, but it certainly endorses Proverbs 23:14: "Do not withold discipline from a child; if you punish him with the rod, he will not die." Line four of song 164 in the Witnesses' hymn book, Children: Precious Gifts From God", chirrups: "He says 'Use the rod, yet with tenderness and loving care'."
The organisation has been in almost daily expectation of Armageddon since 1914, and keeps members in line by predicting a grim fate for non-believers - known privately as birdseed - since, in fulfilment of Ezekiel 39:18, their bones will be picked clean by crows. In particular, since September 11, they hope no one notices that their standard depiction of the onset of Armageddon is a jet plane crashing into a New York skyscraper.
The Watchtower holds that "theocratic war strategy" can justly be used to deceive outsiders: "In times of spiritual warfare, it is proper to mis-direct the enemy by hiding the truth. It is done unselfishly; it does no harm."
Presumably, this is JR Brown's precept in his letter. A trawl of Awake! and The Watchtower reveals few references to "the Manchester Guardian" in the last 20 years - certainly none current quoting from it extensively - and those there are appear to be distortions, or outright reversals, of what our articles said. As with the Bible, the interpretation is wrenched out of context.
But there's a deeper, nagging, thought here. Why is the Watchtower so keen to abandon the Slacks to their fate? Surely a Christian religion should not deny its followers, however repugnantly they have behaved? Did not the example of St Peter on Good Friday lay down a few guidelines here? It can't be, can it, that JR Brown believes that ordinary folk - birdseed, Guardian readers - might think that JWs' reading of the Bible allows such a misunderstanding?
We await his next response with interest.
Stephen Bates is the Guardian's religious affairs correspondent
Edited by - Blondie on 29 January 2003 8:14:39
