My neighbor didn't come on time, and her line was busy, so I went over to see if there was a problem. She was cheerfully eating lunch, and by the time she finally made it over to my place it was 1 1/2 hours late. Oh well, at least she came!
She brought a printout from her elder (an old friend of her husband's ) from the media site of the WT. On paper, it was putting the best face forward, and explained that the Bible's rules were to prevent unfair punishment. We talked about the policies of the WT, and she felt she had to agree with the WT that punishing a person on the testimony of less than 2 witnesses was wrong. Also, that the elders must recognize the difficulty of their position. I asked her about "other" kinds of testimony: affadavits? DNA evidence? Doctor's verification that a victim was molested?
I pointed out that in the Bible, if a new husband complained that his wife was not a virgin, there was a bedcloth which had a purpose to prove/disprove any contention about this. It was not a person, but it was evidence that was considered enough for a conviction or acquittal, like a second witness. I asked, why have the elders never considered that there are other evidences available, or pursued them in order to determine the truth of a claim?
I told her that the biggest issue is not that there are molesters in the KHs, and though their policies about 2 required eye-witnesses being required may severely hamper justice, I was even willing to extend some forgiveness toward them if they were honestly doing what they thought was best, though these policies were awful. The thing that boiled my blood was that, in their supposed efforts to make sure an accused abuser was not treated unjustly, the purported victims were treated as guilty of slander simply by going to the police--a "right" that the WT media release claimed any victim could excercise. Even if they won their court case, the victim, not the abuser, was guilty. I told her that the only consistent "rule" that the elders were applying was to tell victims to "shut up!", and not really caring about the victim as they claimed.
I reminded her that the Dateline program's recording of the legal dept. advised the elder to just walk away as soon as an abuser insisted that he was innocent; how is that policy demonstrating a determined desire to protect children, or demonstrate abhorring child abuse? Reality contradicts their press releases.
One thing that seemed to impress her was that it was through the internet that victims came forward, who had no idea that there were other victims, and 5000+ all were telling the same story: shut up, don't go to the police or you will be disfellowshiped. This was not an anomoly, but a policy.
I see her wavering--a little. She is having some real cognitive dissonance, but she is still very sure that Jehovah is going to make sure justice is done. I commented, "Perhaps news stories like this are Jehovah's method!" She is looking for any strong branch to hang on to.
She had to go to a counseling session by 4:00, but wants to return tonight to watch more clips. I think she likes watching videos on computer. She hasn't got her TV cable installed, so I guess this (even in poor pixels) is good. I wrote down the address (www.dirtclod.com) for her to give to her elder, as she wants him to watch the video. She also thought a transcript would be helpful for her to be sure she understood all the points. (I have one ready now, actually.)
Communication is flowing freely. Hugs, too.
bebu