Corruption in the Clergy

[Jagella]

Scandals abound in Christianity and always have. From sex and money scandals among Pentecostal TV preachers, to child abuse allegations against the Watchtower, to the Vatican pedophile-priest cover-up, it's all over. Corruption in the clergy demonstrates that the men who criticize unbelievers for loving sin should know from personal experience what it's like to enjoy such sins.

So why trust the clergy or believe anything it says?

I can understand some people being scammed by the Christian clergy for a while like I was, but once you know you're being scammed, then the prudent thing to do is to get out like I did. Leave religion and all its corruption and all its lies behind and never return like “The dog turns back to its own vomit,� or "The sow is washed only to wallow in the mud.�

[Bust Nak]

Cooperation with law enforcement agencies is not to be confused with renouncing of all rights.

You don't have a right to refuse a lawful court order though.

From what I can see the Court ordered the Watchtower Society to produce documents which (a) it claimed not have in its possession (b) addresses issues which, according to the first ammendment are outside the courts jurisdiction (issues of religious polity and administration) and (c) could, if not appropriately unredacted violate constitutionally protected third party privacy rights.

If a party believes these points to be sound, presenting the arguments to the proper authorities doesn't constitute "obstruction of justice" but exercise of ones legal rights.

All three objections were noted and rejected in the court of appeal. According to the court, these documents would be in JW's possession, no first amendment or privacy issue would arise should the documents be handed over. Are you suggesting I reject what the court says as a miscarriage of justice?

If the Watchtower fought its corner using every legal means possible not to aquisess what it believes to be an unlawful request while appealing, then that is their (and everyone's) right... to defy the court and face the consequences...

They fought and lost and were fined accordingly. The discovery order is still left unfulfilled even after the appeal were ruled against them. Are you gonna to double down on this as an exercise of ones legal rights?

Looking at the larger picture, this is one document and one refusal of a specific request for specified reasons (including time constraints), can hardly indicative of widescale and indiscriminate non-compliance much less "covering up" a crime and much less with "covering up" of the crime of child abuse. This document doesn't even come close to establishing any of the above.

Lets focus for now, on whether this is one example of covering up first.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 72 by Bust Nak]

I'm not denying they fought and lost, only that fighting is a lawful endeavor if it is done through the courts and even if it is not if the fight is based on the constitution of that country.

Lets focus for now, on whether this is one example of covering up first.

Well the expression "cover-up" usually is used to refer to hiding criminal activity. If you think you can establish that from that particular transcript, feel free.


JW

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

SEX, SIN and ...CHILD ABUSE

[Bust Nak]

I'm not denying they fought and lost, only that fighting is a lawful endeavor if it is done through the courts and even if it is not if the fight is based on the constitution of that country.

That much is a give, of course fighting the court is lawful. It is the not complying with the discovery order part that is unlawful.

Well the expression "cover-up" usually is used to refer to hiding criminal activity. If you think you can establish that from that particular transcript, feel free.

Lets start from the beginning:

1) Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. (Watchtower) was ordered to produce documents. This is a lawful order.
2) Watchtower refused said lawful order.

That's the "hiding" part established.

3) The order was made as part of an investigation relating to child abuse.

That's the "criminal activity" part done.

Objections?

[benchwarmer]

Given the number of legal cases that are appearing, I don't think anyone can claim there is not a systemic problem of some kind.

I most certainly can and do. A reasonable indication of "Systematic" would be an elevated level of allegations and/or convictions. This not only has not been proven, indeed as I have said throughout this thread, any comparative studies I have come across indicate the contrary. Even investigations such as the Australian Commission supports the conclusions our numbers are much lower than other comparative organisations.

That's not what I meant by 'systemic'. I meant that the 'system' i.e. the JW organisation, must have some internal process in place that has been keeping all this secret for so long. In other words, there is a system wide issue that needs to be dealt with. This is not just a local issue in one congregation.

I said I was going to stop digging, but the response of there being no systemic issue kind of bothered me when it certainly seems there is one.

So, I found the following:

https://gizmodo.com/new-whistleblower-s ... 1821799936

Which refers to these leaked files:
https://faithleaks.org/wiki/index.php?t ... estigation

These point to a system where abuse claims are handled in such a way that leaves victims (and potential new victims) vulnerable and little avenue for justice. Unless they decide to leave the JWs of course.

I also found this audio report interesting:

https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/sec ... atchtower/

It all paints a picture of an organization that is doing everything possible to hide the abuse that's been happening and going unresolved.

The abuse itself is horrible as we've all agreed. What's even worse is that organizations appear to be doing everything possible to hide information that they have that could have been used to bring abusers to justice and keep further victims from becoming victims.

