|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on May 9, 2014 14:37:28 GMT -5
It will be interesting to see which male workers suddenly find themselves preaching in countries which do not have an extradition treaty with Australia.
|
|
|
|
Post by gecko45 on May 10, 2014 15:02:00 GMT -5
It will be interesting to see which male workers suddenly find themselves preaching in countries which do not have an extradition treaty with Australia. Would doubt that the overseers would be so foolish as to allow any workers with even a hint of CSA in their past to remain in the ministry, in Australia or any country. But some of the past decisions made by the overseers would indicate that their arrogance knows no bounds. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2014 17:05:28 GMT -5
It will be interesting to see which male workers suddenly find themselves preaching in countries which do not have an extradition treaty with Australia. Would doubt that the overseers would be so foolish as to allow any workers with even a hint of CSA in their past to remain in the ministry, in Australia or any country. But some of the past decisions made by the overseers would indicate that their arrogance knows no bounds. There are suspects in the work in Australia right now. Remember Steve Schultz getting dismissed from the work for reporting suspicions? There are others of concern in Australia but no smoking gun. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 13, 2014 9:13:19 GMT -5
Look up WEB----Open letter to people in the 2x2 way by reuel leach. or---ruel leach letter. Other letters pertaiing to this and testimonies re same pop up now and then. That guy needs a daily valium regimen. A short course of clozapine might also be in order. |
|
jscc1
Junior Member
Posts: 175
|
Post by jscc1 on May 15, 2014 4:28:02 GMT -5
Rational,you are a creep. I have been on anti depressants for years,WHY? because the pain of CSA rape and molesting by worker"s" have left me feeling so empty, unclean and ashamed.The years before it could be openly spoken of is like prison/trapped in the stench created by worker"s". Praise the Lord for a loving caring Pastoral team at our local church. They have never once said those cruel words of elders and a cold preacher,"You'll just have to get over it",or,just "Get over it, just put it behind you". Other victims have had to suffer same or just as compassionless answers to their mention of crimes perpetrated against them by either sister,brother or both workers. So go back to your creepy sect,better still seek Gods purpose for serving Him through the balance of your life. www.friendships.org/Scriptures.html .Start here instruction manual used by millions of christians worldwide. Just written scriptures? |
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 15, 2014 9:04:26 GMT -5
Rational,you are a creep. Not sure how I have offended you. I was responding to Gene's thoughts and added my own regarding a document we had both read.I am sorry to hear this but I still am unsure how my mentioning the possibility that an atypical antipsychotic medication like clozapine, a drug considered by some to be the drug of last resort, reflects on you.Child abuse is a terrible crime and hopefully moving forward there will be better prevention put in place. It sounds like you have found a group that you can trust and with time perhaps they can help you deal with the feelings you have regarding the trauma. Again, I know absolutly nothing regarding your situation other than what you have posted here.Over time the Catholic church, the F&W, and perhaps even the group you are now attending have said this to victims rather than accuse their own.I think the goal is to make some changes regarding this. Given this statement I have a feeling you may not know who I am. I have not been a part of the F&W for over 40 years. And the chances of my seeking god's purpose for anything is nil. I can see absolutely no purpose in serving god for any part of my life. And the fact that I do not believe there is a god would make it just that much more difficult. But, stepping back, I am assuming this trauma occurred some time ago or you would be reporting it to the authorities and having the criminals arrested. Failing that, Do you think there is anything anyone can do that would help you move beyond the point where you are? Assuming you had a magic wand - what do you see would be a solution? Or is there no solution? |
|
jscc1
Junior Member
Posts: 175
|
Post by jscc1 on May 15, 2014 17:09:51 GMT -5
Family breakups,mental traumas (breakdowms),illusive behaviours,all over many countries "suicides". You would have read the Ian Parker tragic life,or comments on suicides of Henderson children? Why mention RCCs or possible same,as in a non unbiblical demanded celibate ministry I have found strength and solace in? As for yourself sorry you are unable to feel no need for God, that is another board topic open for debate,this one is about destroying the lives of little children,families,teens and faiths.
|
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on May 15, 2014 17:23:01 GMT -5
But some of the past decisions made by the overseers would indicate that their arrogance knows no bounds. Unfortunately, this is all too true. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 16, 2014 5:44:22 GMT -5
Family breakups,mental traumas (breakdowms),illusive behaviours,all over many countries "suicides". You would have read the Ian Parker tragic life,or comments on suicides of Henderson children? But even after reading about it was there any indication of why the suicides occurred?Not 100% certain of how this sentence should be parsed but the reason for naming other organizations is to make the point that this is not a problem with any one religion but a criminal problem that reaches into all corners of society despite your characterization of it being a problem found only in the F&W. People abuse children. People kill themselves. People kill others. The organizations to which they belong is rarely the determining factor. You simply have made one organization a convenient scape goat. And, if I am reading what you posted correctly, are not happy that I would imply that the religious organization of which you are currently a part could have the identical problems.Oh, no need to feel sorry(I guessed you meant you were sorry I was unable to feel a need for god). I do not depend on a paranormal being to help me function and I do not blame one when things do not go well - I am not sure what there is to debate. However, it is a valid point for this topic to state that when children are abused, leaving the solution up to god and thinking that the criminal will somehow repent and things will all get better is wrong. If any omnipotent omniscient being actually cared about the abuse of children it wouldn't happen. |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2014 17:28:18 GMT -5
FYI BishopAccountability.org maintains a library in Waltham, MA, and a large online archive of documents, reports, and newspaper articles documenting the sexual abuse of children by persons employed by religious institutions, and the mismanagement by religious leaders of abuse allegations. Their collection of newspaper articles covers sexual abuse in all religions and denominations worldwide.
