Big Tex

Joined

• started 127 topics
• posted 10,216 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Big Tex

• 
  37

  California Girl Abducted, Held and Raped for 18+ years by a possible Jehovah's Witness couple?

  by skeeter1 in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  news just broke that a pretty, blond 11 year old girl adbucted 18+ years ago was found.

  her kidnapper kept her hidden for 18+ years, had 2 kids with her, and was picked up handing out religious literature at a college.

  now, it surfaces that he has ties with the jehovah's witnesses.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Big Tex

  Just because the guy is a monster, and just because of their history of sexual offender denial, doesn't mean this creep is or ever was a Witness. I have no love for that sect but there's no need to drag them into this unless some news story or documentation says otherwise.
• 
  12

  Girl Found Alive 18 years after being kidnapped!

  by AK - Jeff in

  1. social
  2. current

  http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,543640,00.html.

  police are very sure it is her.

  she was 11 - that makes her 29 now!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Big Tex

  Monsters like this do not deserve bail. The flight risk alone is enough to deny bail.

  How much does anyone want to bet the wife is going to claim it's all his fault, she was beaten, had no choice, yada yada.
• 
  12

  Girl Found Alive 18 years after being kidnapped!

  by AK - Jeff in

  1. social
  2. current

  http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,543640,00.html.

  police are very sure it is her.

  she was 11 - that makes her 29 now!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Big Tex

  Reminds me of the story of Stephen Staynor.

  Bless her heart. At least she's alive.
• 
  23

  december 21 2012

  by 504deist in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  believers?

  unbelievers?

  what's everyones take on this?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Big Tex

  believers? unbelievers? what's everyones take on this?

  I believe, one day, December 21, 2012 will come.
• 
  203

  Anyone heard of Watchtower policy change concerning pedophiles

  by Robert_V_Frazier in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i'm passing this along from someone else on another discussion board.

  the claim of any substantive change in the policy on pedophiles is news to me.

  can anybody verify or falsify this claim?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Big Tex

  Just read all 10 pages of this thread for the first time. Good information. Good discussion. Thanks for sharing your story, Big Tex.

  Thanks for reading. I think the discussion with Sola was a good one.
• 
  77

  It's WT leaders, not elders, who are responsible for all the harm. My Geneva, Switz. lecture posted here for new ones & Sola Scriptura to read

  by AndersonsInfo in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  keep it secret has been wts child abuse policy for years.

  he said the policy that jehovah's witnesses have on how to handle cases of child abuse is without equal in the religious community.

  why keep these forms secret?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Big Tex

  Chris: The policy change in the Jan. 1, 1997 Watchtower magazine was not retroactive but became WT law at that time. Even the loophole, "known" went into force then. FYI, here's what the March 14, 1997 Bodies of Elders letter, par. 4 states, and I typed it exactly as it appears in the letter:

  Who is a known child molester?The January 1, 1997 Watchtower article "Let Us Abhor What Is Wicked" mentions on page 29 that a man "known to have been a child molester" would not qualify for privileges in the congregaton. An individual "known" to be a former child molester has reference to the perception of that one in the community and in the Christian congregation. In the eyes of the congregation, a man known to have been a child molester is not "free from accusation" and "irreprehensible," nor does he have a "fine testimony from those on the outside." (1 Tim. 3:1-7, 10; 5:22; Titus 1:7) In view of his past, people in the community would not respect him, and the brothers might even stumble over his appointment.

  Interesting.

  It is easy to discern from reading the above that if the man was not known to be a molester in the community and in the Christian congregation and had a fine testimony from those on the inside of the congregation and from those outside, he would remain in his position, and that's exactly what happened. For example, a man accused or who confessed many years ago, or even served time, and no one knew about his past except maybe other elders, could remain in his position, that is, if he had a "godly" record of "godly acts" for many years. This is not speculation, but information that many of us have received directly from people who knew that this was so.

  So a man like my father, god knows I shouted loud enough about him and certainly not free from accusation, could stay a ministerial servant. He wasn't convicted, the statute of limitations had long since passed, so maybe that was their excuse. Or maybe they just don't care (more likely).

  And if that happened once, and it did, how many other times has it happened? The one bitter lesson Jehovah's Witnesses taught me was that if it happens to you, be assured it is happening to someone else.

  This is more sinister than the two witness rule. This is a warped version of the military's "don't-ask-don't-tell" policy. What we know about sexual offenders is they do not offend one time, but rather again and again. How many children have been been hurt because of this?

