Originally posted by robbie carrobie There is also the matter of corroboration. I knew one man who was not a witness whose step daughter falsely accused him of abuse over a family row about money.
Can't this be left to the law enforcement authorities and to specialists that they can call on?
Originally posted by robbie carrobie The downside of mandatory reporting is that perpetrators may be less likely to come forward if they know that as soon as they do it will be reported. There is also the matter of corroboration. I knew one man who was not a witness whose step daughter falsely accused him of abuse over a family row about money.
How many perpetrators of sexual abuse have come forward of their own free will?
Originally posted by Proper Knob How many perpetrators of sexual abuse have come forward of their own free will?
robbie blanked this question out when I asked it on last year's thread - and well he might seeing as not knowing the answer ~ which he doesn't ~ pulls the carpet from under the notion that letting sex abuse remain unreported results in less sex abuse.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie The downside of mandatory reporting is that perpetrators may be less likely to come forward if they know that as soon as they do it will be reported.
Does your organization [1] foster an atmosphere in which pedophiles can come forward or "repent" safe in the knowledge that their crimes won't be reported, or does your organization [2] foster an atmosphere in which children who are victims of sex crimes can come forward safe in the knowledge that the adults around them will report their abusers to the authorities? It can't really be both. So which is it?
Originally posted by robbie carrobie Thankyou for demonstrating what an irrational, ill-informed, ignorant and habitually critical bigot you evidently purport to be.[/b]
Originally posted by divegeester I support your right to "worship" how and who you choose.
I abhor what your religious organisation can do to people, I criticise it's dangerous and ant-social teachings and doctrines and I find you personally to be the best example of what cultish indoctrination can do to a person.
The poor chumps are under the cosh to bring in a new convert every month.
Originally posted by FMF In the UK and the US, I'd no doubt be bullied for who I am ~ just as I am here at RHP. By contrast, in France, they put their intellectuals on prime time TV.
Your right FMF.
Some people cant deal with straight talkers.(you know who you are and
its not just spooky)
Originally posted by robbie carrobie You do realise that there are laws to protect people from those who hide what they are in order to dupe and gain the trust of others.[/b]
Originally posted by robbie carrobie ok could you be more specific?
Your evasive answers lead me to surmise that the Wikipedia article is completely factual and that you are too sheepish to admit it in front of your friends here on the General Forum. Do the JW elders approve of dishonesty?
Originally posted by HandyAndy Your evasive answers lead me to surmise that the Wikipedia article is completely factual and that you are too sheepish to admit it in front of your friends here on the General Forum. Do the JW elders approve of dishonesty?
"Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah? this that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the greatness of his strength? I that speak in righteousness, mighty to save."
12 Feb '16 13:50
Memo
Back to Top