Marvin Shilmer

Joined

• started 433 topics
• posted 4,004 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Marvin Shilmer

• 
  50

  Response to Pathofthorns

  by silentlambs in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i have watched the intentional effort by pathofthorns to defend wt policy and create misinformation regarding the silentlambs effort.

  are you being paid by wt for your lies?

  why do you create boundaries for silentlambs and question them when you know as well as i that we do not stand or take that position?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Hi, ARoarer

  Your experience is good to inject into this discussion. Assuming you refer to law enforcement officials, the only thing I would add is that your opinion that "disclosure is painful but is always in the best interest of the child" is not accepted as a universal recommendation by quite a few caring and considerate professionals and other persons, including victims themselves. This is one reason laws vary on mandatory reporting. In the case of clerics, another reason these laws vary is because some caring people feel as though victims should have at least one authority figure they can go to without fear of automatic reporting, if that is an issue for them.

  We all know child abuse is a horrendous crime, and that victims need every help possible, and this is the goal of everyone in this discussion. But the details of exactly the best remedy for each case, and whether uniform mandatory reporting should be required for any and all authority figures, is still being debated by caring professionals. Whereas you feel that disclosure to law enforcement authorities is always in the best interest of the child, others feel that most of the time disclosure is in the best interest of the child. The latter don't want to close the door on other options at the discretion of victims. That is the debate. The good side of discussions like we have here is precisely because the act of continuing dialogue is part of the process of improvement.

  Regardless, the debate of mandatory disclosure by clerics should not hinder anyone from a uniform policy of always encouraging that victims (or their guardians) report allegations of child abuse to law enforcement authorities. A policy lacking this essential element is suspicious, at least!
• 
  50

  Response to Pathofthorns

  by silentlambs in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i have watched the intentional effort by pathofthorns to defend wt policy and create misinformation regarding the silentlambs effort.

  are you being paid by wt for your lies?

  why do you create boundaries for silentlambs and question them when you know as well as i that we do not stand or take that position?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  dungbeetle writes:
  

  1) Regarding the claim that Watchtower has made a postive change in handling of pedophiles: what is this new information and where can it be found?

  2) If there is no new info, and it cannot be found, why then make the assertion over a period of months that it exists?

  These are direct questions asked of Pathofthorns, and I 've noticed that not only POT but also his supporters cannot answer them either.

  For the challenged reader:

  As written above, here's the direct answer:

  The change in WTS policy is that what was a covert directive is now overt, which makes it far less likely to be applied unevenly or sporadically.

  Also as written above, here are additional supporting comments:

  Frankly, though Bill has argued that WTS policy has always been to allow victims to report without sanctions (and I would mostly agree with this), getting the WTS to instruct elders on this issue was precarious because men working the different service desks at Patterson were just that, different men, which meant one would be more thorough than another. Also, if Bill is honest here he will also admit that in the past when he would call the service department as an elder (on reported child abuse) the desk man would follow a script of from five to seven statements (depending on which year he called during the past 10) and not one of these scripted statements included instructions that elders should not sanction publishers congregationally who reported allegations of child abuse to authorities (substantiated or not). That all changed at the recent KM schools and that February 2002 letter.

  I am a supporter of truth, regardless of who else does likewise. What about you?

  If you prefer to let this thread die, dungbeetle, then I suggest you stop reviving it. Otherwise you can expect rebuttals by those who care for truth.
• 
  50

  Response to Pathofthorns

  by silentlambs in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i have watched the intentional effort by pathofthorns to defend wt policy and create misinformation regarding the silentlambs effort.

  are you being paid by wt for your lies?

  why do you create boundaries for silentlambs and question them when you know as well as i that we do not stand or take that position?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Whomever has posted as Silentlambs on this thread:

  You wrote:
  

  Path is not trying to find balance, not trying to educate himself, not trying to help children. His posts as I have stated, set forth an agenda that hurts victims of abuse by supporting WT Policy. I stand by my position until he proves otherwise.

  Path has nothing to prove. Proof is up to those making accusations, or any other type assertion for that matter. That you would stand by a position until someone--anyone--proves the negative testifies to your own inability to form logical conclusions, which makes your other assertions suspect. On logical reasoning I suggest you get more education.

  Furthermore, your apparent disregard for how other reasonable people understand statements made by Pathofthorns stands as testimony of your personal unreasonableness, which would most often classify you as hopelessly stubborn. That you would go further and accuse Path of an agenda to hurt children by supporting WTS policy is, simply put, bald slander. That, Mr. or Mrs. Silentlanbs, goes contrary to everything moral you claim to represent. On social development I suggest you get more education.

