Posts by LoneWolf

9

My JW mom's response to Dateline

by buffy in

i actually decided to call my mom and ask her if she saw dateline and what she though of it.

she said she even taped it.

she said, "that abuse must be a problem or jehovah wouldn't have let it be brought out like that.

LoneWolf

Don't be discouraged though. This is a good start, and she is thinking for herself. Just keep it warm and relaxed and she'll continue to gain knowledge and understanding.

LoneWolf

7

Pedophilia, Michael Kelly, and headship.

by LoneWolf in

here are a couple of aspects of the pedophile issue that i feel have not been addressed.

the first is brought up by michael kelly of the washington post writers group.

it was published yesterday in our local newspaper, the eugene (oregon) register guard.. the full article can be found here:.

Yes. In many if not most instances, justifiably so. Sadly, though, sometimes they take it too far in the sense that they see evil where there isn't any. One gets to feeling that one needs to be a lawyer just to say "Good morning!" to them.

There are three long term effects of this militant attitude:

a. Many of the young men who do have the desire to be decent and respectful will tolerate getting kicked in the face only so long, then will actually become what they are accused of being. "I have the name, I may as well have the game." No one appreciates injustice.

You hear of women asking, "Where have all the good men gone?" Inasmuch as their "goodness" was never recognized, let alone appreciated, many of these good men ceased to be good and became as hostile and self-centered as their accusers.

b. Many young women will observe the older women's attitudes and either adopt it themselves or lose hope that they will find any man that is worthy of respect and trust. This lack of hope is a contributing factor in the suicide rates. In this manner it also becomes part of their inheritance.

c. It nearly destroys any chance that either will ever have much chance of having a happy married life. The steriotypes of men, women, and marriage itself have been so skewed that I have a difficult time finding anything at all that is accurate in them.

Yes, I guess that I do possess many of the "traditional values", although I don't hold them just because they are traditional "s'pose to's". We are now working on our 42nd year of marriage, and there is little that we haven't faced during that time. We did everything "wrong" according to today's conventional wisdom on how to ensure a happy marriage, yet we love one another more now than at first. There is no way under the sun we would have lasted this long if we had used today's "wisdom".

Really though, I can hardly expect anyone to understand the scope and depth of what I'm trying to say here. If we ever have a chance to meet perhaps I'll get a chance to tell you a little of the love story that has kept me enthralled and inspired all of my adult life, and then you will be able to understand some of what I speak of.

'Til then, smile and be of good courage.

LoneWolf

7

Pedophilia, Michael Kelly, and headship.

by LoneWolf in

here are a couple of aspects of the pedophile issue that i feel have not been addressed.

the first is brought up by michael kelly of the washington post writers group.

it was published yesterday in our local newspaper, the eugene (oregon) register guard.. the full article can be found here:.

LoneWolf

LOL, wasasister.

Yes, you probably have, and thank you for not "going all Feminist" with me.

What I am referring to here is that if a man is living up to what he should be, the women around him will not have to be constantly on their guard. This means that he must take the lead in the sense that he keeps himself under control instead of expecting her to exert restraint for both of them.

The results are beautiful for both too. She now has the opportunity to take the initiative if she so desires, instead of having to constantly be on the defensive. In turn, he gains something that is even more beautiful than her love --- her trust and faith.

Does that sound better?

LoneWolf

38

The Clergy- Laity Watchtower Lie

by metatron in

jw
friends

i get sick and tired of hearing the watchtower lie that they.

have no 'clergy- laity' distinction.. the hypocrisy in this is almost incredible.

the society wants.

LoneWolf

metatron ---

There is one thing here that I think you may be overlooking. The clergy - laity distinction is not really a function of whether they get paid or not. If it was, the term "paid clergy" would be a redundancy.

Rather, it is a distinction based on elitism. Certain ones have the "authority" to think and reason on the scriptures, while the others don't. Instead, they are expected and required, at times, to believe what has been prepared for them, or else.

YoYoMama's comments really have nothing to do with whether or not they are clergy, as financial remuneration is immaterial.

