Child Abuse Among JWs.

Originally posted by galveston75
What of a Child Molester?
What if a baptized adult Christian sexually molests a child? Is the sinner so wicked that Jehovah will never forgive him? Not necessarily so. Jesus said that ‘blasphemy against the holy spirit’ was unforgivable. And Paul said that there is no sacrifice for sins left for one who practices sin willfully despite knowing the truth ...[text shortened]... the elders and knowing the facts and situations would lead them to a decision on how to proceed.

The following statement is quite troubling, as it seems to leave the alleged victim on their own and no report is made to authorities while the period for repenting is underway. Please elaborate. Do you know whether training in the reporting requirements is conducted with religious leaders?

But if this person did not repent or satisfy the congregation and it wanting to protect the individuals in it, then the authorities could be notified buy the victim.

At least under California law, the following is a mandated reporter:

"
11165.7. (a) As used in this article, "mandated reporter" is
defined as any of the following:
...

" (32) A clergy member, as specified in subdivision (d) of Section
11166. As used in this article, "clergy member" means a priest,
minister, rabbi, religious practitioner, or similar functionary of a
church, temple, or recognized denomination or organization."

...

"11165.9. Reports of suspected child abuse or neglect shall be made
by mandated reporters, or in the case of reports pursuant to Section
11166.05, may be made, to any police department or sheriff's
department, not including a school district police or security
department, county probation department, if designated by the county
to receive mandated reports, or the county welfare department. "

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=11001-12000&file=11164-11174.3

Originally posted by sumydid
I am very saddened (truly and not in a judgmental way) to see believers going back and forth like this. I love all of you.

I wish that one day, all faithful believers in Christ would band together, don our spiritual armor, and defend one another against the true enemy.

So who's the "true enemy" ? The muslims? Atheists?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
shall we consider their record of child molestation, shall we? yes lets do that, should
make an interesting comparison.

It's irrelevant because your organization habors abusers the same as the Catholics. Quantity (how many times or how long is not the question) is irrelevant. Your organization is no better in this regard than the Catholics.


Manny

Originally posted by menace71
It's irrelevant because your organization habors abusers the same as the Catholics. Quantity (how many times or how long is not the question) is irrelevant. Your organization is no better in this regard than the Catholics.


Manny

How stupid of a statement to make. Are you serious?

"Yeah we've got dozens here in Vancouver we're hiding as we speak. I have two child molesters living in my garage and the Brother down the street has 4 he's hiding and the Sister around the corner's hiding 7 of those terrible child molesters in her basement so no one can find em."

Come on...........

Originally posted by galveston75
How stupid of a statement to make. Are you serious?

Perhaps you would like to have a crack at the question - posed in good faith, and seeking to sidestep the name-calling going on here - that is on the previous page, addressed to robbie.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Is there a "true enemy" and of so who are they?
Atheists?

Imo, we have no enemies, no enemies of our true selves anyway. Any perceived opposition is just an illusion.

Whoever the true enemy is, it shouldn't be within the body of Christ. In fact, there is your answer.

Those whom are not in the body of Christ, and specifically those who aim to tear it apart; they are the enemy.

Can someone be in the body of Christ and aim to tear it apart? No. If you have evil intentions, you aren't in the body of Christ to begin with, though you could pose as a family member and perhaps fool some people.

Seems like I recall most people agreeing that the primary litmus test for being a Christian is John 3:16 and everything else is secondary. The problem is what we human beings tend to do is focus on our differences rather than what we have in common.

To me, if someone professes Christian faith, but has a doctrine that I don't agree with, I generally just consider them misguided and leave them be. However if this person has a doctrine I strongly oppose and I see that person trying to gain followers, I would then feel compelled to step up and engage.

Strange thing about this thread is, I care for the folks on both sides so I just read what they are saying and dare not get involved.

Originally posted by galveston75
I can only see where ((((((( 1 )))))))))) person has commented on this information. It seems they want to ignor it and continue on with the attacks.

yes, because they are uninterested in facts, our record of dealing with abuse is in the
public domain, our policy of dealing with abuse is in the public domain, the statistics of
the number of members of the organisation who have been prosecuted and
subsequently removed from our organisation is in the public domain, all they have and
all they can do is attempt to produce allegations of child abuse, because they are
uninterested in FACT, leave them alone, let the haters hate, the liars lie and the
accusers accuse, the caravan rolls on, one cannot stop to kick every dog that barks.

Originally posted by FMF
Perhaps you would like to have a crack at the question - posed in good faith, and seeking to sidestep the name-calling going on here - that is on the previous page, addressed to robbie.

our policy of dealing with abuse is in the public domain, why do you not make
reference to that, if it is indeed, in good faith, that you have asked?

