Here's my response to Bill:
To XXX,
You say that when you first became a Jehovah's Witness (apparently in 1995), you were told that as long as you didn't act on your pedophile tendencies, you'd be considered a brother. That is certainly in accord with stated Watchtower policy at that time, since they didn't consider pedophilia as any worse than sexual impropriety between consenting adults. However, in 1997 a Watchtower article stated a brand new policy concerning how elders should deal with pedophiles. Essentially, "known pedophiles" were not to be used in any position of congregation responsibility. This was followed by several more detailed letters to bodies of elders during the next year, which expanded upon the Watchtower article and more clearly defined what a "known pedophile" is.
Now, you say that you admitted to elders when you were first getting involved with the Witnesses that you had "pedophilic feelings". Apparently they kept this in mind, since many elders want to protect children from pedophiles. Some are more interested in doing this for basic moral reasons, and some because it's something the Watchtower Society says is wrong. Some elders demonstrably don't care about protecting children, but care more about protecting the Watchtower organization's name.
I would say that your elders were more concerned with protecting children than the organization, and so they may have interpreted the phrase "known molester" as "someone known to the elders as a demonstrated or self-admitted potential molester". If so, then it makes sense that they would restrict your congregational privileges, since anyone who has such privileges is viewed as especially "righteous" and will automatically be put in positions where pedophilic tendencies can be acted upon. This is demonstrated in your case, where you had put yourself in a special position of respect with the people you were studying with as their "Bible teacher", and you then used your position to act on your pedophilic tendencies.
So, whether your elders acted in accord with stated or intended Watchtower policies or not, I say that they acted in accord with common sense, given what we know about how pedophiles usually act. You cannot disagree with such a common sense position, given your criminal acts. As a father, I would have a strong desire to punish you severely, if you had violated my daughter's trust and virginity the way you have done with this girl.
You fail to understand a basic point of ethics and law: You committed statutory rape on an eight-year-old girl. Girls that age are incapable of making adult decisions to engage in sexual conduct, according to common sense and to the law. By any measure -- except one in accord with your own selfish and perverted tendencies -- a young girl will engage in such conduct only when influenced by someone with sexual experience, usually an older person who knows better. The laws of various states show an appreciation for this fact, and that's why statutes against "statutory rape" exist. They exist to protect against perverts.
You are a demonstrated pervert and society must be protected from you for the rest of your life, since statistically most pedophiles are extremely prone to repeating their perverted behavior. If you're truly repentent, you'll see that you need to pay back "Caesar's things to Caesar", namely, confess your crime to the girl's parents and to the proper authorities and take your punishment. This is no different from if you had committed any other crime for which the law prescribed punishment, and especially in cases where restitution ought to -- ethically or statutorily -- be made to the victim. Your restitution to your victim could be viewed as the little girl's understanding that what you did to her was a horrendous violation of her person and dignity -- even if she does not at this time have the maturity to understand it.
Given these facts, your elders most certainly were under a moral obligation to report your statutory rape, even though you claim it was consensual sex, and even if your state laws did not *require* it. The law defines all sexual activity by an adult with a little girl as rape, and calls it "statutory rape". Whether the parents of a minor are required to report this crime to authorities is a matter of local law, but the moral obligation remains. And whether Watchtower elders choose to go according to the minimum standards of the law or not is a matter of their ethics. In my view, those elders most certainly are under a moral obligation to report your statutory rape to the authorities.
You complain that the elders who disfellowshipped you didn't believe that you were repentant because you wouldn't go to the girl's mother and tell her what you had done. You provide several self-serving excuses as to why you didn't do so, but it all boils down to a simple thing: you don't want to take the punishment that you know the law prescribes and that the girl's parents would surely want. You use the stereotypical excuse of a pedophile and rapist: "She wanted it!"
What self-serving excuses have you offered up?
"It wasn't a crime because it was consensual sex." See above for my comments.
"To save her the public humiliation and ruined life that arises from the media getting hold of this." Every child service organization I know of has in place mechanisms for preventing unwanted media attention for victims. Indeed, all states require complete anonymity of the victim in pedophile cases. So your excuse here really means that you don't want to take a chance on *you* being exposed in the media.
"As a person who went through the state's Dept of Child & Family Services' psychiatrists, I know how much damage they can inflict." If you're that concerned, you should report your crime to the girl's parents, express your concerns about "the system", and let them decide what to do about their child's mental health. It's their God-given responsibility -- not yours -- and as a pedophile with obviously self-serving motives, you're in no position to judge what is good or bad for your victim.
"The only thing she's upset about is the fact that I haven't continued to come around to see her." This demonstrates her childish immaturity and innocence. It also demonstrates that you, as a pedophile, either don't understand, or more likely, will not admit to yourself, the seriousness of what you've done to her. In any case, she needs appropriate counseling and so do you.
"Second reason is that although I committed an act of gross immorality, I did not do anything deserving of imprisonment." This is THE stereotypical pedophile's excuse. The law clearly defines what you did as a disgusting crime. Whether you deserve imprisonment is for a judge and jury to determine.
As for your 12-step group, it sounds to me more like a pedophile-excuse-making group than one that's interested in the welfare of victims. If you provide me the name of this group, I will make an objective determination of its competence.
As for your girlfriend, I'm sure that she's a solid Jehovah's Witness and that she loves you. However, as a JW, she is under obligation to put the interests of the Watchtower organization above everything else in this world. So she will naturally be inclined to go along with your wanting to keep your perversion under wraps, for fear of "besmirching Jehovah's name". And as with many wives of child molesters, she'll lose a lot if this incident becomes known to authorities. I'm sure that these self-serving motives enter into your motives as well. As for having children with her, unless you get a massive amount of help, how do you know that you won't molest them? You know that recidivism among pedophiles is extremely high, I hope. And the mere fact that you might be a JW will not much influence your base perversion. You've already demonstrated that you can't be trusted with children, even though you claim to have been a worshiper of Jehovah for some eight years before you let your perverted tendencies get the better of you.
Your last argument really takes the cake in terms of inverted thinking. You argue that because Jehovah allows small children to be baptized, they should also be allowed to give sexual consent. But by *defining* them as minors, our society recognizes the fact that minors are emotionally incapable of making such life-altering decisions. They're not allowed to get married without parental consent until age 18. They're not allowed to drink alcohol until age 21. Similarly, they should not be allowed to give sexual consent outside parentally approved marriage. Do you actually think that your victim's parents would have given consent for you and the girl to have sex? I don't think you do, and that's another area where your self-serving thinking has led you to make self-serving excuses. I believe that your elders recognized this, and that's why they determined that, even though you confessed to them, you did not truly repent.
As for the baptism of minors, I believe that Jehovah's Witnesses are practicing a form of infant baptism. Jesus wasn't baptized until 30 years of age, and God never appointed children to any position of responsiblity in any Bible account. The Christian Greek scriptures give no indication that anyone other than a mature adult was ever baptized. Therefore, the Watchtower Society is on thin ice, both doctrinally and legally, in allowing children to make such a life-altering decision.
In conclusion, I give you credit for confessing your perversion to your elders. I think the fact that you refuse to make restitution to your victim, to confess to her parents, and to pay "Caesar's things to Caesar", all prove that you're not truly repentant -- even though you work hard to convince yourself otherwise -- and so the elders made the right decision. Their decision forces you to confront your crime, and most important, will protect children from your demonstrably uncontrollable perversion.
AlanF
