However, you've got admit that that was a pretty wicked and cruel Policy anyway -- to set up Judicial Committees to interrogate children to find out if they had committed "sexual sins" such as fornication.
I do agree this is not a good thing. BUT, if you can say that Ray Franz had these intentions then you can say that Bill Bowen may have and probably has been involved in these proceedings.
As a matter of fact, I was emailed by a girl who claims this is exactly the case (this was not a molestation case). When she was 14, she claims Bill interrogated her beyond belief. She says he (and 2 other elders) wanted to know every dirty detail. How do I know she's telling the truth? I don't. And that's my exact point, you can't believe everything you hear. BUT, if she is lying, why would she have not lied about the case being about molestation rather than simple fornication? And furthermore, if Bill has been involved with interrogations of minors (and it'd be hard to believe in all those years he hadn't been), and he himself followed Ray's directives, well then he's about as big a hypocrite as they come.
I'm not saying this is the case, I'm merely speculating. It was ok to speculate that Ray Franz has been involved in such cases, so why not Bill Bowen? He's got us convinced that in all the years Ray Franz served, he MUST have come across such cases, yet he'd like us to believe HE (BB) never has. WHAT???
So what took him so long to come forward? What makes him better than Ray Franz if he followed the letter of Franz's written law to a "T" up until 2 years ago? Come on, what Bill did as an elder means nothing, and what Ray Franz did as an elder means nothing, because neither one is at this time, YET one is throwing accusations in the other direction, when he's guilty of the same things! Maybe not writing the policy but he sure as hell followed it!
(I'm not being argumentative by the way, I just get excited, haha)
Ray Franz's Policy does not specifically mention molestation cases, so to attribute his intentions in that direction is wrong no matter how you slice it up, and hypocritical, no matter how you look at it. He claims Ray wrote this directive knowing full well that the molestation issue was a problem back in 1973 when molestation was still hush-hush. Meanwhile, Bill Bowen FOLLOWED this directive knowing FULL WELL that molestation was a problem, up until 20 years AFTER Ray Franz left the Watchtower and almost 30 years past the time period the policy took effect. Why are we all so blind to these things?? Am I holding it against Bill that he followed these policies knowing the effects it could and would and has had on children? NO, he's 'repented', he's changed his ways. But I will sure as hell hold it against him if he continues to be a hypocrite. I apologize if I'm offending anyone, but these are the hard facts.
unless of course Bill Bowen had no idea of these things. No idea of the effects of this policy, no idea that molestation existed within the organization, and no idea that the policy was in effect for 30 years. If that's the case, then he owes Ray Franz the biggest apology in the world, because the same could certainly be true of him, 30 years prior.
RevMalk said:I know Bill says that he (Ray Franz) was accused of Child Molestation in '69,
I didn't know that.
Bill told me this on the phone, I 'might' have the year wrong, but it was somewhere in that period of time that he claims Ray was accused, and found to be innocent.
I honestly don't believe the Watchtower Society would ever be stupid enough to try and take Bill Bowen to court for "slander" -- because then it would bring out A LOT of the Watchtower's dirty laundry.
This may or may not be the case. It all depends on how much hassle he causes them. It may come about that they feel taking him out will be the best thing in the long run. If they come to the conclusion that this is going to get real bad (worse than it is now), then they might just take the gamble. Chances are it won't come to that, but it's always best to be careful of what you say and who you say it to, just in case, and that was my only point.
Look, I'm behind Bill in this thing, I really am, but he's got to cut the shit. He takes something wonderful like the CBC episode, and he makes it filthy......and that's a bad thing. Be careful questioning him on the Ray Franz deal....I did that a time or two and you see where it got me.