Posts by DogGone

155

Protecting pedophiles while protecting children

by stillin in

i know that a lynch mob forms whenever there's a hint of anybody being a pedophile, but the truth is that not all are the slavering, predatorial animals that they are painted to be.

each circumstance has its' own specifics.

in defense of the wts, they do keep track of confirmed pedophiles now.

DogGone

Miss.Fit,

(On Castration)

I actually don’t feel castration, whether physical or chemical is more brutal than death. If it solves the problem to do this to a repeat offender, why not? However, I spent a bit of time researching to see if this was effective. After all, many a neutered dog have violated my leg!

A 2010 article from BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal) discussed the efficacy of castration for sex offenders. http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c74?ijkey=rcCG6E9p6AKqY&keytype=ref&siteid=bmjjournals

Physical castration of sex offenders was carried out in several European countries in the first part of the 20th century, and although morally dubious and not always targeted at high risk cases (many of those castrated were homosexual, mentally ill, or learning disabled), recidivism rates of less than 5% over long follow-up periods are invariably reported, compared with expected rates of 50% or more.

However, I thought is the 5% really that great, why did they think the recidivism rate was “expected” to be 50% or higher? Well the footnote indicates this information was from a 1979 study, long before the extensive recidivism rate studies noted earlier. Therefore, that number is suspect. Strangely, the study they site in the paragraph above notes in its abstract that:

The main conclusion is that there is no scientific or ethical basis for castration in the treatment of sex offenders.

Heim N, Hursch CJ. Castration for sex offenders. Treatment or punishment? A review and critique of recent European literature. Arch Sex Behav1979;8:281-304

( http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/485816?dopt=Abstract&access_num=485816&link_type=MED )

However, even it is 5% compared to 9%, that still means a major reduction. A newer study from 2000 referenced by the BMJ notes:

Long-acting gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist analogues are the most potent antiandrogens, and selectively abolish testosterone secretion in a totally reversible fashion. They are administered parenterally once every 1 to 3 months, and have the fewest side effects…. Long-acting GnRH analogues, together with psychotherapy, are highly effective in controlling selected paraphilias (pedophilia, exhibitionism, and voyeurism), and are the most promising mode of therapy in the next millennium. There is an urgent need for good methodological research; carefully designed double-blind controlled studies with a large number of subjects in order to validate or not the use of the various pharmacotherapies.

Rösler A, Witzum E. Pharmacotherapy of the paraphilias in the next millennium. Behav Sci Law2000;18:43-56

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10736576?dopt=Abstract&access_num=10736576&link_type=MED )

So, there does seem to be some promise. The 1997 study abstract, also referenced, has a warning:

One strong conclusion drawn is that antiandrogen medications should never be used as exclusive treatment for paraphilic and aggressive sexual behaviors.

Prentky RA. Arousal reduction in sexual offenders: a review of antiandrogen interventions. Sex Abuse1997;9:335-47

http://sax.sagepub.com/content/9/4/335?ijkey=abe122631ab6aadede7d1127f528fb4de969b342&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha&linkType=ABST&journalCode=spsax&resid=9/4/335&atom=/bmj/340/bmj.c74.atom

155

Protecting pedophiles while protecting children

by stillin in

i know that a lynch mob forms whenever there's a hint of anybody being a pedophile, but the truth is that not all are the slavering, predatorial animals that they are painted to be.

each circumstance has its' own specifics.

in defense of the wts, they do keep track of confirmed pedophiles now.

DogGone

Miss.Fit,

(On Agreement)

I think there are many things we agree on. In addition to what you have listed I think there is agreement that:

- The past practices of the JWs (and almost all other religions) were terrible when it comes to protecting children

- That it is not just a matter of the failure to report the crimes of rank and file members:

o It is the history of intimidating families to keep quiet on pain of disfellowhipping,

o Using the "two witness" policy to bully victims into silence

o Keeping Elders and others in positions of authority after an accusation has surfaced despite failing their own "free from accusation" test (Titus).

- That the JWs have been slower than most to respond with positive change

- That religions should do more than the minimum the law requires given that they claim to be the authority on justice and morality.

