Look Out For: The Deceivers
The claims that the organization is hiding child molestation cases has provided a springboard for many so-called "watchdog" organizations bent upon bringing accusation against the organization for every incident even remotely related to Jehovah's Witnesses, most having nothing to do with the issue of molestation, yet under the guise of serving that issue. Even Jehovah's Witness children who were assaulted by non-Jehovah's Witnesses have not proved free from exploitation by these unscrupulous "watchdogs".
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 ones.
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.
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)
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.)
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.
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.
Similar Articles:
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
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 ones.
False Claims Made By A Certain Watchdog Organization
Every 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 Ask
Whenever 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, can the claim be verified through official sources, such as court documents?
- 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, nor may elders act unilaterally.)
- Is any attempt to hide the incident done by the organization or is it just the local congregation? (There is a distinctive difference. the organization's policies must be shown not to have been violated, and especially to have codified the action as procedure. 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?
Point the Finger in the Right Direction
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)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 Provision
The 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 Authorities
We 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.
Similar Articles:
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
Comments
It's clear, however, that those alleged "watchdog" organizations care very little about children and their protection. If they did care, they would see that going after JWs would do nothing to protect children primarily because JWs do not make laws. We are SUBJECT to them. And quite frankly, the number of children that have been abused in the organization is paltry when compared to what goes on in this country alone, and I am NOT at all minimizing that abuse. I'm just saying that the vast majority of child abuse happens OUTSIDE the organization.
The US takes something around 3 Million child abuse reports per year. That's plenty of children that need protecting. Of course, they don't go after the US government. Going after them wouldn't give them the much needed justification for their apostasy and lies.
I found the complaints about the list we keep self-condemning. If we don't keep a list, we don't care about the background of those who want serve in the congregation and thus are "putting children at risk" -- If we keep a list, we are doing it to protect child abusers. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I've never heard such stupidity.
It's responsible to keep a list of accused sinners. Why? Well, to make sure a pedophile or child abuser isn't given a position of oversight, to subject the person to the rigors as regards their past if they want to serve, and to track offenders.
Is the Government "protecting pedophiles" because they keep a registry of sex offenders?
When you become apostate, its officially required to think only they way they think, which really means not to think too much at all.
Any person condemning JWs for keeping a registry of accused or guilty abusers, condemns EVERY SINGLE GOVERNMENT that has ever existed because they all do/have done the exact same thing for the protection of others.
Please, readers, think about that. Fact is, they don't really care about protecting children. This is all a personal vendetta against Jehovah's Witnesses. That's ALL this is.
Secondly, you often hear apostates say that by Jehovah's Witnesses not announcing to the JW community that someone is disfellowshipped for child abuse, they cannot "protect children" in the JW community and in the community at large. This ignores the fact that when someone is publicly reproved, that puts JWs on alert automatically as regards that person, to closely watch their association with them. A talk is also usually given warning about the pitfalls of whatever action caused the reproof. But again, they don't want you thinking that far. They want to get your emotions all fired up, they want to stir you witch-hunt mentality, they want you to desire to be "in the know". Telling the truth doesn't satisfy those aims.
Why should Jehovah's Witnesses have the responsibility of protecting children in the community at large? This is a faith-based organization, not an Government agency. The responsibility imposed upon us as a Christian religion is that of a spiritual nature. ITS THE JOB OF THE PARENTS TO PROTECT THEIR CHILDREN. To shift that onto a religious organization is bad parenting, and morally repugnant.
If people want to lay the responsibility of protecting children within the community on to us, then they are giving us fiduciary control over non-witness children. In other words, we would own other people's children.
This is exactly what they're proposing by trying shift responsibilities onto the organization or local elders to report abuse where there is no legal mandate.
Does individual and parental rights mean anything to them? Or are they so stupid and narrow-minded in their hatred of JWs that they simply suspend all rational thought?
This is why apostates can NEVER be trusted. Any person with a basic understanding individual rights would see the illogical and wrong-headed rationale of these people.
They claim that the Bible doesn't support having an organization over us, but in the SAME BREATH say this unbiblical organization has the scriptural and moral responsibility to protect members children.
Which is it? If this organization is unbiblical, then there can be no imperatives laid on it.
And what "moral responsibility"? Determined by whom? Don't they say that no one has a monopoly on morality and we're free to determine for ourselves what's morally acceptable or not? Liars tend to contradict themselves. They're contradicting themselves.
As we've said time and again, there is nothing good in lobbing accusations at people for the sake of discrediting them.
As CJ mentioned, the fraud will be exposed and people will no longer trust you. All the media has is its credibility and objectivity. Losing either of those spell doom for them.
So I would as well treat any apostate accusation against JWs with skepticism. Too many times they've been burned by these liars.
The internet is unregulated, and thus doesn't hold people responsible for what they say. Its a LOT easier to spread lies about people.
But I've never seen a professional report about Jehovah's Witnesses by an apostate reporter.
That's a good observation CJ and thanks for that post. I'll be sure to keep that in mind.
I don't think apostates give two shakes about how this affects the victim(s). They are the one exploiting people to satisfy their own agenda.
