Child Abuse Among JWs.

Originally posted by FMF
I have already listed the words and expressions that I did not use which you claim I have used. Why does your "impression" of what I meant depend on you attributing all manner of words and expressions to me that I did not use?

sure FMF, sure you did, words like, 'protect the organisation' and 'deflect criticism'.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
sure FMF, sure you did, words like, 'protect the organisation' and 'deflect criticism'.

"Encouraging". "Reassuring". "Effective".

This is one of the reddest of red herrings I've seen you attempt, robbie. 😵

Originally posted by FMF
"Encouraging". "Reassuring". "Effective".

This is one of the reddest of red herrings I've seen you attempt, robbie. 😵

its hardly hell fire red FMF, but seeing i like you, ill let you off with a stiff reprimand this
time.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
its hardly hell fire red FMF, but seeing i like you, ill let you off with a stiff reprimand this
time.

Actually, robbie, I find your incessant ad hominems and personal insults dreary and boring. I think you are a lesser poster as a result of it. And I think you are not as funny or as endearing as you seem to think you are. Take this bit of advice in good faith, please.

Originally posted by FMF
Actually, robbie, I find your incessant ad hominems and personal insults dreary and boring. I think you are a lesser poster as a result of it. And I think you are not as funny or as endearing as you seem to think you are. Take this bit of advice in good faith, please.

thanks ill instantly dismiss it and once again drop kick it over da moon from where it
belongs, no offence intended, but its simply more droll and troll.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
thanks ill instantly dismiss it and once again drop kick it over da moon from where it belongs, no offence intended, but its simply more droll and troll.

I haven't been attacking you personally at all whereas on this thread you have been attacking people personally, including me, post after post after post after post. It's odd, in such a situation - where you have been 'playing the man rather than the ball' page after page, and I haven't - that you would call me a "troll".

Originally posted by FMF
You want there to be two independent witnesses to an instance of child abuse?

Answer my question first.....

Originally posted by sumydid
However... that being said.

If someone comes forth with allegations of sex abuse or child molestation... I think it's rather archaic, backward, and dangerous to simply present the case in front of a couple of church elders. The matter should be immediately reported to the police. Going back to to Deuteronomy for answers is unsatisfactory in my opinion. ...[text shortened]... stigators, labs, DNA evidence and so forth.. apples and oranges. Take it to the cops, period.

You guys are not reading our post correctly. I said "IF" the abused approached the elders ( first ) then that would obviously mean they want the help of the elders. If they go to the police ( first ) then they want the help of the police. Does that make sense?
So if they come to the elders first the elders would have to ask questions and follow the Bible's guidelines whether you or any one else here agrees. Yes we now have science to help solve these cases and depending on what the conversation is and what the abused wants from the elders, that will determine what happens next.
Did it ever accure to anyone here that perhaps someone may not want the police involved for whatever reason?
I don't know one way or the other but geeeez guys think outside the box. Every situation is different and how the abused wants it to be handled is different.
So if you and others feel this guidline by God is as you say, Archaic, then you need to take that up with God. It seems many here want to change the Bible anyway to fit their beliefs so they might as well change this part too.

Originally posted by galveston75
Answer my question first..... 'would you agree or not with the Bibles view of the "two witness" command from God?"

You believe it is a "command from God". That is a matter for you. Child abuse, by its very nature, is almost always perpetrated in private, where the victim is the only witness. I will leave it to you to wrestle with your question "Do you put mans laws first or God's word the Bible?" This is not a question for me to answer because I do not recognize your credibility in telling me what "God's word" is.

So, you want there to be two independent witnesses to an instance of child abuse?

Originally posted by galveston75
So if you and others feel this guidline by God is as you say, Archaic, then you need to take that up with God.

People concerned with the procedure as you described it, or victims of child abuse who don't agree with the procedure you support, should "take it up with God"?

Originally posted by FMF
People concerned with the procedure as you described it, or victims of child abuse who don't agree with the procedure you support, should "take it up with God"?

I didn't write the Bible and I am not God. But in the end he is the one we will answer too. Now whether you feel this is true or not is not my concern at all.
But he is not dumb and not a caring or loving God and he will no doubt accept the modern sience we now have to pursue and stop child abuse from happening. I personally am very happy we have this today to use.
But it is a mistake to just sit back and even slightly say or even think that God's ways are wrong and that's the jest of your complant I get from you. They can work hand in hand and with all the common sense that should be used to stop this abuse from continuing with any child from anybody.
But this is my opinion no matter how much you or anyone else here disagrees with it and it's this....... I will always do God's way first.
So condemn me all you want but that's my point of view and this is my last comment on this subject.

Originally posted by FMF
You believe it is a "command from God". That is a matter for you. Child abuse, by its very nature, is almost always perpetrated in private, where the victim is the only witness. I will leave it to you to wrestle with your question "Do you put mans laws first or God's word the Bible?" This is not a question for me to answer because I do not recognize your credibi ...[text shortened]... is.

So, you want there to be two independent witnesses to an instance of child abuse?

I answered this already...................

Originally posted by galveston75
You guys are not reading our post correctly. I said "IF" the abused approached the elders ( first ) then that would obviously mean they want the help of the elders. If they go to the police ( first ) then they want the help of the police. Does that make sense?

Yes that makes sense but in my personal opinion, the elders should go straight to the police no matter what the person who went to them prefers. It's too serious of an offense to deliberate about amongst one another; If for no other reason than to protect would-be future victims who could be assaulted that very night, you just don't know.

I hate the subject, really. I don't mean to beat a dead horse. Hey, there are several Christian churches and so forth who believe they shouldn't seek the help of doctors when a terminal illness is discovered -- and most subsequently die as a result.

I don't agree with that either but in cases like these I don't have a negative, angry position toward the folks involved. I just simply disagree. I can't get angry with someone who, through consensus among others, believes they are doing the best thing for another human being. I can disagree and be sad if their efforts backfire, but I can't be angry.

As far as archaic goes, like I said before. There wasn't a police force to turn to back in the days of the Old Testament. Times have changed and I think it's archaic or if it sounds better "extremely old fashioned" to look to the Old Testament for an answer to child abuse claims.

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I doubt you and yours sacrifice the best animals from your flocks, and perform most other rituals of the Old Testament. So I assume you draw the line somewhere and therefore, I think you should be ok with "updating" to the use of police in a child abuse claim.

Originally posted by galveston75
So condemn me all you want but that's my point of view and this is my last comment on this subject.

Yet another straw man. I have not condemned you, as you well know. What is troubling is the procedure you have described. It is also troubling that you suggest that people "take it up with God" if they disagree with you. Do your "elders" ever say something like this to you when you find yourself doubting their "wisdom"?

Originally posted by sumydid
Yes that makes sense but in my personal opinion, the elders should go straight to the police no matter what the person who went to them prefers. It's too serious of an offense to deliberate about amongst one another; If for no other reason than to protect would-be future victims who could be assaulted that very night, you just don't know.

I hate the subj ...[text shortened]... ink you should be ok with "updating" to the use of police in a child abuse claim.

Thanks and we do fully support the police and their efforts.