Posts by Marvin Shilmer

14

Simply Amazing's story up in entirety

by Dogpatch in

jw
friends

many of you read parts of simply amazing's story of life in the watchtower and his encounters with other elders, bethelites and more.

now the entire story is online at:.

http://www.exjws.net/pioneers/partintro.htm.

Marvin Shilmer

Hi, Randy

Thanks for putting Amazing's story online like you have. That is one great read! Thanks to Amazing too, for giving us this gem in the first place!

129

MANDATORY Reporting of Child Abuse

by silentlambs in

it appears there are a few misconceptions when it comes to the reporting of child abuse.

the federal law child abuse prevention and treatment act (capta)(jan. 1996 version), 42 u.s.c.

failure to report can result in civil liability.

"You forget that not only is SL dealing with the legalities of the law of the land, he is also dealing with "theocratic legalities" of those whom he is trying to protect, on the terms of the WT's existance as a religious entity."

I'm not sure what complication you feel like you see. Given the practical situation that Bill is already in (de facto disfellowhsipped) him making a public "what should be" statement represents no threat to Bill or anyone else regardless of whether a specific case is before a secular or JW tribunal. If you are going to insist that some threat exist that should keep us from voicing publicly what Bill would have us stand for publicly then you should provide some evidence demonstrating this is a true possibility. Otherwise all you've done is introduced a red herring into this discussion. Frankly, the notion is so absurd (i.e., public support for a secret position) I see no possibility that it could exist.

"Again and again SL is telling people "what should be", Yet people like you seem intent on twisting his words. I personally do not blame him for wanting to keep his "trap shut", otherwise people like you would deter others from helping his cause."

No, Bill has not given clear details about "what should be." The questions I asked are precisely to gain an understanding on important aspects of what he has said. Of course any of us can choose to keep our traps shut, but on issues of public concern someone has to say what the position is. Otherwise what is to rally around? If Bill wants to lead a unified effort then he has no choice but to express himself as clearly as the public needs it, so they can stand in support. You can believe what you will, but spending my time on this thread of discussion is not for me alone. There are quite a few people watching this thing who are considering just how far they can go in support of Bill's proposals. They can hardly do that unless they understand them.

If you feel I've twisted Bill's words then please give me one example. We will see who's twisted what. My questions are to avoid twisting Bill's words. I only want to understand what he means when he says certain things. Earlier when Bill hurled the same accusation at me I basically replied by saying, 'Okay, if what you wrote does not mean what I thought it did then tell me what you mean." I guess that dirt simple request is a helluva lot tougher for Bill to comply with than it should be. In any event, my ongoing dialogue demonstrates a desire to understand what the man expects in some critical areas, and to undo whatever twisting he thought had occurred.

129

MANDATORY Reporting of Child Abuse

by silentlambs in

it appears there are a few misconceptions when it comes to the reporting of child abuse.

the federal law child abuse prevention and treatment act (capta)(jan. 1996 version), 42 u.s.c.

failure to report can result in civil liability.

Marvin Shilmer

Hi again, ThatSucks

My reasons for insisting on public discussion of my questions stems from the nature of my questions, and the fact that the answers are something the public deserves to hear.

My questions are about statements of position/policy, not about any individual's case. Actual cases of child abuse victims have dynamics and permutations far beyond the singular issues I was trying to gain some understanding of as to what Bill would have people do as a matter of policy. If Bill is unwilling to make public what he feels should be policy given a real life circumstance then he's asking people to publicly support something they can't publicly talk about, which would be absurd.

You write:

"Unfortnately, unbeknownst (perhaps deliberately?) by you, answering your questions publicly can have a profound impact on legalities later."

Again, this would only be true if I were asking Bill to comment about an actual case of child abuse. The day has not yet come in the USA where expressing a conviction about "what should be" endangers a person's cause, unless the cause is illegal. Then it might be a problem.

129

MANDATORY Reporting of Child Abuse

by silentlambs in

it appears there are a few misconceptions when it comes to the reporting of child abuse.

the federal law child abuse prevention and treatment act (capta)(jan. 1996 version), 42 u.s.c.

failure to report can result in civil liability.

Marvin Shilmer

Hi, dungbeetle

I didn't know that about you.

It makes my blood boil knowing firsthand how hurting WTS learned practices have been to so many victims of child abuse. For victims I have nothing but empathy. I too have been victimized. Love for my fellowman and outrage over my own victimization is a driving force for me, to help affect meaningful change.