LoneWolf

7

Pedophilia, Michael Kelly, and headship.

by LoneWolf in

here are a couple of aspects of the pedophile issue that i feel have not been addressed.

the first is brought up by michael kelly of the washington post writers group.

it was published yesterday in our local newspaper, the eugene (oregon) register guard.. the full article can be found here:.

LoneWolf

But to look at it from their viewpoint, perhaps they could justify their conduct by quoting Deuteronomy 25:4. It reads:

"You must not muzzle a bull while it is threshing."

What do you think?

LoneWolf

7

Pedophilia, Michael Kelly, and headship.

by LoneWolf in

here are a couple of aspects of the pedophile issue that i feel have not been addressed.

the first is brought up by michael kelly of the washington post writers group.

it was published yesterday in our local newspaper, the eugene (oregon) register guard.. the full article can be found here:.

LoneWolf

Here are a couple of aspects of the pedophile issue that I feel have not been addressed. The first is brought up by Michael Kelly of the Washington Post Writer’s Group. It was published yesterday in our local newspaper, the Eugene (Oregon) Register Guard.

The full article can be found here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61046-2002Jun4.html

After mentioning the changes in policy that the church is making and posing some questions about them, he goes on to say this:

. . . that this is, ultimately and still, a shameful refusal to fully admit the horror of the church's moral implosion. It is -- again -- an attempt at ducking blame and limiting fallout for what is, in the end, a matter of institutional, not individual, corruption.

The most immediately obvious evasion of responsibility may be found in the directive pertaining to priests who have in the past committed sexual abuse of minors, what might be called the two-rapes-and-you're-out provision -- "if the cleric is a pedophile, or if he has committed more than one act of sexual abuse of a minor." This provision would allow priests who have not been diagnosed as pedophiles to remain in the clerisy. And, of course, this provision would protect from defrocking any cleric determined to have committed one (merely one!) act of sexual abuse of a child.

"But it was just that one time, your honor," is a defense seldom successfully employed in criminal sexual assault cases. It is not immediately clear to a layman why an institution devoted to the teaching of a higher order of morality should adopt a threshold for the punishment of immorality (not to mention criminality) that would be laughed out of, say, the Suffolk County courthouse. Perhaps it is a mystery of the faith.

But the real failing is not what is in the proposal but what is not. Not the slightest mention is made of any intention to investigate or punish the high church officials -- bishops, archbishops and assorted superiors and ecclesiastical bureaucrats -- who, it has been redundantly shown, have systematically aided, protected, hidden and promoted known predator-priests. They are the missing guilty, still.

This pretends, as is the institutional position, that the problem with the church is merely a plague of predator priests. Of course, this is not true. There are about 47,000 Catholic priests in America; the number accused of sexual abuse over the past four decades runs, by the most liberal estimates, only to a few thousand. The church's real problem is that its superior officers deliberately allowed these relatively few priests to remain -- in the face of powerful and mounting evidence of criminal wrongdoing -- in positions where they could exploit their priestly privileges and continue to prey on the young and the vulnerable.

We are speaking of men such as Boston's Cardinal Bernard F. Law, who stands naked before God for his years of protecting and hiding and promoting priests believed to be guilty of chronic, monstrous crimes of sexual depravity against children entrusted to the church's care. And of men such as Law's former top deputy, John B. McCormack, now bishop of Manchester, N.H., who reportedly admitted, under civil oath Monday, to years of effort in covering up credible allegations of clergy sexual crimes, in order to avoid "a scandal." And many more.

Certainly, the men who raped boys need to be defrocked, not to mention tried, convicted and jailed. But what about the men who let the men rape boys? Why do they still hold high office? Why indeed do they still wear clerical collars? If two rapes is enough to get a priest defrocked, shouldn't looking the other way from a few decades' worth of rapes be enough to defrock a bishop?

This entire train of thought applies equally to the Society. We need to know why these principles are not applied right now. Of course, many of us already know, but it’s high time that they be skewered with these questions and driven from any position of respectability.

And that brings up the other.

Both the pedophiles and their protectors are in my opinion utter failures not merely as spiritual leaders, but even as men. According to scripture, men are supposed to take the lead and to be the heads of families. In that role, they are to set the tone of the relationship with women, not the other way around.

