|
Post by sacerdotal on Jul 9, 2013 17:55:58 GMT -5
Yes, let them throw rocks. But its more appropriate to throw rocks within the TLC site where throwing rocks is expected, than to throw rocks on an advocacy site where they will potentially damage more survivors and damage the educational and abuse-prevention functions of WINGS. I defend the right of professing victims to come to a website focused on CSA, without being confronted by rocks hurled at their church and belief system. The church is to be blamed for failing to deal appropriately with CSA, but the church is not the cause of CSA. To suggest the church is the cause is to let the abusers off the hook. Here's a question for you Sac: Who is to blame for CSA - the church or the perpetrator? That makes you an advocate for the professing victims, and puts out a "non-professing CSA victims need not apply here" sign. You just stated Wings new bias very clearly "I defend the right of PROFESSING VICTIMS" rather than, "I defend the right of VICTIMS". Let each say whatever they want to say. EVERYONE has a different CSA experience. Why make it fit a 2x2 template? Strawman. That is your interpretation of what some victims may be doing. In the 2x2 system, the workers are looked upon as God's messengers, modern day apostles, to question them is to question God, etc., etc. Perhaps, maybe, THE culture of not questioning a worker MIGHT have something to do with how a victim was treated, not believed, etc. To ignore the 2x2 culture, and the workers role in CSA cases is idiotic. The most healthy thing that I know for a victim to do is to call any worker that abused them, and those that covered for them, jackasses of the highest sort, and salamander poo. And I think that they should shout that from the highest mountains, or the Wings site, to EMBOLDEN others to do the same against any worker that sexually abused them or covered for them. I cannot think of anything that would be more helpful for the 2x2s than for the members to lose their unnatural, unholy FEAR of the workers. To answer your question, the perpetrator is to blame for CSA. It is Wings that decided to make it about CSA within the 2x2s, so I don't see the need to only hear from one side of the 2x2 experience. Warts are a part of the 2x2 body too.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 9, 2013 17:56:46 GMT -5
And given your penchant for running off in several directions at once, what did you take "limited" to mean? Hint: the answer is in the preceding sentence. What hat -- I took 'limited' to mean as you wrote "very limited" -- And I had no reason to doubt the correctness of this, because of the explanation of Wings reasoning behind the critisizm of victims stories -- in the downplaying of the integrity of writers -- and in the fact that Wings had openly chosen to take action on this unsuitablity of victims stories, because of the 2x2 critisism of these stories being placed on Wings domain. I will restate my feelings that the continued expressions of disregard for, and the discredit shown in the open questioning of the integrity of victims feelings on the CSA that they have experienced --- makes the claim of serious interest in the issues of CSA within 2x2ism a complete farse. --- breaking the most basic principles in dealing with the concern. By removing the validity of the victims from the Wings CSA equation, basic credibility in it being a problem at all effectively vanishes. WINGS does NOT offer professional counselling services, legal services or other support services that are available in the community. It mainly functions as a point of initial contact and will assist the victim in lining up the appropriate services. In addition, there is a discussion board for victims and others. WINGS IS A WEB SITE and as such interpersonal contact between the web site authors and victims is LIMITED. As I said, the board does not and can not offer counselling and rehabilitation support. So, now please tell me where WINGS is "breaking the most basic principles in dealing with the concern"? And where do you see "open questioning of the integrity of victims" given that the WINGS board does not advise or counsel victims?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 9, 2013 18:03:06 GMT -5