My thoughts are with you

129

MANDATORY Reporting of Child Abuse

by silentlambs in

it appears there are a few misconceptions when it comes to the reporting of child abuse.

the federal law child abuse prevention and treatment act (capta)(jan. 1996 version), 42 u.s.c.

failure to report can result in civil liability.

Marvin Shilmer

Hello, ThatSucks

Only you know how I come across to you. Nevertheless, my quest on this thread has been to gain an understanding of important aspects of Bill's thinking and thereof what he would have others do. I don't know any other way to accomplish this than to ask questions, which I have done. It seems to me the straightest route to save everyone a lot of time is simple: read the questions and answer them straightforwardly. If follow-up questions are necessary for a person to understand what is meant then just get on with answering them.

As for whether Bill wants to go on public record with exactly what he thinks should be done in real life circumstances, I thought that exactly is what his efforts are about. I mean, if he feels like his approach is the best one then what good does it do to hide it by refusing to answer specific questions with an equally specific answer. The questions posed are so dirt simple practically anyone could give their answer to them. It is a safe assumption that Bill wants people to fall behind and support what he feels should happen regarding allegations of child abuse. Persons cannot do this responsibly unless they understand what he feels should happen. Only Bill knows what he's thinking. All we can do is ask questions and seek clarification.

As for clarifying these issues in private out of fear of WTS legal eagles, answers to questions I posed represent a position that should be made public for the good of all and hopefully to direct the WTS toward a better policy regarding alleged and known child abuse. Your objection seems to indicate a belief that it is maybe better to hide what should be done in cases like I posed until it can be revealed in a courtroom. If that is your meaning, that premise would be hard for me to swallow. But if you feel you could prove such a premise then I'm all ears.

You wrote:

I think he has answered your questions adequately, you just need to "read between the lines". That is, unless you have a specific reason for not doing so, other than ignorance.

Bill doesn't ask potential supporters to give ambivalent support so he shouldn't give ambivalent answers to concerns that are important to everyone who cares.

129

MANDATORY Reporting of Child Abuse

by silentlambs in

it appears there are a few misconceptions when it comes to the reporting of child abuse.

the federal law child abuse prevention and treatment act (capta)(jan. 1996 version), 42 u.s.c.

failure to report can result in civil liability.

Marvin Shilmer

Hello, Waiting

You wrote

"I think it's the appropriate answer - open a dialogue with the kid first, privately. Then, within a fast time period, encourage kid to talk to professional. If the kid won't, report. If upon initial talking, you think the kid's in danger - call anyway."

As I've said before, I agree this approach is the one to follow with minors. If this is what Bill means then, as I said to him, we agree on that point. The troubling thing is getting him to spit out whether our suspicion of his meaning is correct, that we agree on this point, or whether he means something slightly or greatly different. As it stands his answer could mean very different things in terms of whether he would report with or without the minor's permission as a condition of helping them.

But whether we understand Bill's position here does not answer the question of how he would handle the same request from an adult victimized in childhood. His answer on that question is yet again ambiguous to the point that it could mean very different things in terms of whether he would report with or without the adult's permission as a condition of helping them.

The extension of this is what he would expect of JW elders to do in their situation. Would he have them act the same as he would (being a non-cleric) or would he have them act some other way, given the same circumstances? I don't know the answer to this and am not about to query him further. Bill will answer what he wants to answer and he will dodge what he wants to dodge. It's up to each person to make of his actions what they will.

129

MANDATORY Reporting of Child Abuse

by silentlambs in

it appears there are a few misconceptions when it comes to the reporting of child abuse.

the federal law child abuse prevention and treatment act (capta)(jan. 1996 version), 42 u.s.c.

failure to report can result in civil liability.

Marvin Shilmer

Hello, ThatSucks

As a point of logic, when a person is presented with a legitimate bifurcation then answering with "Neither" is saying "I will not answer the question." This is why my conclusion that Bill does not want to make his position clear.

The questions I posed to Bill are legitimate because they represent real life happenings. For a fact there are victims (children and adults) of child abuse who want help but will not accept it from anyone who would automatically report the incident without explicit permission from them, the victim. My question calls for a "black or white" answer because in real life the victim has presented a "black or white" request: either you will help me without reporting or you will report regardless of my feelings--which is it?

Understanding requires logical analysis together with asking and answering specific questions of concern.

Bill's response was no more than a reply. It was not an answer.

129

MANDATORY Reporting of Child Abuse

by silentlambs in

it appears there are a few misconceptions when it comes to the reporting of child abuse.

the federal law child abuse prevention and treatment act (capta)(jan. 1996 version), 42 u.s.c.

failure to report can result in civil liability.