For a young man to “try out” a young woman to see whether or not she is “trustworthy” and therefore suitable for courtship is an abandoning of any claim he may wish to profess of any headship. He is unworthy of both that role and of the young woman in question.

For an elder to be given only a slap on the wrist on the excuse that the woman was dressed “provocatively” again gets the cart before the horse. None of them live up to nor deserve any role of headship, for they have denied it by their conduct. Instead, they have demanded that the woman assume the role.

I don’t know about you, but I’m tired of this crap.

LoneWolf

71

A Plea For Responsible Reporting

by hillary_step in

jw
friends

many hundreds of people read this site who are not subscribed, and i would suspect that the vast majority are jw's looking for answers to an internal turmoil that they may be living with.. the information posted on this board does get read and then passed among many congregations of jw's.

this information is a powerful force and is a wonderful thing for those who are seeking to be informed, and a not so wonderful thing to those in brooklyn who are seeking to harness the boundaries of knowledge.. given this scenario, and how much credibility can be lost by xjw's who perpetuate gossip and innuendo, can we check our sources and facts very carefully before we post information to this board.

there is no particular nobility in being first with news about some aspect of wts life.

LoneWolf

No, crawdad2, you're wrong.

so you think i have a big mouth, cause i want victims to testify?

We think you have a big mouth because you insist in putting it in motion before you put your brain in gear. The end result is that the goal you have (which is a good one) is set back due to your numbskull answers. That's makes you your own worst enemy, which is bad enough, but the truely sad part is that it also prolongs the injustices that the innocent have to suffer and hurts them worse.

As others have tried to tell you, you need to read AND GET THE MEANING of what others are saying without jumping to all kinds of stupid knee-jerk conclusions, BEFORE attempting to answer.

Your bull-headed and self-centered conduct on this thread reminds me of the guy they found back in Chicago one time. There was a sodden THUD followed by a scream of agony that came out of an apartment, followed by the same thing a few minutes later. After three or four more times, someone called 911.

When the cops got there, they broke down the door and rushed in, only to find this guy with his penis stretched out and supported on the table. It was ghastly looking, bleeding profusely and mashed almost beyond recognition. Before they could stop him, he hauled off and hit it again with the hammer in his hand.

When his scream had died away, they asked him in utter astonishment, "Wha . . . Why are you doing that????"

Came the answer: "Because it wants to pee and I won't let it."

Surely, crawdad2, you can do better than that.

LoneWolf

2

WAS DATELINE TRUE???

by crawdad2 in

omg!!!!.......

what a story!!!!.

dear gov body, .......was dateline true?

LoneWolf

Yup.

8

Anyone from or in Alaska???

by terafera2 in

i'm in anchorage now and it would be cool if any of you are from this area.

i used to live in fairbanks and have wondered about alot of jw's who seemed to live on the 'fence'.

if you are out, let me know!

LoneWolf

Yes. We moved to the Eskimo village of Bethel in 1968 to serve where the need is great. I believe it was the next Yearbook that mentions it. We stayed there 3 1/2 years and then moved to the Butte area of the Matanuska Valley and stayed there for another 7 1/2 years. We know a great many people in that area, including Br. & Sr. Ronco, the Branch Overseer and wife.

Our oldest daughter and family are in the Palmer congregation now. You might even know her. Then there's one wonderful little Eskimo sister in Anchorage that I'd bet big bucks that you do know. She's pioneered for years. Email me if you'd like more details.

All of my family are still in. I was DFed about 15 years ago because they didn't like my looks. Actually, that wasn't the real reason, but the real one was just as petty.

LoneWolf

27

Shaking Hands with Death - part 1

by Amazing in

jw
friends

shaking hands with death: the one common bond we all share, even jehovahs witnesses, is death ... it lurks in the back of the head ... and most people dont think about it more than they are forced to when a loved one dies.

on monday, 5/28 i was forced against my will to meet mr. death, and have my first chat with him.. i would have expected to have profound and serious thoughts combined with the wise and sage advice of standing at the threshold of deaths door.

what i found was something most unexpected ... something that altered my views of life and death, yet once again.. the heart attack: it was a pleasant noontime.

LoneWolf

Words cannot express how glad I am that you have survived and are recovering. The world would be the poorer without you in it.

LoneWolf