Yes, let them throw rocks. But its more appropriate to throw rocks within the TLC site where throwing rocks is expected, than to throw rocks on an advocacy site where they will potentially damage more survivors and damage the educational and abuse-prevention functions of WINGS. I defend the right of professing victims to come to a website focused on CSA, without being confronted by rocks hurled at their church and belief system. The church is to be blamed for failing to deal appropriately with CSA, but the church is not the cause of CSA. To suggest the church is the cause is to let the abusers off the hook. Here's a question for you Sac: Who is to blame for CSA - the church or the perpetrator?The answer could be both the church and the perpetrator could be to blame. The perpetrator is definitely to blame because the perpetrator caused the abuse. How the church handles this offense and the perpetrator determines whether the church is to blame. If the church supports the victims, turns the perpetrator over to the authorities, and spends time and discussion in determining if such future events can be prevented, then I'd say the church is doing its best. Churches can't be expected to be perfect, but Christian churches usually want to protect the weak and vulnerable in society and in their church body. On the other hand, if the church stifles the victims, knowingly places predators among children, and pretends that they're above caring for the victims, then...yeah, the church is to blame. You see this differently? Its not a WINGS objective to destroy the church, but to make it accountable and do the right thing. Some on TMB suggest that is an impossible goal. They're entitled to their opinion of course. If the content WINGS publishes gives the impression that its just another anti-2x2 website then its mission is compromised. IMO the perpetrators are 100% to blame for child sexual abuse. They should be made accountable. The church is not to blame for CSA, but it is 100% responsible to, as you say... " support the victims, turn the perpetrators over to the authorities, and spend time and discussion in determining if such future events can be prevented." If you blame the church for CSA, then you're letting the perpetrators off the hook - at least partially. Quizzer, you and I have been in this church all our lives. Does that give us an excuse to sexually abuse children?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 9, 2013 18:23:55 GMT -5
That makes you an advocate for the professing victims, and puts out a "non-professing CSA victims need to apply here" sign. You just stated Wings new bias very clearly "I defend the right of PROFESSING VICTIMS" rather than, "I defend the right of VICTIMS" to each say whatever they want to say. EVERYONE has a different CSA experience. Why make it fit a 2x2 template? I defend the right of professing victims because people like you do not. I also defend the right of non-professing victims to come to a WINGS website that is non-confrontational, educational, and an advocacy site working towards helping the church to do the right thing. Why do you think either category has to be left out?
|
|
|
Post by holdmyhand on Jul 9, 2013 18:43:27 GMT -5
Who is to blame for CSA - the church or the perpetrator?
Both they work hand in glove (not inferring it is intended that way, just how it is)
The perpetrator committed the crime,
The church has cultivated an environment of passive spiritual abuse that makes it easy for perpetrators to gain trust and authority, It hasn’t dealt appropriately when confronted with evidence, moving perpetrators around to escape accountability and has treated victims badly, (could use stronger language here )
It hasn’t warned families when known perpetrators are in contact with their children
I don’t believe most perpetrators go into the work with the intention of molesting kids, they are caught up in an unnatural lifestyle, living in the spotlight and held on a pedestal, in a way they also become victims of a system that doesn’t offer them professional help when they need it
As Ram and Bob have been saying, we need to look into spiritual abuse to get to the root of the problem
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jul 9, 2013 19:00:06 GMT -5
I defend the right of professing victims because people like you do not. I am a professing person and an elder, so I find your statement perplexing. I also find your statement perplexing because I thought Wings was a CSA site- why are you defending the professing point of view? Why not let each victim tell their story without anyone censoring it? If they want to call the workers hell spawn, let them call the workers hell spawn. And if they want to call the workers angels, let them call the workers angels. It is their story to tell, not ours. Let them tell it as they see fit.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jul 9, 2013 19:04:54 GMT -5
Why do you think either category has to be left out? Your question is loaded with a false implication and passing of the buck. I am not advocating anything be left out. Uh, that would your position- leave out the victim stories that hurt your feelings.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jul 9, 2013 19:15:26 GMT -5
