I will not be presenting the proof of their misdeeds in this post as I do not want to spread their cancer and this is not a court of law. But I want to show the reader the extent of their lies and how to identify whether the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses is actually at fault or not when they come across such information from these mangy dogs.
False Claims Made By A Certain Watchdog OrganizationEvery last watchdog organization focused on the child abuse issue among Jehovah's Witnesses to date has proven to be full of lies and deceit without exception. There is more deceit going on in those organizations than they accuse the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses of. I've found the information on many of these sites to be simply deplorable. It is no wonder that news agencies have stopped listening to them. Stick with me while I highlight a few examples.
One false report involves a supposed incident of a family in Venezuela, who were allegedly Jehovah's Witnesses, who left their dead baby in a room in the hopes it would be resurrected, without reporting it. First, Venezuela was in the midst of a campaign against Jehovah's Witnesses at the time in that country, and just like any country that persecutes, they are clearly creating propaganda, and these watchdog organizations are posting this junk without checking the veracity.
They have also shown reports from the Mirror, which is Russia's premier propaganda machine, and since Russia and the district of Georgia both have continuing campaigns against Jehovah's Witnesses, every sort of lie against us gets printed in the Mirror. When mobs were attacking Jehovah's Witnesses that had been instructed to keep their hands in their laps or down to their sides, the Mirror made it look like Jehovah's Witnesses were the ones that were attacking. The Mirror cannot be trusted as a source of any kind of information, let alone about Jehovah's Witnesses.
Also, many statements on the site seem intent on making the whole organization and everyone that belongs to it look corrupt when this is most certainly not true and a claim that has yet to be proven.
One article regarding a brother blown up inside a kingdom hall gives no evidence to show that it was suicide and does not even mention child abuse, yet the title for the link is "Possible Abuse Link?". This is unfair and has no victims except the brother. What if the brother just happened upon the device in his cleaning duties? They have smeared him and the organization over presumptuousness. Is there a follow-up article? None. Not so much as a hint of child abuse is mentioned inside the article.
Another article listed 26 child molesters, but claiming all 26 were elders, when in fact, 2 in the list were women. (Women can't be elders among Jehovah's Witnesses.) 1 of the women did not even perform sexual abuse, but was a terrifying woman. 1, who was not even an elder at any time and had been disfellowshiped when his activity came to light, was listed twice. (Once under his birth name and the second under his changed name.) Another 15 were never said to be elders. (I could not adequately verify 3 of those reports and kept the bar very low for standard of evidence. 1 other was not even clearly identified as a baptized member of the organization.) 1 was not actually an elder at the time of the offenses. Only 4 in the list were actually elders at the time of their offenses. The article then goes on to compare these 23 Witnesses (Not 26; only 4 of which were elders,) supposedly serving 5,269 witnesses (An actual average of 1,317 to 1 in regard to elders; we don't have that big of congregations,) to 137 pedophile priests serving 41,605 Catholics (An average of 303 to 1, and they do indeed have that many parishioners,) without considering the number of pedophiles among the lay Catholics in relation to the numbers of witnesses in their counties in the UK. Consider, too, that the priests have whole congregations of hundreds to themselves, which each of the four elders never had access to a congregation larger than 150 people, and most likely less than 100. Then there's the fact that we do not shuffle our elders around like the Catholics do priests, and we disfellowship, the Catholics only excommunicate heretics. Epidemic indeed, but on which side?
Clearly these so-called watchdogs don't care what the facts are or where they came from. They are interested only in smear. If they were interested in reporting the truth, they would stick to the facts instead of posting just anything they can get their hands on. They have consistently stated that there are thousands of victims in the US, when in fact there are simply thousands of pages of court documents involving a relatively few victims. It is deplorable what has happened with those victims and their families, but how are these "watchdog" sites doing any better than what they claim the organization they are attacking to be doing when these sites are lying and smearing everyone within the organization? How are they helping victims when they ruin their own credibility and the credibility of the victim with outright lies? Not one of them is the least bit concerned with truth. Their claims have been against the mindset within the organization, but take it from someone inside, that mindset does not prevail among our number, but is human nature rearing its ugly head in very few.
