Posts by Mephis

24

Article- Child checks for all religious leaders, inquiry recommends

by AndersonsInfo in

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/in-depth/child-checks-for-all-religious-leaders-inquiry-recommends/story-fngburq5-1227486717033.

by: rick morton .

from: the australian .

Mephis

I think there may need to be a judgement made somewhere along the line on whether or not treating children as adults (as they are by JWs rather than eg having them in a Sunday School or having child specific activities, they actively baptise minors and even have rules on how best to shun them as they would an adult) counts as more than incidental to the role of the 'religious leaders' within a congregation. On first glance, I'm really not sure, although the report also makes clear that supervised contact makes no difference to the requirement to have the checks done.

(in Britain, they don't meet the current requirements to have the equivalent checks done)

30

Will Jehovah`s Witnesses join with other religions in Compensation Payouts ?

by smiddy in

justice mcclellen asked g.jackson about compensation for victims of child abuse , and mcclellan suggested it be by a consortium of groups , presumably religious and secular in nature as a pool to dispense approppiate compensation to all of the victims involved .. g.jackson hesitated and said they would have to look at the details of that proposal , before committing to it.. jehovah`s witnesses consider themselves as the only true religion and ,all others as false religion .. they take pains to separate themselves from from any association with other religions , not even being included in newspaper notices about church services.they want to keep themselves separate and distinct from false religion as they see them.. so how do you think they will handle this suggestion / requirement ?

will they join in aligning themselves with "babylon the great" in compensation .?.

didn`t they align themselves with another religion in the u.s.a. some years ago , that had to do with the w.t.

Mephis

What is very unlikely to be on the table is for them to declare that redress is available and for them to then draw up their own rules for being able to claim it - which I'd suggest would be their ideal outcome if forced to make provision on their own. The commission's papers already say that individual funds have to also have totally independent means of making a claim so a survivor never is forced to deal with an organisation itself.

Using the commission's figures, with the known number of survivors, and one suggested average figure for redress for each, it comes to a potential liability of something like $113m (Aus)/£53m/$83m (US). One of the WBTS' arguments, even to this commission, has been that they should only be held liable for abuse carried out by elders and ministerial servants. That hasn't carried any weight whatsoever with the commission, but when O'Brien talked about 'fairness' of proposed schemes that is the context.

Can see them trying to drag this out for as long as they can really because it very much makes them not the special snowflakes they try to pretend they are, but yet another religion with a serious issue which handwaving away hasn't solved. They'll use 'be no part of the world' to defend this. Until the bad publicity becomes too much, and the court cases are lost and they realise this may be cheaper than paying £1m a time to the lawyers in each case, and then they'll decide it's like an insurance scheme so scripturally fine after all.

13

Sydney Morning Herald Headline about Compensation for Victims May Cause JW Organization to Gasp

by steve2 in

geoffrey jackson's unfailingly diplomatic responses during friday's royal commission hearings have undoubtedly limited damage to the reputation of the jw organization - but i could never again imagine the watchtower and awake!

magazines criticizing other religions over their responses to child sexual abuse within their parishes.

too close for comfort.

Mephis

The scriptural principle they'll look to first will be Revelation 18:4. The Commission will need to offer them a library pass to overcome that objection.

100

GB member Geoffrey Jackson is lying!

by Billy the Ex-Bethelite in

okay, i know the royal commission hasn't started yet.

but i'm confident enough that he will be telling some whoppers.

so i thought i'd be the first to get a thread started for something that will begin... very soon now!.

Mephis

@Billy - the lady commissioner is a psychiatrist who specialises in working with children.

100

GB member Geoffrey Jackson is lying!

by Billy the Ex-Bethelite in

okay, i know the royal commission hasn't started yet.

but i'm confident enough that he will be telling some whoppers.

so i thought i'd be the first to get a thread started for something that will begin... very soon now!.

