Another Trey Bundy Article on Reveal: "Jehovah’s Witnesses leaders say they don’t protect sexual abusers"

by AndersonsInfo 19 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • Truthexplorer
    In the eyes of the law, after reading that rebuttal, the society must surely now come across as a very insular deluded organisation.

    In section 1.1, the WTBTS refers to child abuse as a sin and a crime. I'm not sure if admitting that child abuse is a criminal act was wise. It's better to appear ignorant and naive, IMO. Did the screw up?

    Part of me wants to read the entire arguments from both sides, but I don't have time right now. Anyway, the question remains, "Why not report all allegations of abuse to the Superior Authorities, even if it's not required under law in your Country?"

    Geoffrey Jackson stated that Australia should have made mandatory reporting of allegations of child sexual abuse a law, if they wanted the WTBTS to require Elders to report such allegations.

    If the WTBTS can comply with such a law, then said law must not be in conflict with scripture. Otherwise, the WTBTS could not comply under any circumstances. Jackson implied that the WTBTS would be happy to comply with such a law, thereby implying that such a law does not contradict WTBTS doctrine of strict adherence to scripture.

    Why all the run around? Why hasn't the WTBTS voluntarily reported all allegations of child sexual abuse to the Superior Authorities? Why not voluntarily hand over your data-base to the Superior Authorities?

    Protecting children is the top priority? I disagree.



    So David Splane is going D2D and defending the WTBTS's child protection policies??


  • LisaRose

    It's the right thing to report child abuse to the authorities, whether it's the law or not. A group that claims to be the only true religion, Gods sole channel of communication with mankind, shouldn't need a law to force them to do the right thing.

    Elders are actually not as capable as anyone else in deciding if an offender is likely to abuse again, they have no absolutely no training in counseling, psychology or child abuse. The many pedophiles who abused children for years, even after being reported to the elders, is proof of that.

    The excuse that most child abuse is not prosecuted anyway is ridiculous. Many crimes cannot be prosecuted for whatever reason, does that means you throw up your hands and give up? You do whatever you can to protect children, unless of course protecting children is not actually your first consideration.

    The idea that two witness rule cannot be changed is laughable, the Watchtower changes rules all the time, they interpret the scriptures however they want and change that interpretation when it suits them. It clearly doesn't suit them to protect children.

    The idea that they punish child molesters is beyond ridiculous. The two witness rule pretty much insures child abusers will rarely be punished. Even then they can opt for private reproof, which is a slap on the wrist and does nothing to protect children. The idea they can monitor the person is silly, they see the person a few hours a week. The Candace Conti case shows that even when a pedophile is known to the elders they will do nothing to prevent contact with children. I personally know of a case where a known pedophile married a woman with children, less than a year after offending, and the elders did nothing, not even warn her, my friend got in trouble for telling her about it. This was a case where he actually admitted the abuse and was prosecuted.

    Repentance goes a long way? Since when? This is actually quite disturbing, as it proves their complete lack of awareness of the risks. It's fairly well known that sexual preference for children is hard wired in child abusers and the possibility they will reoffend is quite high. Of course a child abuser will act sorry, but that's only after they have been caught, I doubt the elders could tell the difference between true repentance and "sorry I got caught". Even if they are repentant they are still a risk, you don't put children at risk.

    Yes, it's possible an abuser will not reoffend, but you don't risk innocent children on a possibility. Their justifications and excuses are disgusting.

  • Vidiot

    If I keep reading about how awesome the WTS insist their child-abuse-related policies are, I'm gonna get brain damage from all the f**king facepalming.


    I'm wondering if the WTBTS leadership is so far gone, that they truly believe the RC will accept their failure to accept responsibility for dropping the ball?

    Seriously, the WTBTS is not being attacked; they aren't being singled out either. The RC just wants to improve the child protection policies of all religions in Australia.

    What are other religions saying? Are they puffing up their chests and trying to absolve themselves of responsibility??


  • flipper

    Good lord - that pile of excuses is so incredibly stooopid. This is the kind of stuff that makes me think someone is sabotaging WT from the inside.

    But I know that if we showed the list of WT responses to Flipper's parents, siblings or daughters we would most likely get their usual programmed response "Well, it really does make sense when you think about it."

    Yeah, like they ever do think....

    Mrs. Flipper


    Now the Witnesses have lashed back. In their rebuttal, they paint attorneys in the case as inexperienced, witnesses as unreliable, the criminal justice system as ineffective and the commission as overstepping its mandate.


    Image result for Watchtower logoImage result for Liars club logoImage result for Watchtower logo

  • Giordano

    How can there be real repentance without accountability? Real repentance without punishment when a crime has been committed?

    Then there is this: “Jehovah’s Witnesses consider that the requirement for two witnesses is not a matter for debate as it is based on Scriptural requirements found in the Mosaic Law and reiterated by Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul.”

    It is a matter of debate if the JW's get this wrong when it comes to Child abuse. The Jewish law requires the victim to first approach the person who is at fault. Did they mean that a minor or adult who was subjected to sexual and or violent abuse must first meet privately with their abuser.....that is absurd as well as dangerous.

    Jesus's reference was to adults.

    On the other hand he was clear about the place of children among Christians. Matthew 19:13 Then some children were brought to Him so that He might lay His hands on them and pray; and the disciples rebuked them. 14 But Jesus said, "Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

    “It is quite apparent that Jehovah’s Witnesses have for at least the last 65 years taken a proactive role in investigating and documenting such abuse and taken action against proved abusers,” the filing reads.

    However the truth of the matter is that they are not proactive in protecting the children and adults who are abused.

  • Vidiot
    I swear, sometimes I think the WTS is trying to actively provoke the secular authorities.

Share this