As noted in the audio report, the JW scandal seems even worse than the Catholic scandal because in the Catholic case, it seems it was just an 'unspoken rule/process' whereas in the JW, they have documentation on who/what/where and a process in place.

At the end of the day, it's not about painting JWs, Catholics, or any other member of a religion in a bad light. What it is about is shining the spotlight on the upper echelons of these organizations and exposing what 'the people in charge' are doing about abuse. Sadly, it seems those in charge are more worried about damage control than defending their 'flock'.

[JehovahsWitness]

Given the number of legal cases that are appearing, I don't think anyone can claim there is not a systemic problem of some kind.

I most certainly can and do. A reasonable indication of "Systematic" would be an elevated level of allegations and/or convictions. This not only has not been proven, indeed as I have said throughout this thread, any comparative studies I have come across indicate the contrary. Even investigations such as the Australian Commission supports the conclusions our numbers are much lower than other comparative organisations.

That's not what I meant by 'systemic'. I meant that the 'system' i.e. the JW organisation, must have some internal process in place that has been keeping all this secret for so long.

The world system rarely if ever addressed this problem (which sadly is probably as old as time) before the last few decades. There was simply no legal and social mechanism in place that gave victims (regardless of the institution) a voice. Do you ask the same of "families" or "orphanages" or "schools" or 'prisons"? Yet why has there been an explotion of allegations and convictions in all these institutions?

We are looking at a social phenonomen that no institution that has children (including the family) is immune from, so above and beyond the development of a legal and social system that has progressively (thankfully) allowed these problems to come to light, based on what do you single out Jehovah's Witnesses? Implying that the Jehovah's Witnesses must have had a special singular "system" of oppression to keep have kept the numbers so low is like asking to a virgin, what system have you used to have sex and not get pregnant. The question is based on a prior unproven assumption.


As for your links, I don't know how many times I have to repeat I am neither claiming there is not sexual abuse of children among our numbers nor am I interested in reading about individual cases (which can only prove what I know already). I am seeking official reports and comparative studies that give us the overall picture and crunch the global numbers.

I am also uninterested in bias website summaries that can twist facts to further their agenda, which is why I prefer to go straight to source. But, if you are combing through them, I would be interested if you can find on fact that I was unable to find: How many allegations or convictions were made last year of child abuse in America. Or in any one State in America? Australia? In the UK? Any published figures on this anywhere.

I was shocked to see that that simple fact is extremely hard to find on the internet. Maybe you will have more success than me. Why is that important? because then one can make a rough comparison to a given organization like my own. That is what is not being done for all the hysteria (not you) and headline grabbing "journalism" and that is what I have been seeking.


JW

[benchwarmer]

Given the number of legal cases that are appearing, I don't think anyone can claim there is not a systemic problem of some kind.

I most certainly can and do. A reasonable indication of "Systematic" would be an elevated level of allegations and/or convictions. This not only has not been proven, indeed as I have said throughout this thread, any comparative studies I have come across indicate the contrary. Even investigations such as the Australian Commission supports the conclusions our numbers are much lower than other comparative organisations.

That's not what I meant by 'systemic'. I meant that the 'system' i.e. the JW organisation, must have some internal process in place that has been keeping all this secret for so long.

The world system rarely if ever addressed this problem (which sadly is probably as old as time) before the last few decades. There was simply no legal and social mechanism in place that gave victims (regardless of the institution) a voice. Do you ask the same of "families" or "orphanages" or "schools" or 'prisons"? Yet why has there been an explotion of allegations and convictions in all these institutions?

We are looking at a social phenonomen that no institution that has children (including the family) is immune from, so above and beyond the development of a legal and social system that has progressively (thankfully) allowed these problems to come to light, based on what do you single out Jehovah's Witnesses? Implying that the Jehovah's Witnesses must have had a special singular "system" of oppression to keep have kept the numbers so low is like asking to a virgin, what system have you used to have sex and not get pregnant. The question is based on a prior unproven assumption.

In general I agree with what you are saying, but I think we might be talking past each other a little.

I'm not trying to single out the JWs, it just happens to be the current discussion point. You asked for some documentation, so I've done some light digging and found some, though perhaps not exactly what you are after.

As for the virgin analogy, that fails as far as I'm concerned. A better analogy would be like asking the parents of a girl, who they claim is a virgin, how she has kept from being pregnant when all the while the parents have internal memos documenting the sex life of their daughter.

As for your links, I don't know how many times I have to repeat I am neither claiming there is not sexual abuse of children among our numbers nor am I interested in reading about individual cases (which can only prove what I know already). I am seeking official reports and comparative studies that give us the overall picture and crunch the global numbers.

