dear ex-jws,.
i am writing this letter to formally thank you for all the encouragment you have given me via this medium of communication.
without your help, i might have been another casualty of satan.
We get this sort of message from active JWs every now and then. We call it 'whistling past the graveyard' here. It tends to get drowned out by the thunderous roar of all those fleeing the organization based on what they learn online.
Seriously, take care Duns. Been nice having you around.
forgive me if any of the following questions are too fundamental, i am curious how the illuminati would respond:.
1. if an individual provides personal dna and finances a personal clone, are both humans legally related?.
2. once cloned, are there any legal entitlements to the clone's wages, profits, inventions, etc?.
JanH is right. Human cloning isn't going to "begin" soon, it's been happening forever. Every identical twin is a clone. They live among us already, and it's no big deal.
hi,.
i'm curious is anybody posting here lives near the denver area, like i do.
troubled,
I can vouch for AlanF being a good person to speak with. I have spoken with him on the phone, and I have met his wife. Both are great, and very helpful to those in need. You couldn't ask for a better resource.
today's headlines .
print this article email this article .
wednesday, august 08, 2001. groups elders targeted in sex abuse case.
“Jehovah’s Witnesses condemn child molestation, and they do not tolerate such activity within their membership,” the group said. “If there is sufficient evidence that someone has exploited children in this way, he may be disfellowshipped.”
A fascinating quote. If there is "sufficient" evidence, something gets done. We know that JWs believe "sufficient" evidence is either a confession or two witnesses. Well, in the Berry case, they had two witnesses, both girls testifying. They weren't believed. So much for evidence.
Another thing: Even if there is sufficient evidence, to make even the JWs notice, the abuser "may" be DFed. Yes, of course, he might be considered repenetant, and therefore not DFed. What happens next? He is put under restrictions (no commenting, etc.), but he remains in the congregation. He is considered repentant! Will his family be taken from him? Not likely. After all, the wife will be told, he is repentant, so you have to forgive. Meanwhile, the same urges will be within him, and the same victims will be at hand.
Finally, even if there is sufficient evidence, and even if the abuser is DFed, that spokesperson for JWs above says nothing about going to the authorities. A DFed person is still allowed to attend meetings. Eventually he gets to be reinstated.
Remember, we are talking about a known abuser, one for whom there was sufficient evidence to convict in a court of law. Yet nothing is said about going to the proper authorities. You'd think the WTS spokesperson would make that point crystal clear, and yet he didn't.
Once again, JWs are not interested in justice, but keeping the name of the congregation clean while secretly hiding all sorts of disgusting behavior.
in view of current developments it may be useful to some who have come to the child abuse issue only recently to highlight the watchtower society's instructions to elders.. in a letter to boe dated november 1, 1995 they make the incriminating statement "it is important to first obtain the society's direction to protect both the elders and the organisation.
incriminating?
yes, for they show clearly what is most important to them.
No, I don't think the Society will protect the elders. I think the elders will be the scapegoat so as to protect Brooklyn. "If only the elders had done what we told them to do," Brooklyn will moan, as they wave more recent letters to the bodies of elders, ignoring the many decades of 'encouraged' silence they were responsible for.
reading farkel's thoughts about being called names, and remembering my own discouragement about the same thing, and thinking about all the posts recently decrying the fighting and bad language, i'm curious to know how my "seeker" persona is perceived here.
i know i have fought with some, made friends with others, so how i am perceived will be varied.
i want to know it all, the good, the bad, the ugly.
The real man behind the fur doesn't base his opinion of himself on other people's judgements of him.
Correct, Dana, and thanks for noticing. I can see why Larry was confused. I don't base my opinion of myself on what anyone thinks, HOWEVER I do recognize that I am imperfect and can improve my ACTIONS in certain ways. The point of this thread was to see if people I respected saw certain flaws in my approach. If I can improve, I will strive to improve. I'm not afraid to admit my mistakes.
This is not the same as having a lower opinion of myself. It's like handing a paper to a friend and asking them to proofread it. You are not asking your friend to judge YOU, but to check your WORK for mistakes. That is the distinction.
local/regional news item wednesday, august 8, 2001 .
jehovah's witnesses shield sexual abusers, suit claims .
by peter smith .
'As elders, we're dealing with the sin,'' he said yesterday. ''The authorities are dealing with the crime, so we're not going to get in the way of that.''
This is the problem we will have with the WTS. They have recently sent out letters to the bodies of elders stating that publishers can go to the police if they so choose. This is a change from previous policy, and one designed to get them in the clear. So even though most elders are behind the times and still going by the traditional 'keep-it-in-the-congregation' mode, the WTS lawyers will wave this new letter in the judge's face and say, "Oh no, Your Honor, elders absolutely don't prevent anyone from going to the police."
The elders in New Hampshire were operating under the old rules, but when interviewed for this article the elder quoted the new rule. This is going to be confusing to those who don't understand the switcheroo the WTS pulled. Typical legal obfuscation. It's like a company caught dumping toxic sludge into the river. When caught, they immediately institute new company policies and announce to the press, "Oh no, we have strict rules against such things." Yeah, they do NOW, but what about when they were dumping the sludge?
Similarly here, the prosecuting attorneys need to press the point that when all these atrocities were occurring, the rules from the WTS strongly discouraged anyone from going to outside parties for help.
i am excited about bill's press release.
does anyone know if the wtbs will do anything with it?
has it been released to american media?
Um, there may be a misconception about press releases -- anyone can issue one, and it can be about anything, and most of them are little more than ads for a company that get totally ignored except by thier business partners. Just try the Press Cliping feature on Yahoo, and see how news organizations get thousands of press releases every day, most of them unbelievably boring and non-newsworthy.
Nobody in the news business thinks twice about a press release -- unless the press release itself is newsworthy. Now, Bill's press release is certainly that, but until it is independently confirmed to check it's veracity, I would be surprised if it gets published by any national news organization. Remember how JWs think the whole world hates them, but in fact the whole world hardly even knows they exist? It's the same with the WTS. By itself, they just aren't newsworthy, no matter how fascinating the subject is to us.
Once Dateline airs, and the word begins to spread, then you may see more interest in these things. But it has to be newsworthy, verifiably newsworthy first.
i thought you might like to see a fax i just sent to j. r. brown.
you can also pick it up on the front page of the website, you may also read and download the complaint that states the basis of this lawsuit.
run wt run...... silentlambs.
I think the WTS strategy is already in place -- they will attempt to take the high ground while leaving the local elders high and dry. They will trot out their recent quotes where they say they 'absolutely do not prevent anyone from going to the authorities' (ignoring the old standard), and any elders who still do things the old way will be accused by the Society of doing their own thing, not up to WTS standards (current standards).
It will be just like when some corporation has done something awful that threatens consumer's health. By the time the reporters show up, the PR spokesperson will be able to say, "We have already taken steps to ensure this never happens again."
i was wondering, for those of you who have left the organization, how long did the transition take?
i mean, how long after you left did you feel up in the air, in turmoil, lost, unsettled?
long long before you felt comfortable with the decision and basically happy with your life?
About a year until the worst of the uncertainty was over. Having the Net helped a LOT. I was never alone through the process.
After a couple of years, I was truly happier than I had ever been in my life. That feeling has only grown greater since.