Yes, let them throw rocks. But its more appropriate to throw rocks within the TLC site where throwing rocks is expected, than to throw rocks on an advocacy site where they will potentially damage more survivors and damage the educational and abuse-prevention functions of WINGS. I defend the right of professing victims to come to a website focused on CSA, without being confronted by rocks hurled at their church and belief system. I see. You aren't worried about the victims damaging themselves with the rocks, you are worried about the 2x2 system being damaged. You don't mind if the victims state their mind about anything else but the 2x2 system or the workers. If they want to talk about their dysfunctional family, that is OK. If they want to talk about a dysfunctional religious system, from their, the victims viewpoint then. . . no, absolutely not. Got it. You are right, someone has to defend the professing victims against those mean ole ex-victims and their "hateful, anti 2x2 rhetoric". Of course, who is going to protect them against you and your viewpoint that they are just being "hateful" and "anti 2x2"? Oh, that is right, you are directing those victims to the TLC. Got it. Good to know.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 9, 2013 19:42:56 GMT -5
Yes, let them throw rocks. But its more appropriate to throw rocks within the TLC site where throwing rocks is expected, than to throw rocks on an advocacy site where they will potentially damage more survivors and damage the educational and abuse-prevention functions of WINGS. I defend the right of professing victims to come to a website focused on CSA, without being confronted by rocks hurled at their church and belief system. The church is to be blamed for failing to deal appropriately with CSA, but the church is not the cause of CSA. To suggest the church is the cause is to let the abusers off the hook. Here's a question for you Sac: Who is to blame for CSA - the church or the perpetrator?The answer could be both the church and the perpetrator could be to blame. The perpetrator is definitely to blame because the perpetrator caused the abuse. How the church handles this offense and the perpetrator determines whether the church is to blame. If the church supports the victims, turns the perpetrator over to the authorities, and spends time and discussion in determining if such future events can be prevented, then I'd say the church is doing its best. Churches can't be expected to be perfect, but Christian churches usually want to protect the weak and vulnerable in society and in their church body. On the other hand, if the church stifles the victims, knowingly places predators among children, and pretends that they're above caring for the victims, then...yeah, the church is to blame. You see this differently? I agree, it is both. The people who move predators around are guilty too. The law has said so in Frandle's case and I hope there will be more so that they get that message loud and clear. I am afraid the secrecy could become even more prevalent but I really hope I'm wrong. Here is a quote from a news clipping about a Thompson MB case with a young girl. If this is how a majority of the friends feel about CSA WINGS has their work cut out for them. I n an interview outside court, Waddell said he victimized other children but he was only charged with the Thompson, Man., case.
There was no mention of other child victims during the court hearing.
"There's been other victims but that's been looked after," Waddell said.
"We looked after the others before," he said.
"Everybody forgave me. The ones that I did, the parents forgave me. We believe in repentance and forgiveness."
Waddell said none of the parents wanted him to go to the police.
"They didn't want to go to the law of the land. They wanted to leave it in God's hands," he said.Read more: wingsbts.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=csainthenews&action=display&thread=95#ixzz2Yb7gcz4z
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 9, 2013 20:15:41 GMT -5
So Jack is an elder in the 2x2 church and a school teacher.
Jack sexually abused his niece who has no connection with the 2x2 church.
Jack also sexually abused the child of a professing friend of the family.
Jack also sexually abused a child at the school where he works.
What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to Jack?
What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to Jack's non-professing family?
What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the 2x2 church?
What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the school where Jack works?