I get it, but I thought we had already agreed those numbers and studies don't exist yet. What does exist is a paper trail of allegations, court cases, leaked internal documents, and evidence of various commissions/committees looking into the matter.

What we have so far appears to show that the organization knew, at least at a national level, about many abuse cases and not much was done about it.

I am also uninterested in bias website summaries that can twist facts to further their agenda, which is why I prefer to go straight to source. But, if you are combing through them, I would be interested if you can find on fact that I was unable to find: How many allegations or convictions were made last year of child abuse in America. Or in any one State in America? Australia? In the UK? Any published figures on this anywhere.

I was shocked to see that that simple fact is extremely hard to find on the internet. Maybe you will have more success than me. Why is that important? because then one can make a rough comparison to a given organization like my own. That is what is not being done for all the hysteria (not you) and headline grabbing "journalism" and that is what I have been seeking.


JW

Well, the numbers you seek would definitely shed some better light on the situation, but I think we all know those are not going to be easy to find nor will they really show the true picture of what's going on. Making allegations of sexual abuse is not an easy thing to do. Stats are only going to show those brave enough to come forward. This is happening, but is only the tip of the iceberg.

I think it's far more important to dig into how various organizations are handling these claims. If they are putting rules in place that effectively squash the claims from seeing the light of day, then there is a big problem that needs to be addressed.

If we want to change the discussion to another organization I'm fine with that. I'm not trying to be unduly harsh on JWs in particular, it's just that that is where major attention happens to be in the last few years.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 77 by benchwarmer]

Fair enough.

Still I think that the number of convictions of child abuse shouldn't be as hard (or near on impossible) to find as it has been, at least for me. This should in my opinion be a matter of public record, it only involves counting and compilation public records. Granted it will be the tip of the iceberg but we don't even have the size of the tip? how can a picture, even a rough one be possible?

I know there are 8 million Witnesses, about the population of Switzerland, so I thouht all I would have to do is look up how many child abuse there were in Switzerland last year. Lo and behold Switzerland doesn't publish that figure. Nor Austria, nor Austalia nor America... Anyway, I guess its no different from States counting the number of car accidents in minute detail but not compling the number of children that go missing each year, but it's very frustrating.

I don't mind speaking about Jehovah's Witnesses in particular as long as the reflections are fact not myth and I know enough the workings of JWs to be able to distinguish between the two. I have no doubt at all few organizations would be able to stand before the public scrutiny we have and am not unhappy about it because it has and will continue to drive the numbers down and help us to improve internal policy. That's a good thing.


JW

[benchwarmer]

[Replying to post 77 by benchwarmer]

Fair enough.

Still I think that the number of convictions of child abuse shouldn't be as hard (or near on impossible) to find as it has been, at least for me. This should in my opinion be a matter of public record, it only involves counting and compilation public records. Granted it will be the tip of the iceberg but we don't even have the size of the tip? how can a picture, even a rough one be possible?

Here is some info (though some seems a bit dated) from Canada:

https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/ ... anada.html

https://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/ ... 08-eng.htm

The second link probably has more of the type of numbers you are looking for (at least in part)

For the US:

https://www.acf.hhs.gov/cb/resource/chi ... tment-2014

For the UK:

https://www.nspcc.org.uk/globalassets/d ... report.pdf

My google search was "number of child abuse convictions <country>" i.e. "number of child abuse convictions uk"

You have to dig a little, but the info is there. Not exactly a fun research project though...

[Jagella]

[Replying to post 77 by JehovahsWitness]

I have no doubt at all few organizations would be able to stand before the public scrutiny we have and am not unhappy about it because it has and will continue to drive the numbers down and help us to improve internal policy. That's a good thing.

Jimmy Swaggart and his ministry also went up against public scrutiny and survived. Your organization doesn't need to be legitimate to survive allegations of wrong doing--it just needs people to support it whether it is legitimate or not.

[TSGracchus]

historia: "I'm not accusing you of saying that all clergy are scammers. I'm pointing out that it is fallacious to claim that religion itself is bad simply because you've come to practice a particular religion by way of people who may themselves have done bad things."

Religion isn't bad because religious people do bad things, religion is bad because religious people believe absurd things, and: “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.� ― Françoise-Marie Arouet, Questions sur les Miracles à M. Claparede, Professeur de Théologie à Genève, par un Proposant: Ou Extrait de Diverses Lettres de M. de Voltaire, Questions sur les Miracles à M. Claparede, Professeur de Théologie à Genève, par un Proposant: Ou Extrait de Diverses Lettres de M. de Voltaire