2 witness rule
I agree that there have to be some changes to Watchtower policy on this but I don't agree that just because someone is convicted of this that they have to be treated like a pariah for the rest of their lives. There have to be reasonable steps to protect other potential victims but that doesn't mean that they have to live outside of society and they don't get the same rights that other people get. edit: that includes the right to be considered until proven guilty by evidence and not for a lynch mob to be formed immediately just because of an accusation.
I know of a gay guy from China he married an American who was convicted at 19 for what is classified as Child Abuse and now my friend cannot be sponsored for citizenship by his husband. They have no intention ever of having children, and my friend is not at risk from harm from his husband but they are not allowed to file for citizenship ever through the person that he loves.
You are conflating seperate issues. Your guy in china example is not what most of us here are talking about.
*Young people who are close in age but one is legally underage.
*How should society treat those charged and found guilty of child sexual abuse.
I agree that a 19yr old with a consenting seventeen yr old (for eg) should not be branded for life.
But, these cases are a distraction from the the majority of what most people consider to be child abuse. That is someone of legal age touching a child sexually that is too young to know what's going on or how to say no.
Many pedophiles spend time grooming victims are charming "nice" psychopaths or narcissists that earn the trust of the child or threaten the child if they "tell." It's the duty of orgs to know what is now common knowledge of the psychology about this stuff and structure their policies around that IF and that's a big IF, IF they care about protecting the children they force to go door to door and to meetings and the children in the houses their members visit for bible studies.
And my point is that people accused of these crimes deserve the same rights to due process that any person has. In most cases, a person on the registry to can go to someone's door and knock on it with any pretence, and it is not against the law. if someone wants to break the law they won't need an organization to give them cover to meet their victims, they are going to find ways to meet them no matter what.
Nobody is saying they don't deserve due process. Who? Who is saying that? I'm not.
And on this exJW forum it is one very specific org and what they can volunteer to do to better protect children. We are not talking about the millions of possible pedophiles not associated with any org or group.
Nobody said anything you're talking about John. This is the bullshit tactic often used by JW supporters to derail conversations and detract from the discussion of Jehovah's Witnesses and how they handle child sexual abuse and personally I find it disgusting. Fisherman tried in one of the last convetsations to use the abuse of other children in other situations to detract from the JWs and their responsibility. It was disgusting.
You're not trying the same here, are you John? Seems like you have a really tough time taking the cult to task while children are suffering and you're defending how accused abusers are looked at. Is that your modus operandi like Fisherman had his, to detract from the horrors of how the cult handles the abuse of innocent children by taking up for abusers and those accused of abuse? Is that REALLY where you're going with this? It looks as disgusting or more so than what Fishy did recently from my vantage point.
In one of the cases wt defended involving church confidentiality, wt told the Court something to the effect of: "I wish you would make things easy for us." That is because, as wt claims, it is challenging for the church to both be required to report and at the same time be required to keep protected information confidential. All that needs to be done in the US is to unify all reporting laws in every state, amend the Constitution and to nationally abolish all privacy rights between the church and congregant in cases involving child abuse. The church could then be concerned with providing spiritual assistance to those child abusers behind bars. The gov could also proscribe child abusers from joining any churches. ... In the meantime, legislation is what it is.
Poor, poor Watchtower. You must feel so bad for them Fishy. It really is the fault of the courts. If only they would make things easier for Watchtower they could do something to help those pesky kids that are getting hurt, right?
Again I ask:
@Fisherman - Do you personally have the opinion that Jehovah's Witnesses handle child sexual abuse allegations in a way that protects children to the best of human abilities? If not, where do you think they fall short? If you do, please highlight the ways in which they best serve children in these cases through their policies.
"this still falls short of what they should be doing"
You mean protecting the vulnerable? Shepherding the flock?
They are a shameless self-preservation organization.
A while back, I went to a doctor for a visit and at his office there was a sign that stated "We report evidence of child abuse to the authorities." When I went in to see him, I asked: "Doc, you get many children here that you have to notify child welfare?" He said: "None, so far." So I tell him: "Who is going to bring you their child if they know you are going to report him? Why don't you take down the sign?" He said: "Legal reasons."