Back to the Conti case for my case example, she was paraded around as some sort of hero of justice against the alleged "evils" of the JW organization. I don't know if you noticed, CJ, but the second her case was settled out of court (not for the $21 Million initial ruling that apostates shot-gunned all over the internet as a victory)that parade instantly loss tons of traction. And the reason for that is because they were using her as a precedent to go after the organization's money on other cases. When that failed to materialize, they began looking for other cases. More specifically, they latched onto the Lopez case. In fact, one author of a prominent watchdog site even stated verbatim that he wants the organization "sued out of existence". That gives you an idea of what they're really all about.
Unlike the Royal Commission, as you so eloquently explained, courts of law only care about facts, unlike apostates.
Now, I am not aiming my shots at Conti, but I'm aiming at those apostates who latch onto, and exploit for lies and personal gain, actual people with real lives who may have been real victims of abuse. Contrary to what one may hear, Witness hate any form of child abuse period. There is no systemic cover-up. We go as far as removing unrepentant abusers from among us and shunning them.
In my opinion, the victims will lose credibility because of apostate ex-JWs. Best bet for any victim is to stay away from people who HATE us. Being trained to lie and make-up stuff to damage our reputation will only succeed in damaging the credibility of the victim(s). Real victims deserve real justice, not exploitation.
If there have been any wrongs committed by people in our organization as regard child abuse, those persons are not shielded from authorities, nor are they shipped from congregation to congregation like those of the Catholic Church.
The claim was that the reason why its hard to sue JWs for alleged cover-ups is because they, and listen to this, "MANIPULATE THE COURT SYSTEM". Granted, the organization has shown that its lawyers are competent enough to establish precedents as regards our religious liberty, but that's in part because this country and many others were prejudiced against the Witnesses. We were not winning cases that helped us escape punishment from clearly illegal activity. There is nothing in the history of JWs that suggest we "manipulate" court systems.
Consider this: If the alleged cover-ups were as clear as those done by the RCC as claimed by apostates, then why is it that JWs can get away with it and the Catholic Church could not? What are JWs doing to judges and lawyers that the Catholic Church failed to do, people? Do our lawyers have some sort of force that can manipulate the system in ways unknown to every lawyer that have ever represented organizations that were successfully sued by its victims?
I mean, that's simply absurd!
Try this one: Perhaps people cannot successfully sue the organization for cover-ups because there simply is no evidence of a cover-up. Otherwise, that would mean that we're the only organization in the history of the U.S justice system to blatantly coverup child abuse clear as day, and get away with it due to mysterious and unexplained forms of manipulation.
But this is apostate logic, 101 on full display. This is really what they expect people to believe. They expect you to believe that everything said about us is 100 percent true, and if it can't be proven in a court of law, then we're manipulating experienced professionals that have found ways to sue other organizations that covered up child abuse, but suddenly loss that ability when it came to us.
Again, it behooves you, readers, to question them logically.
Since every single person at some point in their lives destroy old personal data to keep it from falling into the wrong hands, their logic dictates that by doing so, YOU have engaged in some illegal activity you're trying to hide. By shredding an old social security card when you have a new one, you should be taken to court and tried. This is what they're saying.
Someone can help me out with this, but isn't it standard practice for organizations of any kind, large and small, to destroy old and outdated sensitive data to prevent potential data breaches?
So is every organization covering up illegal activity?
This is something I felt compelled to ask one of the accusers, who was simply parroting the above based on what he heard from apostates, and so I did. I asked him that since all organizations I know of engage in "spring cleanings" of space-clogging data, are they also doing so to hide illegal activity as well?
Obviously, he discerned that I was looking for logical consistency and in order to appear logical and consistent, he HAD to say that anyone who discards or destroys sensitive data does so in order to hide illegal activity. He did not say that initially, because he was deliberately creating a bigoted double-standard that he only applied to Witnesses and not everyone else.
Additionally, that's a hefty accusation he's levying against good and honest people just so he can lie on Jehovah's Witnesses.
Readers, my point in sharing this is to show why its dangerous to take these people at their word. If you ask yourself questions that expose the flaws in their reasoning, you'll readily realize that they're only interested in shoving every lie possible into your face to emotionally prejudice you against us.
But we have faith that there are perhaps millions of honest-hearted ones who use their "power of reason" to see through the lies and deceit.
We have many experiences from Witnesses who were told lies about us before becoming Witnesses, but instead of listening to the lies and taking them at face value, they reasoned that its best served to talk to Witnesses themselves first before determining what's heard is true.
From the Philippines
Your experience proves that there are people who are looking for truth and can do so through the lies.
Using God-given reason and asking some well-reasoned questions have time and time again proven apostate opposers as nothing more than liars.
Love that as well!
As I vaguely recall, this arouse interest among the locals about us. They probably would have never heard or cared about us had it not been for the effort of opposers to make us look bad.
My point is, this effort backfired, this helped our numbers to grow among people there. I don't remember much details, perhaps CJ or someone else can help me out here, but I recall this being something that had taken place.