  Assuming you are Bill, I really don't understand you. Your response to Path is similar to how you have responded to me in private, and I KNOW this man resists WTS policy on child molestation, and other things too. Path is the same way! For crying out loud, Path is a supporter of child molestation victims. This is evident from years of his participation on this forum and from private emails to several. That you would throw away--actually ruin--an opportunity to gain from contributors like him evidences a pathology that puts off so many who might otherwise offer their assist directly to you. Instead these ones are left to go after WTS policy otherwise, which ends up with something less than the most intense offensive possible. Why in God's name you insist on putting off allies escapes me--it totally escapes me. On building allies I suggest you get more education.

  And, please, don't lay into that BS about how reactions like those toward Path can be defended out of an intent to help victims. Sorry, that won't work among thinkers! If your sole driving force was to help kids then you would LISTEN to ALL the stakeholders instead of being so dadblame insistent that everyone but you is wrong in their assessments.

  Enough is enough, Bill. Please, listen to those who love their neighbors and want to help victims. Don't put them off by needless hurling of insult! Persons are not your enemy just because they disagree here or there. Enemies fight your efforts; they don't waste their time trying to help you see alternate viewpoints for sake of strengthening your initiative, as Path has done. Now I suppose everyone will get to read your ranting at me. Go ahead. As Path has demonstrated, neither is this mind bothered by lunacy. What bothers me is how you waste resources like Path. It defies good sense.
• 
  18

  How would you counter these common JW arguments?

  by Leander in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  as i mentioned before in previous posts i'm trying to prepare myself for an exit of the borg.

  so what i've been doing over the last few days is thinking of ways to counter the questions that i know will be directed to me.

  in particular how would you go about responding to the following questions?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  If they get into the 'food at the proper time' business then just tell them you always make sure to compare the "food" you're offered with the Master's menu, just to make sure it's food from his kitchen and not someone else's. In other words, if the "food" doesn't match the menu then you have no choice but to reject it as coming from the Master. The menu is the Bible.
• 
  18

  How would you counter these common JW arguments?

  by Leander in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  as i mentioned before in previous posts i'm trying to prepare myself for an exit of the borg.

  so what i've been doing over the last few days is thinking of ways to counter the questions that i know will be directed to me.

  in particular how would you go about responding to the following questions?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Hi, Leander

  Several have already offered good advice, but here I will give some specific suggestions should you find need for them.

  If you leave the truth how will you be following the scripture "do not be forsaking the gathering of yourselves together"?

  You're not leaving truth. Pursuing truth is a lifelong exercise and you don't contemplate a time when that would change for you. You relish the company of people that live as Christians as far as you can tell, and that desire has not diminished. You do not plan on curtailing any association you see as Christian and that incites people to love and fine works out of love of our Creator and His son, the Christ. Whenever you meet and share company with someone that manifests Christian conduct then you feel you are gathering with a Christian. It's just that simple.

  In turn that questions is usually followed up by them loosely quoting Peter where else are you going to go to? (Thanks to the people on this board I realize now that Peter said who and not where, but most JWs insist that you must be with a group (theirs) in order to serve God)

  You haven't gone anywhere. You made a choice to follow Jesus and that has not changed. Is their someone else they feel it's better that you should follow?

  A few months back I was speaking with an elder about the scripture in Deuteronomy pertaining to false prophecy. He basically tried to pass it off by saying that scripture only applied to the false prophets of the other nations during that time period. While I disagree with his notion that the scripture has only a limited scope I would like to be able to use other scriptural texts of identifying false prophets.

  Don't worry so much about whether someone IS a false prophet as you do about determining whether what someone says IS true. At the end of the day truth is what counts, not what brand of cologne the person who says it wears. In concept the text you speak of warns people to watch for error for the sake of truth, that has not changed. Of course, the WTS has made a boatload of errors! But some of what they taught/teach is true, which shows why we should focus on determining trueness more instead of labeling.
• 
  50

  Response to Pathofthorns

  by silentlambs in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i have watched the intentional effort by pathofthorns to defend wt policy and create misinformation regarding the silentlambs effort.

  are you being paid by wt for your lies?

  why do you create boundaries for silentlambs and question them when you know as well as i that we do not stand or take that position?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Hi, dungbeetle

  The change in WTS policy is that what was a covert directive is now overt, which makes it far less likely to be applied unevenly or sporadically.

