Posts by konceptual99

105

Consider the "outcome" when elders apply the two-witness "rule"

by AndersonsInfo in

jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule is applied by elders when a witness member accuses another member of a sin, even if that sin is a criminal act.

if there arent two witnesses to the accusation, it goes nowhere, including not being reported to the authorities.

and in the case of an allegation of child abuse, the accused is free to molest again.. watchtower attorney, jim mccabe, recently stated this about jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule which he described as a bible-based belief :.

konceptual99

I know most elders are well meaning and want to do what's right, but they are sometimes doing more harm than good. It's a very difficult thing to confront someone you know with an accusation like that, the average elder is just not qualified to determine the truth in these matters. They may feel an abuser is repentant and think the problem is solved, but even when they are repentant they are at high risk of abusing again, and the reality is most abusers are good at deception.

Years before this case the Watchtower said publicly that it would be very rare that a child abuser would ever be given privileges in the congregation again, but Campos was made an elder after being caught more than once. It's obvious that their official polcy is not always what actually happens. The two witness rule makes it almost impossible to prove abuse took place, and even with a confession, confidentiality rules ensures that others in the congregation may not know that there are predators in their so called "spiritual paradise".

This is not a case of individuals making mistakes, or an isolated incident here or there, this is a direct result of policies and practices that are there because the WTBTS and the governing body will protect themselves and their own interests above that of any victim. They have publicly berated the Cathoic church over their abuse issues, while they were paying off victims and insisting on confidentiality. They are hypocrites of the worse sort.

This is exactly the point that Enzo cannot get. The processes and deference to WT Legal means elders are falling into risk laden situations by default.

Even if an abuser is known to be in the congregation, it is WT Legal (via the branch) that determines if the person is going to be treated as a "known child molester". The elders can only take steps to "protect" the congregation if WT Legal let them. Woe betide any who step out of line and have a quiet word with parents - they will be up before a JC for slander before you know it.

Who really is being protected here?

48

Posters do you know of any cases where a devout JW was DF'd for Lesbianism?

by booker-t in

i think this is a hush hush topic among jws but i remember years ago at an assembly i saw two sisters(i am only assuming they were jws they could have been studies or relatives of jws) walking arm and arm like a married couple.

some of the jws looked at them like they had horns.

some of the jws moms were covering their small children's eyes and those two women were stared at like they had the plague.

konceptual99

Some young sisters in the Worthing, West Sussex area got df'ed for it a few years back.

47

Why don't parents of an abused child go straight to police, why go to an elder first??

by FeelingFree in

i hope i don't come across as judgemental but having read a lot on the current child abuse cases and the different threads on here, i am left wondering why on earth a parent of an abuse victim would go to an elder with the problem first and not straight to police?.

as a parent myself i know that if anything like that happend to my child (this applies to when i was still an active jw as well as now) i would not hesitate in going to the authorities as soon as i found out, it wouldn't of crossed mine or my husbands mind to go to an elder.

maybe after we had reported it but definitely never as the first port of call.

konceptual99

It's the culture of deference that is endemic. This is why, whatever the spin on the policies presented by the WTS, the current process poses such risks for situations to be completely screwed up.

105

Consider the "outcome" when elders apply the two-witness "rule"

by AndersonsInfo in

jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule is applied by elders when a witness member accuses another member of a sin, even if that sin is a criminal act.

if there arent two witnesses to the accusation, it goes nowhere, including not being reported to the authorities.

and in the case of an allegation of child abuse, the accused is free to molest again.. watchtower attorney, jim mccabe, recently stated this about jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule which he described as a bible-based belief :.

konceptual99

Hi Enzo,

Of course mismanagement can happen anywhere. The problem for the WTS is that the risk of mis-management is higher IMHO due to the way the policy is presented and cultural issues within the organisation that tend to defer up the heirarchy. You are right that the primary focus and blame should be on the abuser and that it is unfair to assume that the WTS should take full responsilbity for the actions of some.

On the other hand, I have seen how elders bodies act first hand over and over again. The repeated incompetence in how matters far less serious are handled reinforces the fact these are untrained men who often don't think through the consequences of what they are instructed to do. The obvious way forward however is to be 100% clear and publicly transparent on how these cases should be handled, along with clear direction that ensures the relevant authorities are involved as quickly as possible.

Finally, please don't feel you should leave the discussion - if someone is challenging you then have the courage of your convictions and justify your opinion with logic and reason.

105

Consider the "outcome" when elders apply the two-witness "rule"

by AndersonsInfo in

jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule is applied by elders when a witness member accuses another member of a sin, even if that sin is a criminal act.

if there arent two witnesses to the accusation, it goes nowhere, including not being reported to the authorities.

and in the case of an allegation of child abuse, the accused is free to molest again.. watchtower attorney, jim mccabe, recently stated this about jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule which he described as a bible-based belief :.

konceptual99

Hi Enzo,

Am I not making my point clearly?

I have never suggested that parents cannot go to the authorities at any point, before or after informing the elders. I have never suggested that any action will be taken against any that do. I have never suggested that ones are actively prevented from doing so. I have made it clear that I understand that elders are instructed to let parents know they have every right to go to the authorities.

It is clear that where mandatory reporting is required then the elders are under instruction to follow the law. However this still represents the vast minority of jurisdictions where Witnesses are present. The fact is that in the majority of areas there is no obligation for the elders to report anything. Of course parents still can but the process allows for a situation to develop where the authorities are not involved because both Witness parents and elders may act in a way where loyalty to the organisation clouds independant thinking on a matter. This is a cultural, not procedural, issue.

