NEW JW POLICY POSTED!!!

by amac 67 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  dungbeetle

  I just had to reply to a statement on this board that Watchtower had no written policy either allowing or not allowing sexual abuse survivors to report their JW attackers to the authorities.

  This is very incorrect, I am sorry to say.

  In the following three books:

  Your Word is a Lamp to my Foot (1967)

  Organization for Kingdom -Preaching and Disciple-Making (1972)

  Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry (1983 and 1989)

  It states the following (paraphrased)

  If you are sinned against in the congregation, first go to the alleged offender alone. Then take two or three with you. Then go to the elders.

  Or in the alternative: Go directly to the elders.

  All three books specifically state that the issue is not be spoken of to others, or 'gossiped' about as it says. It makes no distinction about inside or outside the congregation. It states two main goals:

  "The gaining of your brother" or "returning the wrongdoer to a righteous path"; and secondly the clean reputation of the congregation.

  And in case there was any misunderstanding, The 'Organization' book says: "A person may come and confess a serious wrongdoing and implicate another with him "(as in the case of a baptised minor child accusing her elder father of having sexual realtions with her, as one example). ."If the other person denies any sharing in the wrong then the charge cannot be accepted without additional testimony to provide the necessary two or three witnesses; the committe would not act against the one accused. But the person confessing would be counseled and reporved as necessary, for he has either committed the deed he confesses or is guilty of lying, or both.If he is repentant, he is not disfellowshiped for the wrong he confesses.

  Let's try a real life example here. the case of a baptised minor child accusing her elder father of having sexual realtions with her. She goes to the elders, reveals her father's actions, but she has no witnesses. The father deines the charge.

  HE GETS OFF WITH PROBABLY AN APOLOGY AND THE GIRL CAN BE DISFELLOWSHIPED.

  WHAT COULD POSSIBLY BE MORE CLEAR THAN THIS?

  Still in doubt?

  The 'Organized' book states further, concerning reporting to the elders: "HAVING DONE THIS YOU HAVE TAKEN IT AS FAR AS YOU CAN. LEAVE THE PROBLEMS IN THE HANDS OF THE RESPONSIBLE MEMBERS OF THE CONGREGATION AND TRUST IN JEHOVAH THAT IT WILL BE RESOLVED.

  Once the Watchtower backpedaled, i don't remember the specific issue. But in it, the Watchtower states that if you have been wronged by another Witness, then IF THAT WITNESS IS EXPELLED then it would be permissable for the injured party to follow up any legal rights.

  So there you have it in print folks.

  Hey Watchtower lawyers you getting this? We be coming for you.
• 

  Pathofthorns

  Amac, I have to applaud your sticking to your guns in this thread. Like I said before, even if the WT came out with the perfect policy on child abuse, we would simply move our focus to the blood issue and how people are dying with respect to that. If they said everyone could take a blood transfusion then we would be back to square one saying they are false prophets.

  The bottom line is we are not interested in reform, we are not interested in anything but the destruction of the WT. I hope you can appreciate this amidst all of the charades we play otherwise you will find yourself frustrated to no end with this crowd.

  Dung, you need to get a grip. I realize this is an emotional issue for you, but you've got to be sending your blood pressure through the roof and that can't be good. I can't for the life of me imagine how you manage to sit through the meetings these days seeing how excited you get here. I love your passion and I'm glad you're on our side, but please don't let your emotions run away on you.

  Path
• 

  dungbeetle

  One point to be made here is that YES, a rape/molestation survivor ALWAYS had the right to go to the police:

  1) IFthere were two or three Witnesses

  2) IF the perpetrator was not repentant

  3) And WHEN the perpetrator was disfellowshiped.

  Otherwise: LET US REFRESH YOU OR GET THE H**L OUT.
• 

  amac

  Path -

  Thank you for your post. I always appreciate your posts as they are honest and balanced. I do realize and agree with what you stated about the views of the majority of this board. I guess I secretly hope otherwise, or that I can help throw a different angle on things to help people feel otherwise.

  The reason I am much more for reform rather than the destruction of the WT is because I view this religion (and most religions) as almost a vice. Many JWs are very dependent on their religion. If the WT wasn't around, they would probably replace it with something similar. I think the negatives of the WT are minor enough that a reform would be better than destruction to avoid the recreation of an institution either similar or even worse.

  I have many friends and family that are JWs and they are very happy and very good people and truly love God and their religion. I have no interest in taking that away from them if it brings them happiness. I do not like the negatives that come along with it, but I would rather eradicate the negatives than tear the whole thing down.

  I feel this way about most religions, because most of them offer some type of spiritual fortitude.

  Cheers,

  amac
• 

  Pathofthorns

  I can agree Amac that there may be some benefit to some persons belonging to a religion and that many (if not most) JWs are good people. I personally feel that changes in the right direction should be applauded, while at the same time I denounce the entire entity as beyond any meaningful reform.

  Why I say this is because if this organization was truly honest about it's own history and shortcomings and if they gave up everything harmful and destructive about it, then they would have no religion left. I think if people were given the chance to, let's say read Crisis of Conscience and were told by the religion's superiors that "yes it is all true", then how many would really choose to remain JWs except for reasons of being in a big social club?

  The religion is founded upon building up hopes and expectations that are supposed to be realized in the "near future" and the publicizing of this through their ministry and much less on true Christian works. You can only tell people it is "just around the corner" for so long before it wears thin. And if there was no ministry publicizing this, would there really be anything left? This religion is about keeping people in an endless loop of meetings/service going sideways through life. How meaningful is this and how long can this be sustained?

