|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 26, 2010 16:58:32 GMT -5
They need to have approachable people around them. If we raise children in a culture that forbids criticism of workers, friends and relatives we are fostering the ideal conditions for abuse to thrive. Little children know its an uphill battle getting adults to believe them. Frankly, there's been enough said on this thread already to deter a timid little abused child from reporting CSA. Sigh, yes, I really have to wonder if you have children. One I know for sure - they will not be judging the approchability of an adult across an internet board. Takes an "adult" or "grownup" to do that doesn't it.  |
|
|
|
Post by JO on Jul 26, 2010 17:06:04 GMT -5
They need to have approachable people around them. If we raise children in a culture that forbids criticism of workers, friends and relatives we are fostering the ideal conditions for abuse to thrive. Little children know its an uphill battle getting adults to believe them. Frankly, there's been enough said on this thread already to deter a timid little abused child from reporting CSA. Sigh, yes, I really have to wonder if you have children. One I know for sure - they will not be judging the approchability of an adult across an internet board. Takes an "adult" or "grownup" to do that doesn't it. Sorry - I don't understand what me having children has to do with this discussion. As an adult I detect an apologist's attitude coming through on this board. I'm pleased that our church is finally starting to acknowledge that workers are human and its alright to expose them when they commit horrific crimes. Are you? |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 26, 2010 17:19:50 GMT -5
So you don't have children - and you know exactly what I was getting at. Good!  I and most I know have always viewed workers as human, glad for those who didn't but do now. I'm pretty sure most workers themselves would be very uncomfortable with people viewing them as super human and infailable. |
|
|
|
Post by juliette on Jul 26, 2010 17:29:46 GMT -5
Really? How much more? Can I get you an aspirin? ps do those references in the bible about how to handle other people's failings also make you sick? I really don't think the verses you quote are relevant in this situation. The goal here is not to handle someone's failings, it's to alert families to a potential danger. If children were exposed to someone who has molested, don't you think it's wise for parents to know so they can talk to their children? This kind of letter is pretty standard now days when someone in a position of trust with children is discovered as a molester. I know I would expect as much from any group that I was associated with. It's amazing how you assume negative motives to others. I can't help but thinking that's a bit of projection on your part. Do you really think anyone involved in this situation gets any joy this? It's a tragedy for all involved. And if someone is looking to cast negative aspirations to your group, I think they could just step aside and let you do your work. You do a great job of making the point that any evil-minded ex would want to make. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2010 17:45:41 GMT -5
The cartoon was drawn for another sentiment, which I thought this new thread was about, ie the same ol, same ol' worker basher ones.
But no, what has happened here is good.
If there is a sexual perpetrator, and that person is not removed then it hurts the doctrine, the attitude of people towards the workers, other workers, and if possible, does more damage to the victim.
|
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jul 26, 2010 17:47:55 GMT -5
Mark 9:42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. Let's put ourselves in the place of a timid little abused child. Could we bring ourselves to report worker sexual abuse to Bert if he was the elder? Or Jesse? Or Linford? Children usually don't 'report' sexual abuse but rather 'disclose', usually in a relaxed situation with someone they trust. Quite often this will not be the parents, and the disclosure can be rather obscure. Teachers today receive training in picking up on these hints, it's almost as if the child is testing the waters to see if they will be believed. If a child does not disclose to their parents it would be highly unlikely that they would do so to the 'usual suspects' above. |
|
|
|
Post by juliette on Jul 26, 2010 17:49:59 GMT -5
The cartoon was drawn for another sentiment, which I thought this new thread was about, ie the same ol, same ol' worker basher ones. But no, what has happened here is good. If there is a sexual perpetrator, and that person is not removed then it hurts the doctrine, the attitude of people towards the workers, other workers, and if possible, does more damage to the victim. Sorry for getting a little heated. I appreciate your post. I'm back to my exalting ways (vs. smiting). |
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Jul 26, 2010 18:48:50 GMT -5
The cartoon was drawn for another sentiment, which I thought this new thread was about, ie the same ol, same ol' worker basher ones. But no, what has happened here is good. If there is a sexual perpetrator, and that person is not removed then it hurts the doctrine, the attitude of people towards the workers, other workers, and if possible, does more damage to the victim. Soooo... How often do you think my posts would be considered 'worker bashing'? An even better question is, how often do I START a thread that would be considered 'worker bashing'? I've been accused of being too friendly with the workers, and even described as not being a real ex and all sorts of fun stuff like that. Read some interesting comments about me on a different board concerning my 'ex' status by other exes. And here you are from the other side thinking I am bashing the workers.......  Guess that should be a good indication to me that I am right out here in the middle of this here bridge I have been building........  Scott  |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 26, 2010 18:53:29 GMT -5