|
|
|
Post by holdmyhand on Jul 9, 2013 21:18:32 GMT -5
So Jack is an elder in the 2x2 church and a school teacher. Jack sexually abused his niece. Jack also sexually abused a child at the school where he works. What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to Jack? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the 2x2 church? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the school where Jack works? FIXIT you have identified JACK, CHURCH, and SCHOOL have all failed her, you could have also added the girls families They ALL FAILED , without knowing more details we can't apportion percentage, even then it is only a guestimate and I don't see the point unless for awarding damages Pointing the finger at a person or group doesn't lessen the responsibility of the others to do something. If only the school had been more diligent they may have caught it 100%. I think we need to focus on what we can do, correct the failing in our backyard
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jul 9, 2013 22:26:08 GMT -5
So Jack is an elder in the 2x2 church and a school teacher. Jack sexually abused his niece who has no connection with the 2x2 church. Jack also sexually abused the child of a professing friend of the family. Jack also sexually abused a child at the school where he works. What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to Jack? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to Jack's non-professing family? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the 2x2 church? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the school where Jack works? Who cares? What does this have to do with the VICTIM account? If the victim was told to keep quiet about it, by a worker, then that becomes part of HER story. If the victim then REALLY, REALLY, REALLY hates the 2x2 system, who can blame her? What makes anyone on the Wings board qualified to denigrate her story as just "bashing" (a pejorative term, by the way) or "anti" anything. Maybe, from her viewpoint, she is pro honesty and doesn't in any shape or fashion want to help the workers and friends maintain a facade of perfection when she has the scars on her psyche that maintain otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jul 9, 2013 22:37:55 GMT -5
So Jack is an elder in the 2x2 church and a school teacher. Jack sexually abused his niece who has no connection with the 2x2 church. Jack also sexually abused the child of a professing friend of the family. Jack also sexually abused a child at the school where he works. What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to Jack? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to Jack's non-professing family? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the 2x2 church? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the school where Jack works? Do you want the victims to figure out all of the possible scenarios and percentages and psychoanalyze everything before they submit a story to Wings? Or do you simply want them to tell their story as THEY SEE IT with no thought by ANYONE as to how it makes the 2x2 fellowship look? Why does that even enter into the equation? Why does anyone care? It doesn't make it fact- it is an opinion of a victim- and very well may be fact- and I think that that is what scares the friends and workers so much- not that the victim is falsifying the account- but because they aren't.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 9, 2013 22:47:38 GMT -5
So Jack is an elder in the 2x2 church and a school teacher. Jack sexually abused his niece. Jack also sexually abused a child at the school where he works. What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to Jack? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the 2x2 church? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the school where Jack works? FIXIT you have identified JACK, CHURCH, and SCHOOL have all failed her, you could have also added the girls families They ALL FAILED , without knowing more details we can't apportion percentage, even then it is only a guestimate and I don't see the point unless for awarding damages Pointing the finger at a person or group doesn't lessen the responsibility of the others to do something. If only the school had been more diligent they may have caught it 100%. I think we need to focus on what we can do, correct the failing in our backyard So do we need a website to bash Jack, the church, the school, as well as the families involved? Wouldn't it be better to focus on the CSA itself? No doubt the church, the school, as well as the families involved all have a part to play in supporting the victims and working towards eliminating any further abuse. But why bash them? Its counter-productive and not the sensible way forward.
|
|
|
Post by holdmyhand on Jul 10, 2013 0:25:36 GMT -5
FIXIT you have identified JACK, CHURCH, and SCHOOL have all failed her, you could have also added the girls families They ALL FAILED , without knowing more details we can't apportion percentage, even then it is only a guestimate and I don't see the point unless for awarding damages Pointing the finger at a person or group doesn't lessen the responsibility of the others to do something. If only the school had been more diligent they may have caught it 100%. I think we need to focus on what we can do, correct the failing in our backyard So do we need a website to bash Jack, the church, the school, as well as the families involved? Wouldn't it be better to focus on the CSA itself? No doubt the church, the school, as well as the families involved all have a part to play in supporting the victims and working towards eliminating any further abuse. But why bash them? Its counter-productive and not the sensible way forward. BASHING ? ? ? ? Sorry FIXIT you have lost me I see wounded hurt people expressing their feelings The pain of deceit, dishonesty, rejection, the humiliation of being used and discarded as worthless The disbelief, realizing they were wronged when still children yet no one cares or tries to understand them, Expressing how they feel when they see their abuser held up as a pillar of righteousness, in a fellowship that just wants them to shut up and suffer in silence. Learning what is preached and practiced doesn't always line up and never has, understand this fellowship is not perfect and that's ok, because only Jesus is. Anger needs expressing and releasing I think BTS board is a good place for them to come to vent (hate using that word here) discuss and be encouraged as they work through the injustice confusion and pain they suffer, it is a place they can go where others, both inside and outside the fellowship understand the unique aspects of 2x2 church hopefully listen and help