Happenings such as this shows that Jehovah is a God who takes advantage of opportunities that open up for his people to preach. No, this isn't saying that God uses apostates and opposers, but whatever door opens up, no matter how, he can draw people.
NOTHING can be done to prevent Jehovah from drawing those he wants; not liars, not apostates, not media, not anyone or anything.
"Jehovah's Witnesses Educate Parents and Children to Protect Against Sexual Predators".
https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/activities/help-community/safeguarding-children-sexual-abuse
And contrary to some of the lies, we haven't taught that child abuse is only perpetrated by strangers. Notice here, in the article: "Child Abuse - Who would do a thing like that?", from a 1985 Awake!:
"When we think of sexual molestation, most of us probably picture a weird stranger who exposes himself to children or lures them away into a car or to some wooded area."
...it goes on to say a paragraph down:
"Thus, in most cases children are molested by people they know and trust, which makes the problem of protecting them more difficult."
As the saying goes, "the best cure for ignorance is education". Jehovah's Witnesses have published a plethora of material designed to educate parents an children on how to protect against child abuse.
The statistics in the link bear this out.
1) Child was abused at a young age
2) Parents reported it to the Elders
3) Elders told parent(s) not to go to police, and sat on their hands and did absolutely nothing
4) Parents did not go to police
5) Parents did nothing for decades either
6) Parents and abused victim were disfellowshipped and shunned after deciding to go to police decades later
7) Organization is then sued
8) Case usually either settled or dismissed.
My question would be what kind of parent would not go to the police when their child is abused by an adult? Fact is, the organization has never instructed Elders to advise victims not to got to police. If an Elder has done that, he is NOT follow the policy.
To not go to police when your child has been abused is child neglect. To try to justify that by lying and saying the organization instructs people to not call the police is child neglect.
Another thing, just because cases are settled by no means indicate the Organization has admitted guilt and are trying to keep it under wraps.
The Plaintiff also has to agree to the settlement. If there was irrefutable evidence of a cover-up as often claimed, I'd never settle, and neither would a lawyer representing a Plaintiff.
Apostates love to say the organization is using "millions of dollars in donated funds" in child abuse cases, when in reality, they're simply defending themselves, most times, against frivolous lawsuits.
I am really tired of seeing parents try to offload their responsibility onto the organization when they don't call police when they become aware of a crime committed against their children.
The world is messed up when a third-party can be sued when they only have second-hand knowledge of a crime.
Sure, the Elders can call the cops, and are free to, but that's not the same as saying they're obligated to. We do respect the rights of an adult to chose to report or not to report.
If we trampled those rights and had mandatory reporting as an organization, we would be accused of violating the rights and freedoms of adults, and would be sued for that as well. We would be accused of trying to "own" people and their children.
This is why I'm OK with them defending themselves using whatever means necessary.
Rob.
The Bible itself doesn't support organizational punishment if there is no evidence to substantiate accusations. Looking at the history of the United States' Judicial System, insufficient evidence has led to the wrong convictions and executions of hundreds or even thousands of people. Our justice system, thus, has a high standard of evidence when it comes to prosecuting alleged criminals.
JWs simply want to MAKE SURE they have a credible accusation, just like any fair and rational justice system would want.
What I also see in some cases is poor handling by local elders, which have cost the Society financially and reputational-wise. Or perhaps, certain parts of our policy simply needed updating to deal with current facts regarding child abusers. Our child abuse policy is a living document, meaning its opening to amendments and revisions.
What I wish I saw more of is blaming the person(s) responsible -- the child abuser himself, and even the parents for not reporting the abuse to police.
I'm trying to understand is why the blame is always thrown at the feet of the organization, and hardly ever at the abuser or the parents for not protecting their own children.
Many apostates have also suggested "speaking out" against our policies. What people have come to realize, is that Jehovah's Witnesses are loyal observers of their religious practice, and that most of us believe the GB is the appointed "slave" prophesied in the Bible. We are also united as a people, despite our differences. So we are loyal to our beliefs and to each other world-wide. No other religion in the world can say this. To explain this away, we are accused of being "controlled" and "brainwashed". LOL.
So my point is, this is a way to divide us against each other and God's appointed channel. Opposers clearly see how close we all are. In the days of Korah, he brought false charges against Moses and Aaron, influenced people, and led a rebellion which Jehovah himself quelled. It seems to me outsiders are also on a campaign, playing on the emotions of people by saying we don't want to protect children, by telling people that rebelling against the policies and those who make them is the best way to get "change" like we are some sort of corrupt Government.
By them NOT writing a child protection policy that fully and completely addresses the holes in ours, and that is realistic and works, I have no reason to believe they want true "change". What they want is for us to fight among each other and become more like Christendom with its tens of thousands of sects, and lose our identifying mark of true Christianity.
"Speaking out" in apostate-speak is another phrase for "rebel". The intent is to clearly encourage disobedience and infighting. This has happened at times throughout our history, and the rebels have been thrown out. I'm very happy to know that those taking the lead will not allow rebels to flourish and cause sectarian divisions within the congregations.