P. Ms Letter to non subscibers to Redress Scheme

by jonahstourguide 45 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • Phizzy

    Cofty, you read too fast ! I actually said " paying up to $150 Million AUD." Which of course is an overestimate, as probably not all would receive the maximum.

    I agree 100% with fade above, that this situation is continuing abuse, simply because the $$$$, are more important to the org than people, and making reparation for the damage they have done to their lives. just Evil.

  • StephaneLaliberte
    The girl Next door: However, the court of public opinion will weigh differently.

    Unfortunately, this doesn’t matter much at this point; they are not making new converts. The majority of their new members are their children and these are the ones the government is seeking to protect.

    The girl Next door: If every JW victim in Australia got the full amount we are talking over $150 million AUD.

    While I join everyone in wanting to hurt the WT organization financially for their reprehensible actions, this will actually do little in eradicating the cult. People will keep practicing their “religion” through zoom and meetings in their various houses or individual properties.

    They don’t need any of their buildings to keep their faith. Sure, they’re ability to bring in new members will be reduced, but that has already been the case for a few years now. So, I don’t actually see much impact from removing their buildings, studios, etc.

    The only way to stop them is to criminalize certain actions that are no longer acceptable today; among these things are people not reporting child abuse to the authorities.

    Smiddy3: Jehovah’s Witnesses have not sponsored any programs or activities that separate children from their parents at any time.

    Yes, they do/did: They coupled young kids with experience pioneers. Brothers often have bible studies with the kids of single mothers. They often send out kids in service with adults without their parents.

    I personally see nothing wrong with the above by the way. Parents are ultimately responsible to know who they trust. But we cannot say that they don’t have activities that separate the kids from the parents.

    Smiddy3: their charitable status should be revoked and they should definitely not get any Government money funded support at all.

    I agree, however, as long as they are considered a religion, this will not happen. Unless the governments no longer view ALL religions as charities.

    Cofty: Surely it can be shown that they have repeatedly broken the law by failing to report abuse in Australian states that have a reporting law.

    I’m not a legal expert, but it appears that these laws only have financial implications, they are not part of the criminal code where they could send those responsible in jail for it. That needs to change.

    Smiddy3: At the ARC Geoffrey Jackson the Aussie G.B. member said it would make their life easier if it was mandatory for them to report such instances

    That was one of the most nauseating things he said. They take zero accountability for their actions and shift the blame on the government. Typical abusers. I heard apologists say that they could be sued if they broke the confidentiality of some pedophiles. Strangely, instead of taking that fight, they take the one that puts the kids at risks.

    Cofty: BUT if the govt make reporting compulsory they will comply.

    Even if it was criminal to not report, I suspect that they still wouldn’t until a few of them have been put in jail for it. Long jail sentences are not needed. Just long enough to lose your job and have a criminal record. That will make a whole lot of people think twice.

    I can imagine a conversation like this: Why are Brothers Smith, Banks and Craig going to jail for 60 days? Well, they didn’t report a pedophile to the police and that pedophile made 2 other victims. So, they were judged as accessory to his crimes.

    Phizzy: The JW Org has done its usual callous calculation, no thought, let alone love, for the victims. It is calculating that to lose Tax Exemption would cost them far less over the years than paying up to $150 Million AUD.

    They won’t lose it. These are empty threats and they know it. As they already don’t bring in new members from the public, they don’t care about their public image either. They have gone full cult mode.

    Cofty: Do we know the sum that they are being asked to contribute to the scene?

    Even if it was 3 million, they wouldn’t. It would imply saying sorry which sounds impossible for them. I’ve never seen them say sorry for absolutely anything.

    No-zombie: when the Organization loses its non-charity tax exemption, what would be actual loss to them. I'm assuming that any donations given to the local branch would be taxed.

    That won’t happen. They’ll go full persecution mode and will go underground, not declaring any income of any kind. It would actually be easy when you think about it.