  I would like to know your thoughts on just what this religion can be reformed into? I also admit that my initial hopes were for reform but after much thought I realized what possibly could this thing reform into and are those expectations realistic? And how much of my life should I sacrifice gambling that this religion would reform into something truly meaningful and beneficial?

  Path
• 

  Cassiline

  I think the negatives of the WT are minor enough that a reform would be better than destruction to avoid the recreation of an institution either similar or even worse.~~amac

  I would not call the WTBTS "negatives" minor nor do I have a desire to see the WTBTS destroyed. I do however believe there are a lot of reforms that need to be made. Major reforms. Call it policing or what have you. My strongest belief is the fact that some will never understand why some of us may be so passionate about those reforms or their wanting the WTBTS to crumble.

  Until one has the opportunity to be disfellowshipped, shunned gossiped about behind their back because a man decided to rape a woman and change the course of her life forever. Until you can feel the pain she felt. The embarrassment and confusion as to why you are in deep shit because they said you did not scream loud enough, long enough or you were too afraid to scream and did not put trust enough in a God one cannot see. I do not believe that one should question their motives nor the reasons why s/he has taken such a stance.

  Until one loses their entire family because they decided that this religion was not something they wish to follow and are shunned and called evil by ones own father, mother, brother, sister, etc., receives mail notifying them they are not permitted to attend their own daughter's graduation, wedding what have you. Until one experiences that very pain themselves I would hesitate to make comment why they may be so negative.

  Until one looses a family member to the blood issue which they backed and know now that the WTBTS allows the same type of blood to be taken and their loved one could have lived and now feel guilty over the decisions they made at the time. Of course this person will feel anger, revulsion at how they came to the decision to end their own child's life by blindly following the word of men. How one person may react is not how another may react.

  Until one is beaten and sexually molested by their own father, an elder and seeks refuge at a young age with other elders in the hall and then is told because you do not have 2 witness there is nothing they can do. Then s/he is returned home to their abusive parent for more of the same. It is not up to anyone to question the "why's" of their actions and feelings.

  Until one is banished and looked at as evil FOR GOING TO the authorities because a trusted fiend of her father raped her repeatedly and she receives no compassion from her brothers and sisters who are we to wonder at how she may feel or act toward the WTBTS.

  How can anyone decide how others are to react after going thorough the above scenarios? How can one say that these things are minor negatives? Because that is thier opinon.We are all allowed our own opinons. To live and walk in another's shoes is something I wish that all of us could do. So we may see how they see and feel.

  I think this would be a most wonderful gift, perhaps the judgmental and biased attitude of so many would be changed into that of compassion. It may be impossible to throw a different "angle" on some subject matters because some have been hurt and mislead for so very long they will not see anything but malice towards the WTBTS.
• 

  Hmmm

  The bottom line is we are not interested in reform, we are not interested in anything but the destruction of the WT. I hope you can appreciate this amidst all of the charades we play otherwise you will find yourself frustrated to no end with this crowd.

  Path, you're doing it again. Weren't you one of the ones decrying generalizations? You've been repeatedly told that your above statement is not true; that the majority--probably VAST majority--don't want the total destruction of the WT, and it's certainly not the ONLY thing they're interested in. But you conveniently ignore it so you can point out generalizations and expose this great mythic charade everyone is supposedly playing.

  Were you truely interested in a truthful and balanced view, you would accept the plain statements from this [unwashed] crowd who tell you they're not foaming-at-the-mouth apostates who literally want to see the WT HQ go up in flames... [deleted]

  If you're going to ignore the evidence sitting right in front of you, at least follow your own advice and refrain from the generalizations.

  Sorry if it seems that I'm singling you out to disagree with lately, but your condescending superiority complex is very off-putting.

  Hmmm

  Edited by - hmmm on 14 June 2002 19:3:0
• 

  amac

  Path -

  "I would like to know your thoughts on just what this religion can be reformed into? "

  That's a good question. I don't really know. But I don't think it is going anywhere or will be destroyed anytime soon, so small steps in reform is all I can reallistically hope for.

  Cass -

  I'm sorry if I mislead you with my post. I don't think the negatives are minor in importance, rather minor in number vs the positives. For instance, you listed the most common negatives, DF/Shunning, Blood, Molestation Policies. That is only 3 issues. A small number that can hopefully be tackled in time.

  Hmmm-

  Thanks for your post. I make that generalization myself, thanks for the correction. I have to constantly remind myself that a vocal minority only seems like a majority.

  Cheers,

  amac
• 

  Pathofthorns

  Hmmm

  the majority--probably VAST majority--don't want the total destruction of the WT,

  I would respectfully beg to differ. I think the majority of those who post here recognize there are benefits in the areas of reform for family who do not wish to leave. But I think the overwhelming majority POSTING HERE recognizes the WT as a corrupt institution that as long as it is in existance is causing harm to people and destroying lives. I think if you conducted a survey here, that is what the end result would be.

  If reform is the true intent of most here, then why have they not really welcomed any changes that have occurred? They will always be skeptical and distrust the future changes (and rightly so) because of the past. At what stage of reform will this crowd really go away and leave the WT alone?

  I guess until a survey is carried out we both can believe our own "generalizations".

  Path
• 

  SloBoy

  Hey Path.......I, though of lowly status, am a poster on this site. Next time you say ' we ' as in ' WE only want to destroy the WBTS ', would it be convienient for you to ascertain if this is truly factual information regarding what ' we' really want to do?