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 10, 2013 0:44:16 GMT -5
So Jack is an elder in the 2x2 church and a school teacher. Jack sexually abused his niece who has no connection with the 2x2 church. Jack also sexually abused the child of a professing friend of the family. Jack also sexually abused a child at the school where he works. What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to Jack? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to Jack's non-professing family? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the 2x2 church? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the school where Jack works? Who cares? What does this have to do with the VICTIM account? If the victim was told to keep quiet about it, by a worker, then that becomes part of HER story. If the victim then REALLY, REALLY, REALLY hates the 2x2 system, who can blame her? What makes anyone on the Wings board qualified to denigrate her story as just "bashing" (a pejorative term, by the way) or "anti" anything. Maybe, from her viewpoint, she is pro honesty and doesn't in any shape or fashion want to help the workers and friends maintain a facade of perfection when she has the scars on her psyche that maintain otherwise. 1. CSA is the focus of WINGS. It must provide a safe place for victims, professing or not. Its role is not to tear down anyone's religious belief system. 2. True, if the victim was told to keep quiet about it, by a worker, then that becomes part of HER story. 3. If the victim then REALLY, REALLY, REALLY hates the 2x2 system, who can blame her? I'm pretty sure no one involved with WINGS would blame her. 4. You asked what makes anyone on the Wings board qualified to denigrate her story as just "bashing" (a pejorative term, by the way) or "anti" anything. If WINGS published everything submitted to it then you might as well have a wiki or something similar. Why would WINGS have objectives if no attempt is made to keep website content within those objectives? Even TMB monitors the content submitted to it. 5. Its not a WINGS objective to maintain a facade of perfection. Try reading the website, and see for yourself. wingsfortruth.info/about/
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 10, 2013 1:12:19 GMT -5
I see wounded hurt people expressing their feelings. So do I.The pain of deceit, dishonesty, rejection, the humiliation of being used and discarded as worthless The disbelief, realizing they were wronged when still children yet no one cares or tries to understand them, Yes, its tragic.Expressing how they feel when they see their abuser held up as a pillar of righteousness, in a fellowship that just wants them to shut up and suffer in silence. Learning what is preached and practiced doesn't always line up and never has, understand this fellowship is not perfect and that's ok, because only Jesus is. Yes, it needs to change. It disgusts me to see workers and overseers putting sexual abusers on a pedestal, but I'm not sure what action can be taken until the victims are ready to disclose it. Its frustrating, but trying to force action would be adding further abuse.
This is a reason why WINGS needs to be 2x2-neutral - there are professing victims who are not ready to have their belief system shattered.Anger needs expressing and releasing True.I think BTS board is a good place for them to come to vent (hate using that word here) discuss and be encouraged as they work through the injustice confusion and pain they suffer, it is a place they can go where others, both inside and outside the fellowship understand the unique aspects of 2x2 church hopefully listen and help True.It seems that you agree with WINGS objectives: Our objective is to provide information, support and guidance on every aspect of CSA and to support victims of CSA. Our ultimate hope is to encourage change within the fellowship in order to protect others from the devastation that occurs through CSA, especially when its impact is trivialized or ignored.wingsfortruth.info/about/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2013 3:05:19 GMT -5
Fixit .. Have wondered before if you are part of the Wings management body .. Some have identified themselves as part of it -- I haven't had this confirmed by you except for, as it seems to me, your fanatical support.
|
|
|
Post by holdmyhand on Jul 10, 2013 3:14:47 GMT -5
It seems that you agree with WINGS objectives: Our objective is to provide information, support and guidance on every aspect of CSA and to support victims of CSA. Our ultimate hope is to encourage change within the fellowship in order to protect others from the devastation that occurs through CSA, especially when its impact is trivialized or ignored.wingsfortruth.info/about/I agree with the objectives But when the word BASHING is used to encourage victims/survivors to modify what they might post, it sends up a red flag So long as the v/s are the first priority and they can post on the BTS board without posts being edited (except for libel reasons ) I have no objection,
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jul 10, 2013 7:38:17 GMT -5
It seems that you agree with WINGS objectives: Our objective is to provide information, support and guidance on every aspect of CSA and to support victims of CSA. Our ultimate hope is to encourage change within the fellowship in order to protect others from the devastation that occurs through CSA, especially when its impact is trivialized or ignored.wingsfortruth.info/about/I agree with the objectives But when the word BASHING is used to encourage victims/survivors to modify what they might post, it sends up a red flag So long as the v/s are the first priority and they can post on the BTS board without posts being edited (except for libel reasons ) I have no objection, Neither do I have an objection if ALL victim stories are published- no matter their feelings of the 2x2s- as I understand it- a few are missing from the BTS site that used to be on Wings.