- As it pertains to Stillin's original post, the general agreement is that all cases are not reported and that not enough has changed with the policies, practices and culture in the religion to protect children.

Now focusing on what we agree on is like attending the old Tuesday books studies. Everyone leaves with cookies but no one has learned a thing. It is by exploring our differences that we are challenged, learn, and grow. Religious and political viewpoints love to exist in echo chambers where people who all agree get together and mock those that don't. Whole networks in the USA are now echo chambers. For the years I have been lurking at JWN, what I have always appreciated is that this is, by and large, not an echo chamber.

Take Losts contribution, it was instructive to me to learn what she meant by the term "pedophile". It is very different than what I mean. We were talking past each other. Most of the time when the subject comes up everyone in the room agrees they should be killed or castrated. As a public statement of condemnation I can't help but support the sentiment. I think of Clifford Olson and I say, why DID we keep him alive? However, when having a considered discussion about the policies of JWs and what society should ultimately do, merely expressing mutually agreed contempt about the very worst cases contributes nothing.

I'm cherry picking cases that are less egregious to show that we should not, must not be so absolute in our statements and judgments.

I'm sorry to hear about your personal story. Although it is all too common, it is still heartbreaking. It is so hard to understand how the reputation of an "organization" can be put above the love, trust, and care of a child. But, when I was deep “in” I was just as blind.

155

Protecting pedophiles while protecting children

by stillin in

i know that a lynch mob forms whenever there's a hint of anybody being a pedophile, but the truth is that not all are the slavering, predatorial animals that they are painted to be.

each circumstance has its' own specifics.

in defense of the wts, they do keep track of confirmed pedophiles now.

DogGone

Stillin,

Thank-you for your kind words. But, I let her get under my skin and failed in following my great mentor, Jimmy Stewart:

"Years ago my mother used to say to me, she'd say, "In this world, Elwood, you must be" - she always called me Elwood - "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant." Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. You may quote me."

~ Harvey

10

I'm not sure why... (Comparing presidents of the US to Watchtower presidents)

by slimboyfat in

but lyndon johnson often reminds me of rutherford.

is there anything to that comparison?

i gather that johnson had a very fiery temper and was disliked by many around him; drinked heavily too, was a womaniser, no stranger to dirty tricks, and was fond of power more than idealistism.

DogGone

Fun thought experiment

Russell > Jefferson - Both prolific writers, out of the box thinkers, and both a bit nutty

Rutherford > Nixon - drunks, rascists, charming at times, both mired in scandal

Knorr > Truman - organizational minds, creators / reformers of institutions, dressed the same, both dropped the bomb in WWII (that the end wasn't coming)

Franz > Andrew Jackson - crazy

155

Protecting pedophiles while protecting children

by stillin in

i know that a lynch mob forms whenever there's a hint of anybody being a pedophile, but the truth is that not all are the slavering, predatorial animals that they are painted to be.

each circumstance has its' own specifics.

in defense of the wts, they do keep track of confirmed pedophiles now.

DogGone

LOST: “Never mind whether or not they will, or might reoffend, they should never be allowed that chance. they should recive the death peanlty, end of problem. much cheaper option too.”

LOST: “The abuser was female, big difference between a male abuser and a female abuser, maybe you should have been clear on that in you initial post.”

LOST: “still in, I made it perfectly clear, paedophiles, who are responsible for heinous crimes against children, should be put to death.”

LOST: “Why do you continuosly 'twist' what I say…….I didn’t say kill them all”

You did unreservedly say they should be put to death. I’m not twisting your words, I’m asking for clarification to see if there is more nuance in your opinion of what society should do or if it is merely a moral high ground. I have my answer and withdraw my questions.

LOST: “The lie, the deception, the trickery. that you and your wife support and worship…..I for sure wouldn't want to be involved in worshiping satan the devil… Could be, jw's are brainwashed demon possessed slaves ? scary thought that actually, but it fits perfectly.”

LOST: “Perhaps you choose to ignore the effects it has on peoples lives, the actual victim.”

LOST: “If more people had courage, instead of cowardice, and didn't cover things up, there would be less suffering.”

LOST: “Making broad sweeping generalisations, doesn't cut it, neither does omitting information under a pretence to draw memebers into a deliberate inflamed conversation.”