  If the WT was sincerely interested in the protection of children, the paragraph should have said in no uncertain terms, just like their viewpoint on this subject is now, -- Any man who has ever been accused of molestation, or confessed molestation, or was in prison for molestation can not be used in a "position of trust" within the organization. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. They should have weighed in on the side of safety of the children, not concern for the man who practiced "Godly" acts.

  As I said in another thread, to quote Walt Whitman, -- "What you do speaks so loudly I cannot hear what you say."

  Anyone wanting to know the truth, need only look at what actions Jehovah's Witnesses have taken, and sometimes what actions they have not taken. The actions put a lie to all of their platitudes.

  In that same letter it stated, regarding those who were "known" to have been guilty of child molestation, that the elders had to send in a report. This is what two paragraphs stated that certainly shows that known guilty child molesters were to be given further consideration and due to that, consequently, there were molesters who remained in their positions.

  It may be possible that some who were guilty of child molestation were or are now serving as elders, ministerial servants, or regular or special pioneers. Others may have been guilty of child molestation before they were baptized. The bodies of elders should not query individuals. However, the body of elders should discuss this matter and give the Society a report on anyone who is currently serving or who formerely served in a Society-appointed position in your congregation who is known to have been guilty of child molestation in the past.

  In your report please answer the following questions: How long ago did he commit the sin? What was his age at the time? What was the age of his victim(s)? Was it a one-time occurrence or a practice? If it was a practice, to what extent? How is he viewed in the community and by the authorities? Has he lived down any notoriety in the community? Are members of the congregation aware of what took place? How do they and/or his victim(s) view him? Has he ever been disfellowshipped, reproved, counseled, or otherwise dealt with? If he has moved to another congregation, please identify the congregation to which he has moved. Was that congregation advised of his past conduct of child molestation, and, if so, when? This information should be sent to the Society along with any other observations that the body of elders has. Please send this to the Society in the "Special Blue" envelope so that the factors involved may be given due consideration; this information is not to be made available to those not involved.

  Disgusting.

  I wonder if the elders even went to this much trouble regarding my father. Probably not. Denial is so much easier.
• 
  203

  Anyone heard of Watchtower policy change concerning pedophiles

  by Robert_V_Frazier in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i'm passing this along from someone else on another discussion board.

  the claim of any substantive change in the policy on pedophiles is news to me.

  can anybody verify or falsify this claim?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Big Tex

  Additionally do not pay any attention to someone hijacking a thread just for the big thrill of reaching 100 posts. It is clear that person has nothing of value to say and was only jerking me around.
• 
  77

  It's WT leaders, not elders, who are responsible for all the harm. My Geneva, Switz. lecture posted here for new ones & Sola Scriptura to read

  by AndersonsInfo in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  keep it secret has been wts child abuse policy for years.

  he said the policy that jehovah's witnesses have on how to handle cases of child abuse is without equal in the religious community.

  why keep these forms secret?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Big Tex

  the solution was the directive in the Jan. 1, 1997 Watchtower article, “Let Us Abhor What Is Wicked” Jan. 1, 1997 Watchtower magazine. The article explained if a man was a child molester before he was baptized, he would not qualify for congregation privileges.

  I was not aware of this, or maybe I've got Alzheimers and forgot it. At any rate, this is interesting.

  Does anyone know if this directive was effective 1/1/97, or did it apply retroactively?

  I guess the loophole here is the word "known" and then we're back to the two witness rule, eh?

  Thanks for posting this Barabra. As always your writing is outstanding. I appreciate you taking up this issue as your posts are far better than anything I can do.

  Be well,

  Chris
• 
  203

  Anyone heard of Watchtower policy change concerning pedophiles

  by Robert_V_Frazier in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i'm passing this along from someone else on another discussion board.

  the claim of any substantive change in the policy on pedophiles is news to me.

  can anybody verify or falsify this claim?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Big Tex

  Thanks Lee. I really appreciate the assist.
• 
  19

  If You Could Go Back In Time ...

  by Big Tex in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  assuming you could go back in time, and knowing what you know now, is there anything the 2009 you could say to that person you were while you were one of jehovah's witnesses, that would have gotten you out earlier, or easier?.

  in other words, have you learned anything now, or while you were exiting, that would have made a difference to you while you were a witness?

  and would it make any difference?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Big Tex

  I think most people who leave Jehovah's Witnesses do so only after they have gone through an experience. I think that for the vast majority of us, words, logic, even scripture would have been meaningless.

  We had to go through what we did, as painful as it was, in order to escape.

  I don't know what the means or says about people. Maybe it's that old axiom about experience being the best teacher!

  Chris