These websites are as guilty as the pedophiles, because they are victimizing millions with their lies and drawing others after themselves as apostates do. Indeed, Paul wrote correctly about such ones, saying: "Satan himself keeps transforming himself into an angel of light. It is therefore nothing great if his ministers also keep transforming themselves into ministers of righteousness. But their end shall be according to their works." (2 Corinthians 11:14-15) With their record of blatant lies and unsupported claims, no one should put an ounce of trust in anything they say.
The issue in this article isn't about whether abuse happens or even about the policy with the JW organization. It's about the fraudulent claims and libelous reporting of these cowards. No matter what one's issues with the organization, if they support the issues these nominal "watchdogs" claim to support, they should be appalled at these organizations doing damage to the credibility of their cause. They are doing more damage to the cause of protecting children than anyone else could possibly do.
Some Questions to AskWhenever you come across information like this, it is important to ask the following questions:
- Does the article use credible, unbiased sources?
- Does the article make a claim about Jehovah's Witnesses that you have never seen printed? Our opposers like to create false stories such as claiming that our publications taught that the dinosaurs were wiped out by the flood, but they won't provide quotes, just false claims. Here's a quote: "We do not know whether they continued to exist until man was created (toward the close of the sixth “day”)" (w73 7/15 Questions from Readers, p.447)
- Does the article cover both sides of the story, or just bombard the reader with negative propaganda? (The organization's denial of speaking to the press about accusations should not impede the reporter's ability to investigate fairly. I do all my posts without ever contacting the organization for information. Why? Because all the information I need is already available. Jehovah's Witnesses are about the most transparent organization you can find, and whatever they happen not to be transparent about comes to light by means of disloyal and apostate individuals and it still turns out to be harmless information when removed from the pile of lies typically piled on it when presented by them. [Do I need to bring up the "Smash-and-Grab" lies debacle I exposed that apostates are still licking their wounds over?])
- Does the article use confirmation bias, cherry-picking the facts to suit the author's agenda, while disregarding other facts? For instance, taking quotes out of context to make it appear that a quote supports their claims when, in fact, it does exactly the opposite in context.
- Does the article provide fact-checking?
- If referencing such things as fund-raising, does it list the source of the fund-raiser and verify who is actually responsible for it? Check the comments on the fund-raiser to find out who is actually donating to it.
- Does the article paint an individual in question as a victim when all other signs show them to be happy and faithful to God and the organization?
- Are the numbers supported by facts?
- Was the accused individual a baptized, active member of the organization in good standing at the time of the incident in question? If they claim him to be an elder, do actual news reports actually identify him as an elder?
- Has the accused individual been proven in a court of law to have committed the act?
- Is the court case about proving someone's guilt or simply getting money out of the organization for protecting the sanctity of confession and repentance?
- Is there a valid reason, with proof, for highlighting the individual's association with the organization? (Such as the accused individual utilizing a loophole or other policy in the organization's policies to have access to a victim pool?)
- Does the article make the claim that the incident mentioned is included under one of the supposed hidden cases? Does the article provide proof for such a claim?
- Does the article make clear any effort on the part of the organization to hide the event, or are all the attempts to hide it done by those who are not under direction by the organization to do so? (Note: Parents do not have the authority to act on behalf of the congregation or the organization. Their actions are their own.)
- Is any attempt to hide the incident done by the organization or is it just the local congregation? (There is a distinctive difference. Note: there has never been shown to be a communication from the organization directing congregations or individuals to hide such incidents from the police.)
- Can the actions of the individual who caused the incident be directly or indirectly attributed to the direction of the congregation or the organization? Or was the individual acting of their own volition without undue influence?
- Does God's holy spirit force people to change, or is it the responsibility of the individual to make the change? (John 14:26; Romans 2:3-6)
- Should being a member of Jehovah's Witnesses automatically force a person to be perfect and unblemished from the world? Should the organization have the authority to force people to submit in such a way? (Philemon 14; 1 Peter 5:2) Has it ever attempted to do so?
- Ask yourself how do we compare to the world at large? (See the next section.) Does the world so readily confess its sins?
