Pope meets victims of child sexual abuse in Chile and cries with them. WHAT ABOUT THE GB, WHEN WILL THEY FOLLOW RCC???

by redpilltwice 40 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • Hanged Man
    Hanged Man


    What the fuck was I thinking?...the catholic church are the good guys now....I need to learn to be fooled again....soz everyone.

  • Hanged Man
    Hanged Man

    catholic guys....good guys now.....catholic guys......good guys now.....catholic guys....good guys now.....I've actually got that sewn into my blindfold in luminous thread so I see it constantly.

  • LisaRose
    Just before I posted the link, you were no doubt more than happy to make an equal comparison.

    And you accuse me of speculation?

    Secondly, elders don’t investigate abuse. All they are doing is attempting to corroborate an accusation (dealing with sin — the police deal crime).

    What is attempting to corroborate if not an investigation? Spitting hairs.

    Thirdly, you are lying. Where in print, or implication, is an attitude that abuse “doesn’t happen here”? Please prove that.

    I well remember sitting in the kingdom reading the Kingdom ministry that said sexual abuse of children was very rare among jehovah's Witnesses, because they don't have Clergy or priests. I remember reading many times that Jehovah's Witnesses live in a "spiritual paradise". I was associated for thirty years, so I think I know what I am talking about and I don't appreciate being called a liar, please try to keep the discussion civil.

    oruthly, you are ignorant of the two-witness rule (or playing ignorant). It’s an allegation, with corroborating evidence, including BUT NOT LIMITED TO, a physical eye witness. This is the base standard of all civilized justice systems.

    Maybe that is the way the two witness rule should work, but in the hundreds of cases I have read about, that is not how it did work. Multiple cases may be spread out over many years, and over multiple congregations making it unlikely for it to be applied that way. It's not necessarily deliberate on the part of the elders, but more of a systemic problem, which the organization has not addressed.

    Just to give you an example of some the problems that happen, in a case I knew of personally: This was my best friend, who had a young son that was sexually abused by a young brother she hired to babysit. At first the elders acted appropriately. The brother confessed and was reproved, the courts got involved, he was put on probation. About a year later the brother got engaged to a young woman with two children. My friend was concerned that this lady was unaware of the danger to her children, so informed her of his history. My friend was told this was none of her business, that the man was forgiven and given a clean slate, that if she said anything else about it she would be disfellowshipped.

    I was astounded. These elders felt it was OK to put these children in harm's way with no warning to the mother. If you know anything about child sex abuse you know that there is a high rate of ricidivism. It's simply naive to think that someone is just going to stop abusing children because he said he was sorry and will have a wife now, that's not how it works.

    Fifthly, you are just speculating about an alleged “conflict of interest”. The fact that very few elders are accused of child abuse means that there is no incentive for them to cover for each other.

    So, elders don't investigate elders?

    It's simple human behavior, in a small tight group such as an elder body It's hard to be impartial. It's not that the elders don't care or aren't trying to do right in most cases, it's the system that's at fault.

  • Bobby2446

    Ok now you’re changing your story from “abuse doesn’t happen here” to “abuse is rare”. Those are two completely different statements.

    And “we have a spiritual paradise” is not the same as saying “abuse doesn’t happen here”. You are being deceptive.

    Frankly, your unverified personal experience really is of little merit. Bill Bowen has several thousand such stories on his website.

    The two-witness rule works just as I stated.

    And when I said the elders are not investigating abuse, I mean they are not conducting a criminal investigation (testing evidence, rape kits, DNA evidence, etc).

    All they are doing is seeing if the accused has been accused more than once, if anyone else knows about it, or if he confesses, to see if he qualifies to remain a jw. That’s it.

    That doesn’t not compete with what the police do.

  • Bobby2446

    Your story reads like the typical atrocity story — someone was abused, elders handled “eternally” and let the abuser have access to children, and threatened to disfellowship anyone who discussed it because it’s “slander”.

    Now I didn’t say your story was untrue — I said it was unverified. Some stories may be true, others are not. But there are two sides to every story.

    But the fact your story is carefully crafted to cause moral outrage raises suspicions about its veracity. Anti-jws deliberately manufacture their stories just to get that sort of reaction. These stories are common among people who claimed they left a “cult”.

  • John Davis
    John Davis

    While that story is horrendous it also shows human nature. The woman has a duty to find out whatever she can from a potential husband through asking questions of the man and spending time with him. Granted you did not indicate what time era this event took place, it is presumable that the man after being convicted had to report as a sex offender depending on the state laws, so she could have found that information that way. Also, there have been instances where women know that they are marrying sexual offenders and don't care or overlook it because they feel that love is stronger than that. Your story while true has to be looked at all angles and can't just lay the blame because someone didn't come up to her and tell her that he was convicted of a sexual assault.

  • LisaRose

    Agreed, the woman had a duty to protect her children and should have been better informed, but I have found that some Jehovah's Witnesses tend to be a bit gullible and also put a lot of trust in fellow believers. It's not just JWs either, it's human nature to believe what we want to believe, to see what we want to see. The sad reality is that this woman went on to marry the pervert anyway. You can't fix stupid I guess. I often wonder about those children and how it turned out for them. At least my friend didn't have to feel guilty knowing she could have said something and didnt.

    And yes, this is an unverified story. This is a discussion board, People come here to discuss their experiences, there is no way to know if any of them are true really, so people can believe the story or not, it doesn't hurt my feelings any. Frankly it's pretty mild compared to some stories I've read, so I don't get why it seems so unbelievable. I only used it to illustrate the disconnect between what the Watchtower says about protecting children and what actually happens in reality.

  • _Morpheus
    Foruthly, you are ignorant of the two-witness rule (or playing ignorant). It’s an allegation, with corroborating evidence, including BUT NOT LIMITED TO, a physical eye witness. This is the base standard of all civilized justice systems

    Oh bobby bobby bobby bobby.... your showing your lack of organization understanding again. It has become very clear to me that you havnt been associated with the organization of jehovahs witnesses for very long and you most definitely never had a position of responsiblity. Having sat on far too many judicial committees i can tell you that your understanding of what is acceptable as evidence is dead ass wrong.

    However, rather than express what you will undoubtly think is simply my word for it, please note what the elders school text book says:

    So, you are patently wrong. Two or three witnesses are absolutely needed and there is positively no stands even remotely resembling the legal standards of the modern western world.

    I would ask you to apologize but im sure thats pointless. I can only hope your less ignorant.

  • Bobby2446

    Um, I don’t think I’m wrong.


    When asked, JR Brown cleared that up 15 years ago, stating the rule included other evidence instead of “a second witness”.

    But seeing how emotional you are, the manual supports my point of corroboration (accusation of the same kind of wrongdoing in a separate incident).

    So I am not wrong. You’re just emotional, your appeal to authority notwithstanding.

  • Bobby2446

    And child abuse mishandlings, mostly are not an issue of policy, but execution on the local level.

Share this