The cartoon was drawn for another sentiment, which I thought this new thread was about, ie the same ol, same ol' worker basher ones. But no, what has happened here is good. If there is a sexual perpetrator, and that person is not removed then it hurts the doctrine, the attitude of people towards the workers, other workers, and if possible, does more damage to the victim. Soooo... How often do you think my posts would be considered 'worker bashing'? An even better question is, how often do I START a thread that would be considered 'worker bashing'? I've been accused of being too friendly with the workers, and even described as not being a real ex and all sorts of fun stuff like that. Read some interesting comments about me on a different board concerning my 'ex' status by other exes. And here you are from the other side thinking I am bashing the workers....... Guess that should be a good indication to me that I am right out here in the middle of this here bridge I have been building........ Scott For you, Scott! www.youtube.com/watch?v=XU1enqTD3Bo&feature=related |
|
|
|
Post by JO on Jul 26, 2010 18:54:59 GMT -5
Mark 9:42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. Let's put ourselves in the place of a timid little abused child. Could we bring ourselves to report worker sexual abuse to Bert if he was the elder? Or Jesse? Or Linford? Children usually don't 'report' sexual abuse but rather 'disclose', usually in a relaxed situation with someone they trust. Quite often this will not be the parents, and the disclosure can be rather obscure. Teachers today receive training in picking up on these hints, it's almost as if the child is testing the waters to see if they will be believed. If a child does not disclose to their parents it would be highly unlikely that they would do so to the 'usual suspects' above. My point is exactly that: providing our children with "a relaxed situation with someone they trust." Of course parents have the major role, but the whole church has a role in fostering a culture of love and trust and accountability. The refusal to contemplate "God's true servants" doing evil things has made it too easy for child sexual abusers to operate. A timid little child victim won't report a worker for CSA when parents put workers on a pedastool. |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 26, 2010 19:09:12 GMT -5
Children usually don't 'report' sexual abuse but rather 'disclose', usually in a relaxed situation with someone they trust. Quite often this will not be the parents, and the disclosure can be rather obscure. Teachers today receive training in picking up on these hints, it's almost as if the child is testing the waters to see if they will be believed. If a child does not disclose to their parents it would be highly unlikely that they would do so to the 'usual suspects' above. It would be just as unlikely that they would trust either you or JO. If you disagree I'd like to know your reason and logic - how do you and JO know if a child would be more or less likely to trust Bert, Lin, me, you, or JO? I'm talking about how all of us interact with children in real life ... care to share? |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 26, 2010 19:14:06 GMT -5
JO, you mentioned me by name, Fred you seconded, I want to know the exact problems I have that make me untrustworthy in the eyes of the children I'm around, what about me makes them turn away?
|
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 26, 2010 19:17:58 GMT -5
Actually, if Bert didn't talk to the children, but used his cartoons and let them tell him what to use and say....the children might incidentally spill the beans to him....but he'd have to not say a word!
|
|
|
|
Post by JO on Jul 26, 2010 19:26:06 GMT -5
JO, you mentioned me by name, Fred you seconded, I want to know the exact problems I have that make me untrustworthy in the eyes of the children I'm around, what about me makes them turn away? Jesse, I'm not accusing you of anything. I simply asked the question. If you contribute towards a culture of accountability for all who claim authority in our church I applaud you for that. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2010 19:28:39 GMT -5
I was not raised to hate TV nor to treat the workers as anything but people. So you had workers who were pro-TV or at least not anti-TV? Sounds like a different religion than the one I was raised in. |
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Jul 26, 2010 19:33:53 GMT -5
I agree with Rational. I don't have a religion. I do have a relationship with God.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2010 19:42:45 GMT -5
JO, you mentioned me by name, Fred you seconded, I want to know the exact problems I have that make me untrustworthy in the eyes of the children I'm around, what about me makes them turn away? Jesse, I'm not accusing you of anything. I simply asked the question. If you contribute towards a culture of accountability for all who claim authority in our church I applaud you for that. 10 years ago, there would have been almost no one that I know of in the meetings who would have been safe for my daughter to disclose worker CSA other than very few family. Sadly, family who are exes would have been safer to disclose to because of the F&W culture. Frankly, 15 years ago I wouldn't have been a very effective advocate for my own child because of the culture. I would have been at least somewhat skeptical that he/she wasn't telling the story right because "workers don't do that sort of thing". I shudder when I think of it today. That's where the problem exists in the fellowship. Parents unwittingly betray their own children because they are blinded to the truth by their delusions about certain aspects of the fellowship and the ministry group in particular. We need to blow these delusions to bits. While meetings, conventions and visiting workers are largely safe places and people, there is by no means any guarantee of that for any child. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2010 19:47:05 GMT -5
I agree with Rational. I don't have a religion. I do have a relationship with God. I grew up in a religion (anti-TV) and didn't have any choice in that. I appreciate that my parents didn't swallow all the koolaid even though they swallowed a fair bit of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jul 26, 2010 20:12:29 GMT -5
Scott, why would a person say this: We have no agenda or motive beyond seeking the safety of our children from sexual abuse, and healing for past victims. and in the next paragraph, change topics to talk about religion like this: I would recommend two separate letters, one about the serious issue of CSA, and the other to speculate about God and religion. |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jul 26, 2010 20:31:02 GMT -5
