by ezekiel3 30 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
Flea:
I'll share the opinion that most organized religion sucks. But when one religion (JWs) blames another (Catholics) for something that both have a problem with (child abuse) while concealing and protecting the problem (JW's two-witness rule, countersuing victims, etc), that is plainly dispicable.
Who would have thought religion could bend so low?
should not the WatchTower clean its own house before they point a finger at another religiuos organization?
Hypocrits!
What is about sexually restrictive regimes that causes this perverted behaviour?
JWs are not allowed ANY sexual behaviour before they are married. Catholic priests are celibate for life (correct me if I'm wrong).
What I can't square is how these people expect to get away with it. They are commiting these crimes in front of their omnipresent God, yet expect to get away with it. Is it a lack of faith? Do they expect forgiveness if they confess, or do they expect to get thru' Armageddon if they don't fornicate on the day it happens, with no witnesses?
If it's the "Jehovah will make all things right after Armageddon" then the WT has to take some of the blame - an abusers charter as far as I'm concerned.
Shame on you!
It's easier to confess the sins of others than your own. The Pharisees were good at that. Are you listening Watchtower Society?
Are you listening Watchtower Society?
I think they only hear the ching-a-ling of money and that's all.
How dare you blind the minds of your believers to the issues in your house while amplifing rumors about Catholics! Where is the "Watching the World" that cites Silent Lambs?! Shame!!
Just don't worry about that. Meantime, get out and sell magazines, make the sales meetings, keep your head down and shut up.
that watching the world blurb is a slap in the face of the victims within the wtbs..why dont they mention their own law suits?why dont they mention that they want to NEVER shelter pedaphiles? what about their own moral laxities?
I must stress I have no 'inside' knowledge, however that piece may be more significant than we first imagine, when considered through the lens of WT infighting...
As you probably know, Service Department can't stand Writing Department: they consider them a bunch of left-wing 'softies' without the backbone to manage a mutinational corporation, errrrm, organisation.
By the same token, Writing can't stand Service, viewing them as a bunch of hard-line Pharisees who wouldn't know the "love of the Christ" if it slapped them in the face. Writing are as concerned about the child abuse situation as many of us are (after all, it's not any of their guys in the dock, the whole mess is Service's baby.).
Going back in time for a moment, in the matter of the restructuring of presidential and governing body authority, RVF tells us (CoC 65-73) that material in the magazines (prepared by Writing) could be used to advance their own agenda, in this case that the GB rather than the president had the final authority.
So what if this snippet in Watching the World, and any other similar such items that may appear in the magazines, are Writing's way of undermining Service's position and authority, especially within the GB itself? After all, they've nothing to lose by taking the 'moral high ground.'
Or am I just being delusional again?
Regards,
Ken
Intriguing thought Ken. My only contribution would be that I would think (dangerous I know!), regarding the sex abuse problem, you would also need to factor in Legal. I would think even Service would take a back seat to Legal in direction on how to keep a lid on the problem.
The number of 23,720 is significant, to say the least. If we apply this to the entire worldwide organization, then the figure would be one Jehovah?s Witness out of two hundred and sixty is a child molester on file at their headquarters.
This sort of speculative, unsubstantiated "reporting" is no less wild-eyed than the shoot-from-the-hip approach the WTS takes in its own publications, i.e., Watching the Word.
Worse, it undermines your otherwise valid position that the WTS has no business chastising another religion for a problem they themselves have yet to squarely face or admit.
Further, it gives apologists ample grounds to dismiss all such reports as nothing more than hyperbole from the lunatic fringe.
This number of 23,720: Is it the number of reports the WTS has supposedly received, and over how long a period? Or is it the number of children allegedly impacted? Or is the actual number of child molesters who've been uncovered by the elders in various congos? I've heard it reported various ways. I don't doubt the problem is bigger than they want to admit. I just wonder what purpose is served by tossing around these kinds of figures carelessly, especially in a context where we are bashing the WTS for the same kind of sloppy research.
My main point is: We don't gain any ground when we stoop to exaggerate the problems.
Big Tex,
I would think even Service would take a back seat to Legal in direction on how to keep a lid on the problem.
Good point. On the other hand, recent court successes may have made Service bolder. And Writing more determined to bring them down a peg or two.
Plus, there's a GB Service Committee but no Legal Committee--I've no idea under which Committee's jurisdiction Legal comes. (Anyone know?) I suspect it's a given that the Service Department overseer easily outranks, and outguns, Legal's overseer...
Regards,
Ken
