How do we protect the abuser?

by ???? 104 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  avishai

  Disclaimer:

  No dispute that many cases seriously screwed up and WT policy was more concerned with image than children.

  Good. The prior case is the exception. When did this case you speak of happen?

  Most cases, not just "many" were seriously screwed up.

  Here's an exammple of one. The court case is still on going.

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/38146/1.ashx

  Here's the update. http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/8/46670/1.ashx

  This is the kind of case and rhetoric the JW's have problems with.

  ?????? and shadow: Please read these links and tell me what you think is true and what is not.
• 

  shadow

  Given the nature of the WTS, it is still difficult to compile an accurate statistical picture of what transpired due to previous WT policy.

  The experience I spoke of occurred since 2000.

  Brumley sounds more like a lawyer than a Christian. I believe WT is less than open about this to protect their image.

  The current policy is much better than the old one.

  What would you like current JW's to do?
• 

  ????

  Ok up to this point i have been nothing but honest with all of you and presume that you are doing the same but I keep being told that I'm:

  gdt, I mean, ???

  skiddish

  believe this is a troll at work The situation you describe, while tragic, is very rare. That is of course if it is even true.

  so busy trying to defend an indefensible evil

  sorry ???????? but you seem like someone who would push my buttons

  Or could this just be 'another scenario' in your mind?

  I love how you guys defend your stand with actions and words. Never once did I say Jws have it right and there is no room for change. Most of you guys jumped all over me every time I had a reasonable Question. I think its sad that most likely some of you have been hurt very deeply by Abuse to yourself or a family member. But what about the rest of you! Believing every story!

  As a general comment, why is it so difficult for many XJW's to see that attacking individual JW's will not change WTS policy however hard we attack them.
• 

  shamus

  ???

  I am not mad at you. That was never the case. Sometimes I tend to be abrupt on this forum.

  I would ask you, though, how you are using generalizing statements, such as "if you tell the police that you were sexually abused by a congregation member, you will be disfellowshipped". Your words, not mine. And it's absolutley false. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.

  Using blank statements and black and white thinking is all that you're doing in this case.

  Anyone who truly believes that statement, in this day and age in 'the truth' is delusional. However, that was not always the case. I don't really think you were serious when you made that statement, were you?
• 

  ????

  Im sorry could you cut and paste that for me I cant find where i said that.
• 

  avishai

  The experience I spoke of occurred since 2000

  That's what I thought. And lemme guess, It was in a mandatory reporting state? Also, since the elders were'nt aproached first, there was'nt much they could do anyway, right? Good for the parents and the therapist, I wish more people had understanding elders that don't call all psychiatrists and therapists "quacks".

  Brumley sounds more like a lawyer than a Christian.

  Amen.

  I believe WT is less than open about this to protect their image.

  Which is exactly why molestation has been covered up for decades.

  The current policy is much better than the old one.

  Only in mandatory reporting states or countries. Everywhere else it's status quo.

  Also, It may not be better at all, one of the many examples of the wts telling one thing to the authorities and doing another. Here's how it works. Let's say it's a mandatory reporting state.

  An elder is told of an abuse case. One witness, let's say the abused. The abuser denies it. So, there is only one witness. The elder does'nt feel compelled to report it because his and the society's view of GOD's law is the two witness rule. So he does'nt report it because, in his mind, no crime was committed. Even though Caesars law says he has to report it, they don't due to the two witness rule.

  It's just lip service, as usual, and it's pathetic that the "new" rules came within a week or two of the dateline special.
• 

  shamus

  In all the years i have been a witness there have been countless wt studys reminding the cong the elders are imperfect and mess up so why let them play a role in some so serious. Parents have HAVE to do what is best for the child regardless or the outcome. But I have a hard time beleaving that every time parents go to the police they will be disfellowshiped.

  Now I have to wonder if you are even the same person posting here. I think that this could be just b.s. If you don't even know what you've been saying on this very thread, then something is wrong. Just IMO>
• 

  avishai

  Its not because of the child abuse thing that he left. After he got kicked out of bethel for making a late night sex phone add on T.V. . His roommate kicked him out because he caught him Jerking off to scrambled pay per view and he found a " pink pocket " in his bedroom and more porn on his computer then you can shake a stick at <I said Stick>.

  So what? What does that do other than slander someone who did'nt hurt anyone. I fail to see your point other than to ruthlessly embarrass and slander someone else. Typical JW response.
• 

  ????

  It's just lip service, as usual, and it's pathetic that the "new" rules came within a week or two of the dateline special.

  Are you sure its "new" and not just a " reminder" to everyone in the congergations, so that when the many people ask us we don't give them incorect info?
• 

  SheilaM

  ???????? Have you heard of libel ...your above statement could be used in court. Libel is the written word and you have not backed up what you said with any newspaper articles NOTHING..... I would delete the info on John before you end up in court