Marvin Shilmer

Hello, morrisamb

I am not in the media.

Giving general or editorial answers to specific questions is part of everyday speech; we all do it. But when someone is trying to understand another person's thinking or position in specific areas then answers must be precise in order to clarify with a measure of specificity equal to the question.

The example of this thread is poignant because the one who started it did so expressly for the purpose of undoing misconceptions and straightening out supposed uncontextual alleged contradiction. He wrote,

It appears there are a few misconceptions when it comes to the reporting of child abuse. Some have taken statements I have made out of context to make it appear there is a contradiction in how silentlambs views the issue of reporting child molestation. Whether this is being done out of ignorance or intentionally remains to be seen. The point is that in all fifty States it is MANDATORY to report child molestation. What does MANDATORY mean? Webster’s defines it as….

All I've wanted to know on this thread is specifically what Bill would have people practice as mandatory reporting. To gain this understanding I posed specific questions dealing with victims who seek help but refuse to accept it from anyone who would report the incident regardless of the victim's feelings. I thought I had a pretty good idea of his thinking when he wrote,

I have talked to many victims who have never reported their abuse, I simply encourage them to talk about it to counselors, close friends, or report the matter on the sl website. The more they learn they can speak out the more likely they are to report the crime.

To me this statement had to do with adult victims and it seemed pretty clear (in fact, explicit) that Bill did not practice a brand of mandatory reporting that would override feelings of adults who were victimized in childhood (a position I agree with). Other statements by Bill led me to believe he would report knowledge of child abuse to a minor whether the minor agreed with the reporting or not (another position I agree with). But then Bill exclaimed that I was somehow defending WTS policy (a policy I have denounced in explicit terms) and that I had twisted his words. This can mean only one thing: Bill was saying my conclusions of his thinking and practices was wrong, which put me back to square one trying to understand his recommendations. Therefore I again presented precise questions for the sake of understanding, not to simply hear him editorialize. I've already heard his general editorials and they do not answer questions of meaning in important specific areas. This is especially the case since Bill has said explicit written statements of his do not mean what they say. Again, mine was an exercise toward understanding, but it failed despite every effort to gain it. As things stand now the only conclusion I can draw is that Bill does not want to be understood, or maybe that he does not comprehend the request for understanding. I lean toward the former conclusion because my efforts have been so precise that I would think any competent adult could discern the intent to understand.

A person who claims they want to be understood precisely cannot be trusted when they refuse to give precise answers to precise questions. It's an inexplicable dichotomy to act that way. That anyone would hold to such an approach in view of the seriousness and realness of the topic makes it all the more difficult to fathom why they would do it.

129

MANDATORY Reporting of Child Abuse

by silentlambs in

it appears there are a few misconceptions when it comes to the reporting of child abuse.

the federal law child abuse prevention and treatment act (capta)(jan. 1996 version), 42 u.s.c.

failure to report can result in civil liability.

Marvin Shilmer

Dungbeetle:

When you write things like,

"It looks like to me that you aren't going to let the suffering of all the JW's like me and others in thsi whole world stand between you and the BIGGER FISH IN THE LITTLER POND that you hope to be some day."
it seems you believe I am striving to rise in the ranks of the WTS' hierarchical system. If this is what you believe then you must have read the conclusion into my composition titled Remaining in Association with Jehovah’s Witnesses. Or, maybe you read it into something else I penned. The reasons I know you could not have drawn such a conclusion logically are 1) because I have never expressed any desire to rise in the ranks of the JW hierarchy since many years ago realizing the utter hypocrisy of WTS leaders and 2) just the opposite is true in my life.

If you believe what I think you do about me, then for no good reason both of us are missing out on what probably could have been mutually beneficial association and instead we find ourselves at loggerheads, which is a shame.

But one thing is for sure, like Bill, when asked precise questions on practical matters you too refuse to give precise answers. This is what you just did with your last response to me here. This smacks of the same nonsensical tactics used by WTS leadership. I cannot tolerate it, and I don't know a single thinking person that could.

129

MANDATORY Reporting of Child Abuse

by silentlambs in

it appears there are a few misconceptions when it comes to the reporting of child abuse.

the federal law child abuse prevention and treatment act (capta)(jan. 1996 version), 42 u.s.c.

failure to report can result in civil liability.

Marvin Shilmer

dungbeetle

Just a quick question for you:

When I say the WTS’ child abuse policy is disingenuous and amoral, what do you think that means? What do you think such an assertion says about how I view the policy?