by wannaexit 60 Replies latest jw friends
I've quickly read through watchtower's submission to the Royal Commission. Seems like they aren't planning to change policy anytime soon. They are critical of how the royal commission handled the situation.
The tone is of the submission is shear arrogance.
These people are incorrigible. But then when an organization thinks they are superior race, they'll thumb their nose at anybody.
I don't have the time to create a nice summary....sorry.
It's an interesting read.
Watchtower's response to Royal Commission
...............
In case of emergency, claim persecution...
"Jehovah’s Witnesses consider, however, that some of the criticisms made by Counsel Assisting go beyond what is necessary to assist the Commission in fulfilling its task or what is required by the Terms of Reference. They appear to be unjustified attacks on Jehovah’s Witnesses as a faith and the individual members thereof. These attacks seem to be the result of misinterpretations of the beliefs and practices of Jehovah’s Witnesses and of the Bible and the law."
Wryly amused that that they even try to disagree with points where the commissioner has already told them they have issues.
But morally bankrupt leadership yet again. They claim they assume elders will be moved by their conscience to report, whilst being absolutely adamant that they need mandated reporting because it's just too difficult for them to say it explicitly and actively put elders through a process to figure out whether or not they're legally obliged to report.
More of the same on other issues. Whitewashed graves as one chap was meant to have phrased it.
Oh wow! The ARROGANCE is outstanding!
Simply amazing that they have tried to manipulate the royal commission....
They are above the lowly laws of "Caesar".
They only answer to "GOD" (Guardians of Doctrine).
Doc
Wannaexit " Watchtowers response to the Royal Commision shows they learned nothing and will do nothing"
The Rebel (A) I am sure the Watchtower have learnt a lot from the Royal Commission in Australia, so it will be interesting how they approach the Royal Commission in England.
I say the above because ;-
A) Two members from my former congregation contacted me by email and mentioned the lack of sincerity G,B member G .Jackson showed. This is huge to me, because I am now disassociated, and yet two former friends in good standing renewed friendship with me, and are questioning the organisation because of G.B Geoffry Jacksons insincerity and evasive answers to questions.
As for your second question I agree " they will do nothing" practical as a result of the commissions findings. I say this because I believe they have no interest in the tragic moral conflicts that were raised about child abuse,
Therefore I have concluded :
A) image and superficiality is all the G.B is concerned about
B) I believe they are aware they damaged their image as a result of the Royal Commission.
C) I am sure they are aware this negative image has resulted in members questioning their authority.
An off topic observation , in my opinion the more members are exposed to the G.B on Watchtower media, the more obvious enough it becomes the G.B are simply playing fictional characters pretending to be something they are not.
The Rebel
Here's a good indication of their attitude
9.304 The suggested finding wrongly assumes a broad obligation upon Jehovah’s Witnesses “to protect children in the community” but fails to identify how such an obligation exists.
Do they really need to be told why they have an obligation to help protect the community?