If the article does nothing to show any fault on the part of the organization, then it should be discarded as nothing more than a sensational piece meant to throw dirt on an otherwise innocent organization, (Psalm 64:3-5; John 15:19, 20) usually by former members seeking to justify their own misguided course. (Jude 16)
Point the Finger in the Right Direction
The only thing that has been held against the organization is their keeping a file of sex offenders without taking extraordinary efforts beyond their responsibilities as a Bible-based religious organization to bring the offenders to justice. Such efforts belong to the individuals affected by the case. (Galatians 6:4, 5) Even elders are permitted to call the authorities, without penalty, if their conscience moves them to do so. Governing body member Geoffrey Jackson, at the recent Royal Commission hearing in Australia concerning allegations of child sex abuse cases among Jehovah's Witnesses, in regard to elders consciences moving them to call the police, said "I would certainly hope so". But the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses have no authority by God to direct individuals to call the police for any matter. The organization's hands are tied unless a local authority makes it a law to contact the police when any accusation is observed by an individual or the congregation. In many lands, individuals who directly observe a felony are under law to contact the police.
A number of children under the age of 14 equal to 1% of America's total population file sexual abuse every year. (Around 3 million with less than 20% of those ever seeing the inside of a courtroom. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.) For Jehovah's Witnesses, that number would equal 80,000 reports every year, but barely a fraction of such a number ever gets reported even to the branch office. Only a handful of such cases each year around the world ever see the courts despite our current published policy of permitting anyone involved with the case to contact authorities to report the crime without consequence. Does that sound like rampant child sex abuse to you? The fact is, our clean standards are what protect children and it is quite effective. Despite what our opposers would have you believe,
Some courts are trying to get a hold of our list of those who have been accused of sexual misconduct, which could put many members at risk of prosecution though having been forgiven by their accusers and never having re-offended. Those who confessed their sins without prompting would be prosecuted, causing others who would otherwise be inclined to confess to become disinclined to confess, hampering our ability to help them and their victims. Many more are simply guilty of "statutory rape" because they had sex with someone who was a year or two shy of legal age and the offender may be no more than a young adult, guilty only of sexual promiscuity with a willing participant rather than child sex abuse. (See Opposers Want Ex-Criminals to Stop Confessing Sins for more information.)
Disfellowshiping Is a Limited ProvisionThe organization does, however, disfellowship, but even that is limited and is incapable of being used as a means of prevention because all it does is ask members not to associate with the disfellowshiped individual. The purpose of disfellowshiping is to get rid of those who, by their words, by unrepentance or by consistent actions, show that they are unwilling to live up to the Bible's standards. It is not meant to get rid of anyone who sins at any time, or in any particular way. Thus, even heinous sins do not get punished by the organization in such a way if the individual demonstrates repentance. (2 Corinthians 7:8-11)
We do, however, provide restrictions in the ministry and Bethel volunteering to those who have been censured or recently reinstated, and certain permanent restrictions in the case of child sexual endangerment, for those who commit serious sins. But then people accuse us of using disfellowshiping as a means of scaring people into staying and punishing people for not staying when all we're doing is following the direction of the Holy Scriptures for the spiritual safety of the congregation. Those hypocrites need to make up their minds about which side of the issue they are going to support.
We Cooperate with AuthoritiesWe do not discourage governments from making laws that require us to act in certain ways towards felonies. As long as those laws do not directly contradict God's word, we will obey them to the letter. So if you want the organization to act beyond the authority given to it by God, you must change the laws of the land, because they "stand placed in their relative positions by God." (Romans 13:1-4) You cannot, however, get the organization to impose rules on its members, by its own volition, that cannot be supported by God's Word, the Bible. (It is our only authority outside the local governments. The governing body merely interprets that authority to the best of its ability. Opinions do not matter unless they can establish a scriptural precedent.)
In fact, by our operating strictly from the guidance of the Scriptures, our organization works in a highly efficient and extremely effective way that no other organization has been able to achieve with their worldly and often ungodly ideas. That's not a condemnation, but a comparison. We are the standard that the world holds up to other religious organizations to live up to in regards to the clean conduct of its members, its devotion to the Bible, the efficiency of its organization and its total separation from state.
Flip-side News: Governing Body Member Demonstrated Correct Procedure
Flip-side News: Response to the Royal Commission of Australia
Flip-side News: Opposers Want Ex-Criminals to Stop Confessing Sins