    Fadeaway1962: Agree with crofty the money is important but what is more important is saying sorry because that would mean acknowledging that the inspired word of god is wrong regarding the two witness rule

    They won’t say sorry because it would bring their “reproach” on their organization. Never did, never will. The reason they don’t report to the police has nothing to do with the bible. Even when guilt is established, they still don’t report to the police. Hence, this has nothing to do with the 2 witness rule. Its all about them not wanting to let the authorities in what they perceive as being “their business”.

  • Finkelstein

    I thought the JWS had a set doctrine which stated that they were to obey governmental authorities , they even use to quote a scripture to that effect ???

  • StephaneLaliberte
    I thought the JWS had a set doctrine which stated that they were to obey governmental authorities

    Unless it is against the will of the governing body God, for God has supreme authority.

  • joey jojo
  • smiddy3

    The Jehovah's Witnesses has refused to sign up, saying it does not have the institutional settings of other faith-based institutions that the redress scheme is designed to cover.

    It`s not just faith- based institutions that the redress scheme is designed to cover .?

    It also covers non religious institutions such as sporting groups, Boy Scouts ,Girl Guides etc,etc.

    I hope the Govt`s see through their Theocratic Warfare strategy to try and hoodwink the government.

  • Finkelstein

    More bad news for JWorg. they should have played along as being subjective to governmental authorities.

  • jonahstourguide
  • jonahstourguide

    Here it is

    Six institutions, including the Jehovah's Witnesses, have been publicly named by the Federal Government for failing to sign up to the National Redress Scheme for victims of institutional child sexual abuse.

    Key points:

    • Organisations had until last night to join the program
    • The Government says those which did not sign up will no longer receive Commonwealth funding
    • 380 non-government institutions have signed up or intend to sign up to the scheme

    Organisations had until last night to join the program, with the Commonwealth promising to not only reveal those which refused to take part, but also cut them off from future federal funding and consider ways to cut their charitable status.

    The six institutions are Australian Air League, Boys' Brigade NSW, Fairbridge Restored Limited, Lakes Entrance Pony Club, Jehovah's Witnesses and Kenja Communications.

    There are 55 applications from victims of child sexual abuse that cannot currently be processed as a result of the six groups failing to sign up.

    Social Services Minister Anne Ruston was scathing as she urged the organisations to think about the consequences of not joining.

    "Think about the reputational damage by you saying, as an organisation, that despite having a history of working with children, despite having applications against your organisation for child sexual abuse, you still refuse to accept your moral obligation and responsibility to come forward and allow these people the small thing of a bit of redress and a small amount of money to acknowledge that they actually have had wrongs committed against them," she told the ABC's AM program.

    If you or anyone you know needs help:

    "I don't understand how any organisation can take that kind of course of action, so I'll be calling on them to actually rethink their position."

    The Commonwealth and state and territory governments have all signed up to the scheme — covering any abuse that happened within their institutions.

    In total, 224 non-government institutions have agreed to take part in the scheme, while another 156 have signalled their intention to join.

    Jehovah's Witnesses argued it did not have the "institutional settings" needed to be covered by the National Redress Scheme.

    "Jehovah's Witnesses understand that, to date, there have been less than 10 applicants to the redress scheme who have referred to the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses," the organisation's Tom Pecipajkovski told the ABC.

    Exposing a national shame

    The key moments that led to one of Australia's most shocking inquiries.

    Read more

    "Jehovah's Witnesses have responded and will continue to respond directly to individual claims for redress in a caring, fair, and principled manner, taking into consideration the unique circumstances of each claim.

    "The religion of Jehovah's Witnesses also provides spiritual comfort and assistance to child abuse victims and their families."

    Senator Ruston said it was not up to Jehovah's Witnesses or other organisations to decide whether their models suited the scheme or not.

    "It's not up to you to make those decisions," she said.

    "Let the independent scheme assess the validity of the arguments you're putting forward because they may well be correct but it's not for them to decide.

    "We have applications and we have a responsibility to process them."

    The Minister said in the future if a new non-participating organisation was named in an application, it would have six months from when it was notified of the application to join the scheme, or be publicly named and be ineligible for Commonwealth funding.

    Posted 38mminutes ago


    P.S. Right on smiddy3

  • Fadeaway1962

    Thanks for the update

Share this