LOST: “do you take the jehovist stance of covering up…?”

LOST: “My tone of writing ? how do come to that conclusion ?”

I can’t imagine how I would have had cause to wonder about your tone

LOST: “I fail to see how which country one lives in is relevant to crime and punishment.”

OK, wow!

Lost, you confuse questions with statements. You are confusing Stillin and myself. You are the one questioning motives. No one is questioning yours. Not even by using disingenuous language such as “one could say”. You seem to confuse several thoughts when using points about the massive failings of religion to argue for capital punishment. Or at least, I'm having trouble following the point.

I don't think you are interested in a good faith conversation with me about the topics that are close to my heart. Respectfully, I'm going to bow out from further conversation with you on this topic. All the best.

155

Protecting pedophiles while protecting children

by stillin in

i know that a lynch mob forms whenever there's a hint of anybody being a pedophile, but the truth is that not all are the slavering, predatorial animals that they are painted to be.

each circumstance has its' own specifics.

in defense of the wts, they do keep track of confirmed pedophiles now.

DogGone

jgnat,

That is the million dollar question. Personally, I think it is a question of management not cure. But, what really do I know? I am worried that killing all abusers would send the wrong message to some, that they should just kill the victim since the punishment is the same and the witness is gone. But, that is an opinion that carries no merit, just one mans' thought.

Lost,

You are 100% crystal clear on your stance that adult pedophiles who commit "heinous crimes" against children should be killed. I don't think anyone reading this could doubt that this is what you firmly believe. I don't agree, nor do I think this has much to do with the question of reporting. If you want the death penalty, talk to your political representative in whatever country you call home.

I asked if you were angry because of the tone of your posts. Your questions challenged whether we are cowards, jehovists, ignoring, covering up, etc. It might just be your writing style and I apologize for asking if you were angry. I won't assume it angered you to ask if you were angry, of course. That wouldn't make any sense.

Lost, we are talking past one another. You are talking about a world which is black and white and I'm talking about the grey. You bring up children getting raped, tortured and buggered. It is easy to say kill them all! However, not all cases are so black and white. Not all abuse takes that form. You ask if we are going to ask about each scenario and pick apart the ones that seem less than the other? YES I AM!! If you are going to say kill them all I am going to ask:

- does that include adolescents? (you have answered no)

- does that include women? (you have answered yes)

- does that include inappropriate touching?

- does that include creepy text messages, phone calls, or emails?

- does that include peeping toms?

- does that include mentally disadvantaged people?

- does that include non sexual abuse?

- does that include when the victim is sleeping?

- does that include when the abuser confesses?

- does that include those who induce kids to undress on a webcam?

- does that include people who sneak cameras into locker rooms?

- does that include people under the age of 25 that engage in sexual activity with people over the age of 16?

- does that include people over the age of 18 who engage in sexual activity with people under the age of 18?

- does that include people viewing child pornography?

- does that include people viewing so called "jailbait"?

- does that include when the victim, now an adult, does not want the abuser to be killed?

You started with an unqualified statement and now you have qualified it with "adult" and "heinous". Simply put, what is "adult" and what is "heinous"? Is your stand really so simple?

And even if you answered all those questions, that is one person's view. If you answered yes down the line I'd applaud your consistency. But, it is neither the law nor germane to the question of what Catholics or JW's have or will do on the matter of reporting. My point is simple, if you want them to report, make it the law. If you want to kill all the pedophiles, well, I'm going to respectfully disagree. I'm also going to insist that your opinion is an unreflective and easy emotional solution to a deeply complex and challenging problem.

155

Protecting pedophiles while protecting children

by stillin in

i know that a lynch mob forms whenever there's a hint of anybody being a pedophile, but the truth is that not all are the slavering, predatorial animals that they are painted to be.

each circumstance has its' own specifics.

in defense of the wts, they do keep track of confirmed pedophiles now.

DogGone

Lost,

My initial post was about recidivism rates. I have no idea why I should have been clear about the gender of someone who abused members of my family. It did not come up until later when Jhine and I were having a thoughtful conversation about whether abusers can truly be reformed. I don't really think you believe that it makes a difference if it is a female who sexually abused my siblings. So, I'm going to leave that comment alone.

