Hi Flipper
I never called you a child molester.
Previous post
I didn't SAY you were a child molester, just a child molester/ WT / JW apologist. Unless I'm hitting a nerve that's getting a bit too close for comfort for you.
Perhaps you would like to withdraw the second sentence there then. And to be honest calling me a molestor apologist is hardly better is it? Anyway, never mind. Have a different opinion on how to protect children so that means I am what, making excuses or trying to protect molestors? Forget it.
As to why you tend to defend the WT.
I havn't. I have been saying that releasing this list may endanger children and Anonymous could do more damage by going for documents that link the governing body with wanting to cover up abuse to save the WT reputation. My posts are long and tedious so maybe you missed that.
WT society has assets and multi- billion $$$ property investments to protect, so my assertion is there are criminally insane and morally devoid individuals running the top of the WT society organization. They'd never choose to implement a policy to go to police authorites first because they have too much to lose ! If you don't believe that then why have elders under WT society instruction disfellowshipped countless numbers of JW's who report to police authorities that a family member has been molested ? Even those who have reported that their own children having been molested in trying to get justice reporting it to police- have been literally kicked out of congregations thrown under the bus and cut off from their families- shunned.
Yup. Which is why simply changing the policy - unless it is "you must report all allegations to the police first" - will always fail because the culture is one to cover this up. Releasing this list will neither change the policy to the one above (if at all) or change that culture. The fact the society has a list of 23,000 names that are people with 2 accusers is already in the public domain.
You mentioned a hypothetical situation of announcing WHO a molester is from the platform . I've actually seen that happen ! In 1998 a middle aged JW man ran up onto the stage after a WT study grabbing the microphone from the elder and told the audience " brother So and So sitting over there is a child molester ! He's abused 7 children here in 20 years and if you love your children you will keep them away from him ! " So I ask you James : What made that JW man FEEL he needed to say this out loud to warn 150 people, including parents , about this child molester ? Because he KNEW the WT society's child abuse policies were and are deficient and that the ELDERS would NOT breathe a word of warning to parents as to WHO the child molester was so they might protect their children from harm ! That man that stormed the stage that day- became my new hero ! The elder grabbed the microphone from him and said, " brothers and sisters we are aware of the situation and we are handling it " . O.K. Fine. But that still wouldn't help parents know WHO to keep their child away from.
More exciting than the average meeting. But what happened next? Did he remain in the congregation? Did the abuse stop? Did people treat him differently? Actually this is really interesting because here is actual evidence of what happens when someone does get named and shamed.
James : You go on and on saying sites like Megan's Law won't help prevent children from getting abused . What kind of a statement is that ? Pictures of the child molesters are posted , also in California here it narrows down to the addresses of where these criminals are . Tell me, how does that ENDANGER children instead of helping parents to protect their children in knowing where these bastards are ? So yes- I feel community awareness is a route that WILL work better than no communication at all about prospective and past child molesters who may stalk and reoffend. It keeps the public notified. I would think being a victim yourself, you'd agree with that ?
I want children protected. I wasn't. It wasn't in the hall, but my experience is irelevant. It really is. Have a look at the NSPCC report. It specifically mentions California. Have a read from page 50 onwards. Basically they conclude that no, whilst the public feel safer in reality there is no evidence they are and that community notification may make things worse by driving molestors underground and also stopping reporting of abuse by family members for fear the family will be stigmitised. So no, I don't agree keeping the public notified is a good thing. Maybe more evidence will come out but currently whilst it seems counterintuitive there is good reason to not have blanket notification. What they are trialling over here is allowing someone who has started a relationship with someone to enquire about their past. Maybe this will work, although not sure.
My own JW elder dad 7 elder brother informed JW parents privately by phone in their congregation when two registered csex offenders moved into the congreagtion. These men had served hard time in prison for their offenses then became Witnesses. My dad and brother were not tOLD to do this from the WT society, but morally took it upon themselves to do this to protect children and inform parents so THEY could protect their children. Ironically though, do you realize if a Circuit Overseer or WT leaders found out my dad and brother did that- they would have lost their elders positions due to going against the WT society's policy of keeping confidentiality ? So it comes down to this : Are elders going to follow their own inner moral compass, or allow the WT society to dictate an immoral , criminally negligent compass in order to protect a unethical, morally devoid WT leadership ? THAT is the dilemma facing elders today. Also the fact that the WT society will throw elders under the bus and not back them up. There are a lot of elders running scared right now due to " Mother " WT society not backing them up if they try to do the right thing for child victims.
Interesting point. Not really comparable as these men were convicted and the right way around this is as they are proposing in australia (or doing) where anyone coming into contact with children must be criminal record checked. Then it would not be anyone's moral responsibility. This raises the question for any church or society about how you monitor convicted molestors. Would I want them in my church? (well, if i went to one). No. Does the knowledge protect my children? Yup. Would I be glad your dad told me? Yup. But again the question would be what happened next? If these men were bent on abusing they would have just moved to a different congregation or different church or find a different mechanism to do what they want. But in any case we are talking about partial notification to people who have children potentially at risk and the men are convicted and not accused. The evidence is still being gathered as to whether this works as it is very similar to what is being tried over here. It may well work. What anonymous is doing is international notification of men accused. Very different.
As to you never seeing " this side " of me - I have very strong feelings about child abuse victims. I have lots of good friends on this board who have been child raped literally and raped in their minds by WT society criminal policies , and my 1st JW wife of 19 yrs. was molested as well, with nothing done about it. Due to the lack of caring from elders she had flashbacks in her late 30's and would not get help from a counselor, it cost us our marriage and caused a broken home for our then teenage children . So yes, I do get emotional and aggressive discussing this subject. I tolerate no ignorance about it. And I make no apologies for not tolerating ignorance when it's such a vicious crime that destroys people, many of them for life. O.K. I'm done. This isn't a Kingdom hall, it's real life. Peace out, Mr. Flipper
As passionately as I feel about it. But passion should not mean that we don't consider the consequences of what is being proposed because of anger towards molestors. Especially if there is evidence that is worthy of consideration that this is unlikely to 'work' in terms of protecting children. And it still disturbs me that people are so willing to convict everyone on this list because of two witnessess whilst then going on to lambast how shite the elders are at investigating these things and doing things properly. And then this view that it is ok to ruin innocent people's lives to punish others. That is really distasteful and no one has said to me how many innocent people and their families are 'expendable' to warrant one guilty person being expelled from the congregation.
...OUTLAW