Mephis

Another huge whopper is that elders were expected to use their conscience and report regardless of law. No, they're expected to phone the service department who'll tell them not to report regardless of their consciences.

9

Sumerian history

by StarTrekAngel in

can anyone recommend a good, updated book or documentary on the sumerian civilization?.

thanks in advance.

Mephis

Probably something by Kramer as a general book, although that's kind of 'classic' now (50 years old!). Crawford would be the other to check out which fills in more of the blanks uncovered in the 40 years between her book and Kramer's.

15

New Catholic tribunal formed

by OrphanCrow in

this happened in the month prior to the jws giving testimony for the royal commission - the article was published june 10, 2015. it is interesting to note that this catholic tribunal is for addressing those priests who cover up child abuse.

pope francis makes catholic bishops who cover up for paedophile priests accountable for first time with new tribunal system.

pope francis has taken a major step towards stamping out paedophilia in the catholic church, approving a new system of tribunals designed to make bishops accountable for the priests under them.the new and unprecedented vatican legal mechanism will hear the cases against bishops accused of covering up paedophile priests who abuse children on their watch.the church has previously faced criticism for failing to hold those in higher positions accountable for what goes on in their bishoprics.the vatican said pope francis was presented with the tribunal proposals by cardinal sean omalley, who he appointed as head of a new sex abuse advisory commission in december 2013.francis and his cardinal advisers approved the plans and allocated funding for full-time personnel to staff the new office.the vatican spokesman, rev federico lombardi, said this means there is now a specific process by which the vatican can deal with bishops who are negligent in handling cases of abuse in their territories.canon law already does provide sanctions for bishops who are negligent in their duties, but the vatican has never been known to mete out punishment for a bishop who covered up for an abuser.previously, the closest francis had come was in april, when he accepted the resignation of a us bishop found to have failed to report a suspected child abuser.

Mephis

One of the reasons why the Methodists stood out with this, is not only their response - which was welcomed by survivors' groups - but also that the problems and abuse they uncovered and took responsibility for were not limited to just those with a formal role in their religion.

The WBTS has already tried, in Australia, to argue that they don't have a problem to address unless it's an elder (and to a lesser degree a ministerial servant) who is the abuser.

It's quite the contrast in how organisations look to their past, own their mistakes, seek to make restitution and redress, and look into how better to protect those whom they claim to 'shepherd'.

9

Who would Jehovah Vote For In 2016?

by BashfulAshG in

we all know that jws don't vote, but hypothetically, who would jehovah or the gb vote for and why?.

Mephis

Someone like this here in Britain.

41

Need the hardest evidence possible that humans have lived for more than 6000 years

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

since coming out of the witnesses, i have gone through a transformation in thought and in mind.

i started with the usual: i thought that jesus was god.

then i investigated more about the bible and thought that the bible was not true, given the many contradictions, failed prophecies, etc.. then i investigated evolution and read lots and now i accept evolution and natural selection as things that are true.. now, i need to make my dad rethink everything.

Mephis

If anyone dating the pyramids to 15000 years ago is classed as a scholar, I'd like to be classed as a brain surgeon on the corresponding academic criteria that I once touched someone's head.

13

How does the WTS view 'ancient humans' (i.e. fossils assigned to the genus Homo)?

by LoveUniHateExams in

having read i love ttatt's thread about evidence for humans living more than 6,000 years ago, i responded by using neanderthals and homo ergaster as evidence.

.

this got me thinking about the wt's current view on 'cavemen' (), etc.. so, how does the wts view 'ancient humans'?

Mephis

They use selective quotations to imply that they're 'just' humans. They don't really address the DNA evidence from what I've seen. And of course, the Denisovan evidence is fairly recent so hasn't had to be addressed. Effectively they try to blur and misrepresent the evidence rather than deal with the real arguments. "These aren't ape men - look a scientist said so!". But crickets on the issue of how Neanderthals diverged from the common ancestor of anatomically modern humans.