  Frankly, though Bill has argued that WTS policy has always been to allow victims to report without sanctions (and I would mostly agree with this), getting the WTS to instruct elders on this issue was precarious because men working the different service desks at Patterson were just that, different men, which meant one would be more thorough than another. Also, if Bill is honest here he will also admit that in the past when he would call the service department as an elder (on reported child abuse) the desk man would follow a script of from five to seven statements (depending on which year he called during the past 10) and not one of these scripted statements included instructions that elders should not sanction publishers congregationally who reported allegations of child abuse to authorities (substantiated or not). That all changed at the recent KM schools and that February 2002 letter.
• 
  50

  Response to Pathofthorns

  by silentlambs in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i have watched the intentional effort by pathofthorns to defend wt policy and create misinformation regarding the silentlambs effort.

  are you being paid by wt for your lies?

  why do you create boundaries for silentlambs and question them when you know as well as i that we do not stand or take that position?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  .

  I don’t understand this attack on Path myself. He’s always presented levelheaded thoughts in the past, and this time is no different.

  What’s the basic difference between Bill’s opinion and Path’s? In my view it boils down to one basic difference.

  Bill insists elders must report alleged or known child abuse whether the victims (or their innocent guardians) want it reported or not.

  Path sees wisdom in elders always encouraging that victims (or their guardians) report the allegations of or known child abuse but leaving the prerogative to the victim (or their innocent guardian(s)) to do so.

  What is the merit of Bill’s insistence? It presents a much tougher ultimatum to would-be abusers and it might protect more children. Why do I say “might” protect more children? Because Bill’s solution would put off some victims from reporting, and is exactly why Path has suggested what he has.

  What is the merit of Path’s opinion? It provides an outlet for victims to get some kind of help that do not feel able or ready to go to authorities. If the policy was for elders to always encourage victims to report then when timid victims go to elders they would find support that might make them go ahead and report. Abusers of these victims might be left on the loose even longer if timid victims fail to talk because they have no authority figure to talk with that will not automatically report, which, in this case, is what they are not ready for.

  I don’t have time to dig through all the posts on this subject, but elsewhere I have posted the same sentiments as Path has here, if I’m reading him correctly. Nothing Bill has said changes my mind either, because he has yet to present a better solution to help timid victims come forward to get some kind of help that would not do so if reporting was automatic as he would insist. As far as I’m concerned if the WTS changed its policy so that elders were required to ALWAYS encourage victims to report alleged abuse to authorities then they would be doing all they could to help with as MANY victims as possible regardless of their timidity. Of course, in areas where elders are legally bound to see that these allegations are reported, nothing would really change except maybe elders would generally be more supportive as a result of a policy to always encourage reporting.

  Bill, before you get your underwear wadded up about this post just sit down, cool off and answer these questions: Who will victims go to who don’t feel able to go the route of reporting to authorities right away, if at all? WHO?! Where do they go to begin getting encouragement that might ultimately lead to reporting and arresting a criminal that might not otherwise come to justice? The solution you insist upon does not help these victims. Sorry, that’s just the facts!

  My best regards for Bill and Path, and the rest,

  Marvin Shilmer
• 
  3

  Greg Stafford and Golden Age Books!

  by stevieb1 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this i have found really funny.

  there is a witness in the uk who operates a mail order bookstore offering books of interest to jehovah's witnesses.

  this is what he says in his latest list:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Can someone provide a web address to the site mentioned by steve?

  Thanks!
• 
  19

  Just Got This Email From a Witness

  by stevieb1 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  quote.

  "i feel you should remember where you got the truth.

  first, who was the one feeding you to where you are now.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Here’s another one:

  “God. Where else should I go?”
• 
  19

  Just Got This Email From a Witness

  by stevieb1 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  quote.

  "i feel you should remember where you got the truth.

  first, who was the one feeding you to where you are now.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Them:
  "I feel you should remember where you got the truth first, who was the one feeding you to where you are now."

  Me:
  “Brother [John Doe] helped me in my search for truth, and my craving for truth has not diminished since then. Do you think it should?”

  Or:
  “I decided to search for what is true, so my search for truth started with me. Over the years I have learned truths from many people, some of them Jehovah’s Witnesses. Should I deny what is true based on who helps me find it?”

  Or:
  “Learning truth begins at birth. The first truth I learned was the necessity to fulfill hunger pains. My mother taught me how. Fortunately my search for truth did not end there. Eventually I learned it was okay to search for truth beyond my mother, because truth is not the sole possession of one person. I seek truth from anywhere I can find it. Should I turn down something that is true because I don’t care for the messenger?”

  Source: Reasoning From The Striptures