To The Australian Government .Have Jehovah`s Witnesses signed the Redress scheme ?

by smiddy3 13 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  dubstepped

  To demonstrate that they are bending over backwards to be reasonable and fair, and that the Org has had absolutely every chance to do the right thing, will not, and have therefore condemned themselves by their own actions...

  Haven't they already? Define "every" chance. March is another chance. April? May? 2022? 2023? Why really even put a limit on it?

  ...and when their tax-exemption is finally revoked, they will have zero legitimate cause to whine about "persecution", or (more importantly from the secular authorities' POV) waste the courts' time and money trying to fight the results.

  They already have zero legitimate cause to whine about persecution. Zero. It's been years. They will whine about persecution anyway, this does nothing to change that, and they have never needed legitimate cause to do so. You're dealing with a cult, not reasonable people. Most JWs already believe that the ARC isn't anything but apostate driven lies already. This changes nothing.
  
  This also doesn't prevent the cult from any legal banter.

  In addition, the public outcry over CSA has become an issue that democratic nations can no longer ignore, the WTS has presented themselves as a near-perfect subject for an example to be made of (something that occasionally needs to be done), and I'm positive the Aussie legal system knows it.
  Not to mention that they also know the world is watching with interest, so their tactics can serve as a template for others to follow.

  The whole world is watching? I doubt many people know or care outside of the ex-JW community. They could also be using the wrong tactics and be giving that as an example. Conflating the world watching with them doing the right thing isn't necessarily true.

  Big picture, man, big picture.

  Yes, and in the big picture I think that being lenient and lax on the cult of Jehovah's Witnesses never works. They lack boundaries and don't take things seriously because they get away with it their entire lives. Australia set a boundary and backed off it, something that rarely ever garners respect for the boundary set.

  I hope it works on some level. I know there is more than one "right" way to do something, and that many tactics can work. I know that some are saying now that the focus is really the CSA survivors and giving more time for the JWs to join so that it keeps the door open for possible redress. How about you just revoke the charitable status now and give that tax money to the CSA survivors as redress and skip the niceties toward Watchtower? Just a thought. I just think they're playing Watchtower's game instead of the other way around, and that is is weak. I hope it works out though.
• 

  Anony Mous

  As with most of these things, just grease the right hands and this will all go away. These kind of government actions are just a modern extortion scheme from those in power. They'll go through all the motions, hang this up in court for another decade and hope everyone else forgets before dismantling the operations for having done its job. The WTBTS will never have paid or lost anything, they're too small fish, the Catholic Church is much bigger and has already paid up, the extra few millions from the WTBTS won't make a change.
• 

  Phizzy

  They have finally signed up, after missing several deadlines , and issued this statement :

  " “Now that the law requires charities to join the scheme, Jehovah’s Witnesses will comply. Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that it is their responsibility before God to respect and co-operate with the authorities.”

  So they are saying that they do not have a responsibility before God to treat the Victims with compassion and love, that the whole of their responsibility is merely to comply with the Law. A True God of Love might have something to say about that !
• 

  Vidiot

  Sneaky buggers.
  

  At no point do they mention that technically, Jehovah's Witnesses don't actually have to be registered as a charity.

  The only real advantage to the Org being a charity is the tax-exemption it affords.

  The grudging acceptance of voluntary joining the scheme...

  ...i.e. showing their throat to agents of "Satan's World', tacitly admitting that the problem was real and their fault, and potentially undermining their authority in the eyes of the membership*...

  ...therefore suggests that they signed up not because they "respect and cooperate with the authorities", but because they want, nay, need said tax-exemption.

  Just how badly, I wonder?**

  

  *I freely admit that I actually thought the Org wouldn't budge on this for these reasons. Surprise, surprise.

  **A rhetorical question; I think a really strong argument could be made that at this point, they just might be fucked without it.