Scott, why would a person say this: We have no agenda or motive beyond seeking the safety of our children from sexual abuse, and healing for past victims. and in the next paragraph, change topics to talk about religion like this: I would recommend two separate letters, one about the serious issue of CSA, and the other to speculate about God and religion. I don't see it as speculation about God's blessing or not blessing....all the hot spots the workers have been put in in the last couple of years attest to the lack of God's blessing, IMO and I have to wonder if some of them are thinking the same thing and that has what has spurred some of them into acting differently then the past status quo....I give some of them credit for finally being willing to come to the table, at the least! That is a move in the right direction or so it seems to me! |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 26, 2010 20:35:31 GMT -5
This hypothetical situation was never meant to be a recommended course of action. It was intended to help us all to consider our own approachability. Little children won't drive themselves to the nearest police station and report abuse. (You say this hypothetical situation was never meant to be a recommended course of action. - and yet you continue to build on it. As Alice said “Curiouser and curiouser!”) That is the job of their parents. Like their parents? Not if we teach our children that they can approach their parents with anything. We can teach our children the difference between crime and religion (and yes, I do realize thee difference is subtle). Then the parents have not done their job well. And your solution is to have approachable religious leaders that the crime can be reported to so if there is a way for it to be covered up it can be? |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 26, 2010 20:39:15 GMT -5
If you contribute towards a culture of accountability for all who claim authority in our church I applaud you for that. No, not just for those who are alleged to "claim authority", I believe all should be held responsible and accountable for their own individual actions. When you think about it criticising others is a form of claiming authority over them isn't it. |
|
|
|
Post by JO on Jul 26, 2010 20:54:12 GMT -5
Rational, you’re misunderstanding me. You're not even close. I’m not suggesting children report CSA to religious leaders. I’m suggesting that everyone in our church should contribute towards a culture of accountability. If the child perceives a church culture of “God’s way (i.e. friends and workers) is perfect” then it makes it very difficult to report CSA even to responsible loving parents. If you teach your children they can approach you with anything, while raising them in a church culture that insists God himself is controlling it, then they will probably keep it to themselves. This hypothetical situation was never meant to be a recommended course of action. It was intended to help us all to consider our own approachability. Little children won't drive themselves to the nearest police station and report abuse. (You say this hypothetical situation was never meant to be a recommended course of action. - and yet you continue to build on it. As Alice said “Curiouser and curiouser!”) That is the job of their parents. Like their parents? Not if we teach our children that they can approach their parents with anything. We can teach our children the difference between crime and religion (and yes, I do realize thee difference is subtle). Then the parents have not done their job well. And your solution is to have approachable religious leaders that the crime can be reported to so if there is a way for it to be covered up it can be? |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 26, 2010 20:57:04 GMT -5
Frankly, 15 years ago I wouldn't have been a very effective advocate for my own child because of the culture. I would have been at least somewhat skeptical that he/she wasn't telling the story right because "workers don't do that sort of thing". I wasn't that way 15 years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by JO on Jul 26, 2010 20:58:38 GMT -5
If you contribute towards a culture of accountability for all who claim authority in our church I applaud you for that. No, not just for those who are alleged to "claim authority", I believe all should be held responsible and accountable for their own individual actions. When you think about it criticising others is a form of claiming authority over them isn't it. When you think about it, criticising others is what we want CSA victims to feel free to do. |
|
|
|
Post by JO on Jul 26, 2010 21:00:07 GMT -5
Frankly, 15 years ago I wouldn't have been a very effective advocate for my own child because of the culture. I would have been at least somewhat skeptical that he/she wasn't telling the story right because "workers don't do that sort of thing". I wasn't that way 15 years ago. Jesse, even today you seem sceptical and resentful when CSA is exposed. |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 26, 2010 21:07:51 GMT -5
If you teach your children they can approach you with anything, while raising them in a church culture that insists God himself is controlling it, then they will probably keep it to themselves. JO I was reading Matt 5 the other day and ran across this; Meekness toward God is that disposition of spirit in which we accept His dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting. In the OT, the meek are those wholly relying on God rather than their own strength to defend against injustice. Thus, meekness toward evil people means knowing God is permitting the injuries they inflict, that He is using them to purify His elect, and that He will deliver His elect in His time (Isa 41:17, Luk 18:1-8). Gentleness or meekness is the opposite to self-assertiveness and self-interest. It stems from trust in God's goodness and control over the situation. The gentle person is not occupied with self at all. This is a work of the Holy Spirit, not of the human will (Gal 5:23). -> Source Ahab in Moby D i c k was consumed with stamping out injustice and evil symbolized in the white whale - and it killed him in the end. The code of the sea was not to stamp out evil, it was to help the Rachel look for her lost children. |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 26, 2010 21:10:35 GMT -5
No, not just for those who are alleged to "claim authority", I believe all should be held responsible and accountable for their own individual actions. When you think about it criticising others is a form of claiming authority over them isn't it. When you think about it, criticising others is what we want CSA victims to feel free to do. I'd like CSA victims to report their assailants, not criticise them. |
|