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Jul 10, 2013 7:54:55 GMT -5
So Jack is an elder in the 2x2 church and a school teacher. Jack sexually abused his niece who has no connection with the 2x2 church. Jack also sexually abused the child of a professing friend of the family. Jack also sexually abused a child at the school where he works. What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to Jack? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to Jack's non-professing family? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the 2x2 church? What percentage of responsibility should be apportioned to the school where Jack works? Do you want the victims to figure out all of the possible scenarios and percentages and psychoanalyze everything before they submit a story to Wings? Or do you simply want them to tell their story as THEY SEE IT with no thought by ANYONE as to how it makes the 2x2 fellowship look? Why does that even enter into the equation? Why does anyone care? It doesn't make it fact- it is an opinion of a victim- and very well may be fact- and I think that that is what scares the friends and workers so much- not that the victim is falsifying the account- but because they aren't. I don't have any problem with any victim telling their own story,even every ugly detail.I do have a problem with leading the victim into their story. In my mind it is no longer a biography,but an autobiography.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2013 8:31:58 GMT -5
Right. Wings does not needs to be in the business of judging the motives of victims. I'll say it again- if the victims want to throw rocks at the 2x2 house, then let them throw rocks. Watch both clips back to back to see what I mean. I don't think that it is fair to characterize harsh criticism of the 2x2s in a victim's letter as "advocacy". I think advocacy is what Wings is doing by becoming a judge of what is proper and not for a victim to say. It is condescending, really. Yes, let them throw rocks. But its more appropriate to throw rocks within the TLC site where throwing rocks is expected, than to throw rocks on an advocacy site where they will potentially damage more survivors and damage the educational and abuse-prevention functions of WINGS. I defend the right of professing victims to come to a website focused on CSA, without being confronted by rocks hurled at their church and belief system. The church is to be blamed for failing to deal appropriately with CSA, but the church is not the cause of CSA. To suggest the church is the cause is to let the abusers off the hook. Here's a question for you Sac:
Who is to blame for CSA - the church or the perpetrator?
It is true that individuals commit CSA. However, do not underestimate the role that environment plays in presenting the offenders with the opportunities to commit their crimes. The worker environment is virtually unique in its culture and presents a unique environment of trust and opportunity. Keep in mind, virtually all workers, prior to going into the work, were upright, law abiding citizens, with the best motives and intentions as they entered the ministry. Their hitherto standard of character was considered exemplary. What made them commit their crimes? Keep very much in mind that workers, particularly young ones, are likely to be victims, even more than members of the lay fellowship, to spiritual abuse, something they don't understand, are encouraged to submit to and accept, putting a brave face on things. Some crack, others get out. Eventually a release is necessary. Whilst the workers who commit csa or other forms of abuse are responsible for their wrongdoings, I do not need to stretch my imagination very far to find mitigating circumstances connected with the environment they live in. Some counselors are identifying a link between spiritual abuse and csa with regards to the victims. If this is the case, there may well be a link with the perpetrators also. As I keep telling you Fixit, prepare a broader platform to work from. It is a complex matter, often with no real black and white answers.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 10, 2013 12:46:27 GMT -5
Every time I see someone write the word 'victim' I see a dis-empowered person. Would not the word 'survivor' be a better choice when talking about those who have experienced CSA? It's a subtle difference, but it empowers the person they are today instead of keeping them back in the 'moment' of their experience. They are truly survivors who are working courageously at dealing with their past.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 10, 2013 16:33:38 GMT -5