Originally posted by galveston75
How stupid of a statement to make. Are you serious?

"Yeah we've got dozens here in Vancouver we're hiding as we speak. I have two child molesters living in my garage and the Brother down the street has 4 he's hiding and the Sister around the corner's hiding 7 of those terrible child molesters in her basement so no one can find em."

Come on...........

dude you must realise the motive for making this thread, the original poster has
publicly expressed a hatred for Jehovahs witnesses, he has made this thread, with
the specific intent of expressing his hatred in the hope that you or I will become
emotionally involved in trying to defend these unfounded allegations. If he was
really concerned about child abuse among Jehovahs witnesses and if he actually
knew of any REAL instances, why is he posting it on a public forum? Is it not correct
to go to the public authorities and report it? I know this, you know this, why it yet
evades him, I cannot say. In fact, this may be applied to anyone of these accusers,
if they have any REAL evidence of child abuse among Jehovahs witnesses (that is
unimagined, not made up by disgruntled ex witnesses who we kicked out because
they could not live up to our high moral standards) why have they not reported it?
Ask yourself these questions and the motive becomes apparent.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
our policy of dealing with abuse is in the public domain, why do you not make
reference to that, if it is indeed, in good faith, that you have asked?

I am reacting to what you have posted about your policy. Others have commented on it too. Why is raising the specific concern - that the JW approach to dealing with suspected abuse cases could result in the true extent of those problems being underestimated - met by you simply dismissing those who voice concerns as "haters" and "liars"?

Originally posted by FMF
I am reacting to what you have posted about your policy. Others have commented on it too. Why is raising the specific concern - that the JW approach to dealing with suspected abuse cases could result in the true extent of those problems being underestimated - met by you simply dismissing those who voice concerns as "haters" and "liars"?

what could be, if, maybe, is alleged that, is possible, is suspected that etc etc is none
of my concern, what indeed is your 'specific concern', about publicly available policy
for the protection of children that ails you, you have not said. If it is suspected that,
alleged that, is thought that, then please spare me, if you have any concrete
knowledge of child abuse among Jehovahs witnesses then why haven't you reported
it? if you do not, then what really are your motivations for broaching the subject,
concern for whom and what and on what basis? you have not said.

as for the accusation of liars and haters, the original poster has clearly and publicly
acknowledged his hatred for Jehovahs witnesses, are you willing to deny that this is not
the case? It is my personal opinion that he is a liar and a fraud, i am free to
express that opinion, you need not acquiesce.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
as for the accusation of liars and haters, the original poster has clearly and publicly acknowledged his hatred for Jehovahs witnesses, are you willing to deny that this is not the case?

So if it's only one poster who you think is a hater and liar you are not referring to anyone else? You seem to be making the accusation indiscriminately. Why don't you make it clear you are referring to one poster?

Originally posted by FMF
So if it's only one poster who you think is a hater and liar you are not referring to anyone else? You seem to be making the accusation indiscriminately. Why don't you make it clear you are referring to one poster?

there are others also, Manny for example has also publicly declared his hatred, they
know who they are, i need not name them specifically, if it applies then it applies, if it
does not then you have nothing to concern yourself with. You have not of course
answered any of the question that were asked of you, you state that you have specific
concerns, you do not state on what basis those concerns are being raised, other than
that which might be, is suspected that, is reported that, is possible that, is alleged that.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
if you do not, then what really are your motivations for broaching the subject,
concern for whom and what and on what basis? you have not said.

as for the accusation of liars and haters, the original poster has clearly and publicly
acknowledged his hatred for Jehovahs witnesses, are you willing to deny that this is not
the case? It is my personal opinion that he is a liar and a fraud, i am free to
express that opinion.

Well whether it be the JW and or the Catholic church, in the case of child abuse and sexual harassment etc., my concern is not for the institution, but for the victims. Does JW policy, as handed down to its members, actively encourage those who are victims of sexual assault at the hands of other JWs to go straight to the police and not go via the JW elders if they feel more comfortable doing that? Does it actively and explicitly back the prerogative of the victim? Will the victims face any kind of backlash?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You have not of course answered any of the question that were asked of you, you state that you have specific concerns, you do not state on what basis those concerns are being raised, other than that which might be, is suspected that, is reported that, is possible that, is alleged that.

I can't type any faster than I am, robbie. I've just got in from work and sat down.

I have raised my concern about the JW approach because I think it is likely to result in some things that ought to be reported not being reported.