by stuckinamovement 67 Replies latest watchtower scandals
Will someone help me figure out where I can find the link on this thread along with further information on the Royal Commission site? I typed in Jehovah's Witnesses in the search engine hoping I'd find it and nothing came up.
I'd like send this valuable information to a sexual abuse victim directly from the ARC site.
18. Factors to consider: At times, the conduct of an individual may not be classified as child abuse from the perspective of the congregation, but from a legal standpoint he may be viewed as guilty of such.
19. ... if the one who views child pornography does not involve anyone else in his actions, this is not considered to be child abuse from a congregational standpoint.
Thanks stuckinamovement!!
Marking.
I am eagerly awaiting the RCs questions regarding this document.
I think it's the most damning one of all.
Can you think of another group or organization (either religious or secular) whose official policy is to PROMOTE child molesters as long as they are good at keeping secrets?
Why would those in charge fight so hard NOT to change their PROTECTIVE policy toward child molesters?
Birds of a feather
I've been away from the whole JW thing for a while, but I truly do not understand their reasoning here...it makes absolutely no sense and is a totally unnecessary self-inflicted wound . I obviously have no proof, but from the outside this really smells of hiding deeper secrets very high in the food chain by persons who were in the past involved in some very nefarious things and now hold critical positions. Just my opinion.
Axelspeed I wouldn't put a pedophile ring past them.
3rdgen - "Why would those in charge fight so hard NOT to change their PROTECTIVE policy toward child molesters?"
Historically, whenever political figures have consistently favored laws that foster leniency for various types of crimes, in almost all cases, it has been demonstrated later that it was due to them being guilty of said crimes.
I've tried to get to listen to all the commission but I don't recall the excellent Mr. Stewart grilling any top brass jw's about reappointing a molester to be an elder and referring to this manual.
Can anyone point me to such an exchange or if not can someone offer to the commission the possible benefit of such an exchange based on this damning evidence?
if the one who views child pornography does not involve anyone else in his actions, this is not considered to be child abuse from a congregational standpoint
That's just....breathtaking.
Un-friggin'-believable.
So, how many current JW elders, COs, branch committee members, etc. are/were child porn collectors? It certainly doesn't inhibit their "spiritual qualifications".