The parents may be misguided and think that they should not involve the authorities and unless the elders tell them they can, indeed should do so, then it never happens.

This is what has happened time and time again. My hope is that it would happen less now in some areas of the West since I think there is less automatic deferrence to the society on matters like this but it's not true of all poeple and certainly not true in all areas. In parts of Africa, for example, this whole subject carries great cultural shame and it's not dealt with correctly in society as a whole - what do you think happens in those places?

A simple sentence on JW.org could clear this whole subject up. Under the heading "Our Child Protection Policy" it should say "In the event of any accussation or evidence of child abuse being made to the elders then they will (a) ensure the physical safety of the child and (b) immediately inform the appropriate law enforcement and social care authorities.

Despite the plethora of paperwork available on the site you mentioned, the evidence presented in numerous court cases of abuse amongst Witnesses testifies to the fact that the procedures and policies leave the door wide open for mismanagement.

105

Consider the "outcome" when elders apply the two-witness "rule"

by AndersonsInfo in

jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule is applied by elders when a witness member accuses another member of a sin, even if that sin is a criminal act.

if there arent two witnesses to the accusation, it goes nowhere, including not being reported to the authorities.

and in the case of an allegation of child abuse, the accused is free to molest again.. watchtower attorney, jim mccabe, recently stated this about jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule which he described as a bible-based belief :.

konceptual99

Enzo,

I am fully aware that where the law stipulates mandatory reporting then the elders do so however where there is not mandatory reporting then the elders still follow the original instructions. There is no directive for ALL cases to reported REGARDLESS of the local laws. There is no directive to involve the authorities in first instance and consider judicial action as of secondary import.

I am not claiming that elders are deliberately secretive. I am not claiming people are prevented from contacting the authorities. I also don't think that the elders ignore the safety of child. What happens is that elders defer to Bethel and follow the ensuing instructions closely. If Bethel do not tell them to report it and the family do not ask if they can report it then it does not get reported. Many elders when faced with a situation like this do not operate with any common sense or with some autonomy. They default to robot mode. I accept that it makes sense for the elders to speak with Bethel and get direction. What I do not accept is that the process is not consistent and is open to failures simply because it's a lottery as to if the victim gets help from elders with some brains and vision, or ones that do nothing unless Bethel have given them explicit instruction.

43

Apostate with the HIGHEST ENTERTAINMENT VALUE has to be this lady

by Terry in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swgzcvh3rns&feature=youtu.be.

she is magnificent!

katie kitten.

konceptual99

Got to agree.

105

Consider the "outcome" when elders apply the two-witness "rule"

by AndersonsInfo in

jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule is applied by elders when a witness member accuses another member of a sin, even if that sin is a criminal act.

if there arent two witnesses to the accusation, it goes nowhere, including not being reported to the authorities.

and in the case of an allegation of child abuse, the accused is free to molest again.. watchtower attorney, jim mccabe, recently stated this about jehovahs witnesses two-witness rule which he described as a bible-based belief :.

konceptual99

Enzo,

The elders are not instructed to inform any third parties. They are told to contact Bethel. They are instructed not to prevent the family of a minor approaching the authorities. The grey area is down to how proactive the elders are. It is very easy to read an implication into the instructions that the elders would only advise the family that they are perfectly free to go to the authorities if specifically asked. If they are not asked then they would not proactively let the family know. This can produce massive inconsistancies.

Some elders (and they are out there) would not just tell a family they can go to the authorities, they would insist on it. The problem is that there are more elders who work under a misguided sense of loyalty that will go as far as to foster an atmosphere of secrecy, especially if dealing with a family that show their primary defference to the elders and organisation.

The WTS have been very careful to do enough to plead an apparently open and transparent approach to child protection issues whilst maintaining the culture of "keep it in-house" that has prevailed for years. Even in Western societies this culture has been hard to break down. I dread to think what it is like in some parts of the world.

If you have any information that is different to that in the Shepherd Book and subsequent BOE letters that have been published here and elsewhere then please post it. If it were there I think it would have been presented here very quickly.

49

MY CONCLUSION IS: 'GOD' DOESN'T EXIST

by NAVYTOWN in

jw
friends

i have come to the conclusion that there is no god.

period!!!

if there was a loving, righteous, all-knowing, all powerful god up there somewhere, where is he and what good is he???

konceptual99

My study of the Bible with the help of the WTS helped me debunk many Bible interpretations. My debunking of the WTS has left me with little practical alternative than God does not exist.

35

JAN 2015 Awake - Yet More Fallacies and Disingenuous Statements re Evolution/Creation

by konceptual99 in

so the new awake is up.. first question..... "how did life begin?.

how would you complete the following sentance?.

life is the result of..... a. evolution.

konceptual99

So the new Awake is up.

First question....

"How Did Life Begin?

How would you complete the following sentance?

LIFE IS THE RESULT OF....

A. EVOLUTION

B. CREATION"

err.... neither.

Apparently the Bible is not anti-science....

"For example, the Bible does not support creationism. It does not state that the earth was created in six literal 24-hour days"

err.... yet another repetition of the mantra that JWs are not creationists. Despite believing in creation.

What is it with these people? Everytime they have a chance to answer the critics, respond to the repeated exposures of disingenuous statements they jsut repeat it again. Why can they not be open, transparent? Admit they are OLD EARTH creationists? Be clear that evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life? Be clear that they do accept that a certain amount of evolution has, and continues to, happen?

Instead we get yet another dismal treatment of the subject. I think they realised a long time ago that they will never convince anyone who can see past the smokescreen and so they just use enough emotion and pseudo-science to appeal to the gullible and those too indoctrinated to see the light.