Here's the WTS bolting the stable door...
JW.ORG Child Sexual Abuse Resources
by konceptual99 3 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
steve2
Feeling the heat, JW organization? Of course, this is desperate PR with more than a tinge of prickly defensiveness about it.
Three points worth considering for those who think this bibliography of JW literature on child sexual abuse is in any way commendable from a child-safety perspective:
1. Omitted from the bibliography are the many article citations across the decades that have roundly condemned the churches of Christendom for failing to protect children from pedophiles within the ranks of church hierarchies and for failing to alert the authorities about disclosed abuse. Observers of JW literature will already know that it is some years since we have seen any further articles criticizing churches in JW publications because the trickle of child sexual abuse allegations - both historical and current - within JW organization has now turned in to a steady stream. For JW organization to have continued pointing the finger of righteous condemnation at the churches over child sexual abuse risks that finger being turned back on it.
2. Not one single article in that gleaming bibliography informed JW parents and caregivers they had a perfect right to report child sexual abuse allegations to the police or health professionals. It is now far more widely known that JW organization's response to child abuse allegations in congregations were dealt with in-house with elders admonished to keep in contact with JW organization's loftily named "Legal Department".
3. The two-witness rule is the albatross around JW organization's neck. No where in the single page puff piece will the reader find any mention of the "two witness" rule. However, this antiquated embarrassment of a rule remains in place - it's just not talked about in polite company or in PR puff pieces.
-
smiddy
Obviously its designed to arm the faithfull with ammunition to anybody who challenges them at the doors or in cart-work .( probably with ex-JW`s in mind ) that they do inform and protect children fom sexuall abuse.
However steve2 points out some excellent comebacks to any "justification" the JW`s might try to defend themselves with.
-
Vidiot
"Omitted from the bibliography are the many article citations across the decades that have roundly condemned the churches of Christendom..."
I've seen stones thrown in glass houses, but that one takes it to a whole new level.
It really makes you wonder - in retrospect - what the fuck were they thinking???
"Not one single article in that gleaming bibliography informed JW parents and caregivers they had a perfect right to report child sexual abuse allegations..."
Let alone a responsibility or duty...
"Nowhere in the single page puff piece will the reader find any mention of the 'two witness' rule. However, this antiquated embarrassment of a rule remains in place..."
Funny... you'd think that the rule that - arguably - dictates the Org's (pedo-related) actions the most would be right at the top of the list...
"...it's just not talked about in polite company or in PR puff pieces."
Nice to have the two clearly distinguished.
...
As usual, steve-o nails it through and through. Well done, man.