It seems that you agree with WINGS objectives: Our objective is to provide information, support and guidance on every aspect of CSA and to support victims of CSA. Our ultimate hope is to encourage change within the fellowship in order to protect others from the devastation that occurs through CSA, especially when its impact is trivialized or ignored.wingsfortruth.info/about/I agree with the objectives But when the word BASHING is used to encourage victims/survivors to modify what they might post, it sends up a red flag So long as the v/s are the first priority and they can post on the BTS board without posts being edited (except for libel reasons ) I have no objection, Here's some questions we need to ask ourselves: 1. Is there a substantial number of friends and workers who need to be educated around CSA? 2. Can friends and workers be educated around CSA without confronting them with everything else that is allegedly wrong with their church and belief system? 3. Is CSA important enough as an issue to deal with it separately, or should it be mixed in with everything else in the great big barrel of grievances against the church? 4. Will children continue to be sexually abused because most of those who could make a difference see the WINGS websites as church-bashing sites and stay away from them?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2013 17:35:04 GMT -5
I agree with the objectives But when the word BASHING is used to encourage victims/survivors to modify what they might post, it sends up a red flag So long as the v/s are the first priority and they can post on the BTS board without posts being edited (except for libel reasons ) I have no objection, Here's some questions we need to ask ourselves: 1. Is there a substantial number of friends and workers who need to be educated around CSA? The workers have no excuse for not being able to answer this by now, if indeed this is the case.
2. Can friends and workers be educated around CSA without confronting them with everything else that is allegedly wrong with their church and belief system? If the other "wrong" things may relate in some way to the occurrences of CSA, then these should be included. Also, why hide anything (of significance) which may be wrong?
3. Is CSA important enough as an issue to deal with it separately, or should it be mixed in with everything else in the great big barrel of grievances against the church? Whilst there is nothing wrong with addressing it separately, it should not be addressed on an "only" basis in respect to other forms of abuse. Often there is overlap and awareness of one may have benefits for the others. Addressing spiritual abuse may well be a major step forward in dealing with all forms of abuse?4. Will children continue to be sexually abused because most of those who could make a difference see the WINGS websites as church-bashing sites and stay away from them? The church needs to be inward looking and aware of the reality of its failings. Much that is considered to be "church bashing," anti 2x2 etc., may indeed be the natural reaction from things such as spiritual abuse, etc. A new understanding needs to be taught. Spiritual abuse may lead to CSA and other forms of abuse. That is one major reason why it needs to be brought to notice and acted upon. Also the serious damage that it can cause to others needs to be highlighted.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 10, 2013 17:52:58 GMT -5
If WINGS attempted to address all the concerns that people have about the church it would have little impact.
CSA is way too important as an issue to lump it in with everything else.
The eradication of CSA in the church is achievable.
The eradication of the church (which some exes would like to see) is not going to happen any time soon.
If you make WINGS a "confront everything in the church that you don't like" website you'll lose most of the people who could make a difference with CSA.
Do you care about eradicating CSA in the church?
Or are you more interested in making a big show of how evil and wrong the 2x2 church is?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 10, 2013 17:59:21 GMT -5
Whilst the workers who commit csa or other forms of abuse are responsible for their wrongdoings, I do not need to stretch my imagination very far to find mitigating circumstances connected with the environment they live in. Some counselors are identifying a link between spiritual abuse and csa with regards to the victims. If this is the case, there may well be a link with the perpetrators also. Clearly not all CSA is the result of spiritual abuse. Do you think if you eliminated spiritual abuse you would eliminate CSA? What percentage of CSA do you think is spiritual abuse-related?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 10, 2013 18:06:32 GMT -5
I get the impression some folks here would like WINGS to be the "confront everything in the church that you don't like" website that deals with spiritual abuse, history of the fellowship, why the church is an evil cult, religious doctrine, workers are evil, etc.
If that was to happen, there'd be a need for a website that is focused on CSA in the fellowship. A site that is not going to confront friends and workers with all sorts of other issues that serves to alienate them and make them back off.
|
|