I'm not sure who you are accusing of making broad generalizations. Stillin and I, among others, have actually been arguing against broad generalizations.

Are you angry at Stillin and I because you feel we are defending the WTS and other religious organizations? I took Stillin's entire thread to be a question about what is the correct balance. What should and should not be done in these aweful situations. Things like the relationship of the victim, the duration, the age of the abuser, the age of the abused all are factors, in my mind, that should be taken into consideration. I also think the discussion should extend beyond sexual abuse to emotional and physical abuse. Is your stance the same for the emotional and physical abuse of a youth?

It's true, I have argued against the (mistaken) view that the law requires the WTS to report in all cases in all jurisdictions (it doesn't). That’s why they call the headquarters for legal advice. I even pointed out the distinction between States which have a confessional exemption (almost all States) and those with a broad Clergy exemption (over half). That distinction is largely lost.

Facts matter.

I don’t agree with your opinion or rhetoric. But, that is entirely OK. We are not in a cult anymore and can actually have wildly different views on things.

12

Disfellowshiping a pagan practice says AWAKE! magazine

by Rufus T. Firefly in

jw
friends

the [catholic] hierarchys excommunication .

is altogether foreign to bible teachings.. .

the encyclopedia britannica says that papal excommunication is not without pagan influence.

DogGone

What a find! Stunning, really.... stunning....

155

Protecting pedophiles while protecting children

by stillin in

i know that a lynch mob forms whenever there's a hint of anybody being a pedophile, but the truth is that not all are the slavering, predatorial animals that they are painted to be.

each circumstance has its' own specifics.

in defense of the wts, they do keep track of confirmed pedophiles now.

DogGone

Jhine, My apologies on the late reply. My wife and I went on a nice little vacation and I checked out from JWN for a while. Not sure if you are still following this thread, but you asked....

You asked if the matter involving my family was reported. It was. All of this is about 20 years ago now, but the matter was reported. It all happened outside of the JW religion as my family is not involved in any way. At the time, I was at the beginning of my involvement. Reporting worked out well for a few reasons. The victims, my little brother and sister, were provided counseling. They were so very young. My sister was a toddler and my brother was maybe 4 or 5. The reaction from my step mother was strong - she was hurt beyond hurt. She felt betrayed and probably shamed that the abuse went on so long. On the positive side, she has become a regular volunteer with victim's services directly helping in that community. This really is a blip in our family history. My brother and sister are doing very well. My little sis is in university and my little brother has a great job and a house. Pretty darn good for a guy in his early twenties.

The abuser, well the reporting worked out well for her. She was a teenager who was herself abused, by her uncle, if I recall correctly. The family covered it up and she went on to do what she did as our close family friend and babysitter. I don't believe charges were ever pressed by the Crown due to her age and circumstance. But, she did receive help, perhaps under a youth program; I don't know, exactly. I've read that the reason many of the most intransigent abusers focus on the same gender and age as when they were victimized is they are mentally locked into what happened to them. Maybe this is why the recidivism stats for same-sex abusers are so much higher.

Sometimes my family points her out in the town when I visit. I don't even remember what she looks like. I don't hate her, unlike many in my family. I feel she is another victim in this whole affair. My family would jump down my throat if they heard my thoughts on it, though. What I have always had is pity. But then, I have my own worldview and my own story.

DogGone

37

So What Do You Think: Are JWs The WORST Religion One Could Be In?

by minimus in

jw
friends

be realistic..

DogGone

From The West Wing

JOSH
Thanks. Islamic extremist is to Islamic as "blank" is to Christianity.

Josh writes this on the board as he speaks it again to the kids.

JOSH
Islamic... extremist... is to... Islamic... as... "blank" is... to Christianity.

BOY 2
Christian Fundamentalists.

JOSH
No.

BOY 3
Jehovah's Witnesses?

JOSH
No. Guys, the Christian right may not be your cup of tea, but they're not blowing stuff up. "Islamic extremist is to Islamic as "blank is to Christianity."

No one responds.

Josh turns around and writes "KKK" on the dry erase board, and circles it.