I have rejoined lately after the FFRF had an ad in many newspapers that countered the Hobby Lobby ad.
|
|
jscc1
Junior Member
Posts: 175
|
Post by jscc1 on May 19, 2014 2:51:04 GMT -5
THE BEAM IN YOUR OWN EYES, YOU ARE NOT THE OTHERS? GET OFF YOUR BUTTS AND CLEAN UP YOUR OWN SECTS CRIMES AGAINST LITTLE CHILDREN FIRST.DEMAND OF CELIBACY IS NOT BIBLICAL?
|
|
jscc1
Junior Member
Posts: 175
|
Post by jscc1 on May 19, 2014 3:31:43 GMT -5
WHY? Do 2x2s try and throw up other failures? Before their "own crimes and lies"? EG: csa/no name,preacher only ministry,CSA,Exclusevism?
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 19, 2014 9:27:44 GMT -5
THE BEAM IN YOUR OWN EYES, YOU ARE NOT THE OTHERS? GET OFF YOUR BUTTS AND CLEAN UP YOUR OWN SECTS CRIMES AGAINST LITTLE CHILDREN FIRST.DEMAND OF CELIBACY IS NOT BIBLICAL? WHY? Do 2x2s try and throw up other failures? Before their "own crimes and lies"? EG: csa/no name,preacher only ministry,CSA,Exclusevism? It is difficult to grasp the full meaning of these two posts. The liberal use of question marks to terminate phrases that do not, in context, appear to be questions, makes it hard to know if you are looking for answers or just venting. Perhaps rewriting them to make your point clearly would be of benefit. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2014 11:50:15 GMT -5
The lack of tolerance towards CSA victims on TMB by one or two posters is disturbing. Let's show these people some love and understanding. Even if you love the meetings and ministry (work), you should still have sympathy towards those wronged by the system.
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 19, 2014 14:04:17 GMT -5
The lack of tolerance towards CSA victims on TMB by one or two posters is disturbing. Let's show these people some love and understanding. Even if you love the meetings and ministry (work), you should still have sympathy towards those wronged by the system. For an alternative look at child sexual abuse and how it is viewed: “The Trauma Myth”: The child betrayed.Another view point. |
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on May 19, 2014 14:45:38 GMT -5
Ummm. I don't have a problem with leaving this as another one of those "unanswered questions" in my life. (The type of questions that make good traveling companions.) I do know for myself, when a classmate in Grade 2 was being sexually abused by the town weirdo, I did have some feelings of (almost) envy - because she was receiving attention. My parents were good parents, pretty mature individuals, but if there was something that I lacked in my upbringing - it was attention. My parents were busy, and I had lots of siblings. This, in itself, though, is one of the things that screws people up later in life when they are trying to assimilate it all - is that the feelings are not always all bad. Susan Clancy makes the point (very strongly) that "Harmfulness is NOT the same as wrongfulness." For the stage I am at in MY life, the only concern is WRONGFULNESS. This should never ever happen to a child. And I hope to God, NEVER on my watch. This is OUR responsibility as adults, no longer vulnerable to predators. And this responsibility should never be obfuscated by any prognostications about the harm to a child. THIS SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN TO A CHILD. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on May 19, 2014 15:38:17 GMT -5
The following quote is well said. How can we give the rape end of the spectrum the emphasis it deserves without trivialising the other end of the spectrum that can still have serious psychological and sexual implications for the person's future?
The following is something that needs to change:
|
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 19, 2014 17:02:28 GMT -5
The lack of tolerance towards CSA victims on TMB by one or two posters is disturbing. Let's show these people some love and understanding. Even if you love the meetings and ministry (work), you should still have sympathy towards those wronged by the system. For an alternative look at child sexual abuse and how it is viewed: “The Trauma Myth”: The child betrayed.Another view point.Very interesting article. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2014 8:33:37 GMT -5
Very interesting article. Susan Clancy has the support of the Raelians. Great endorsement. That probably stems from her earlier research in which she declares that people who are abducted by aliens are not crazy. Raelians agree with Clancy on her non-traumatic view of child sex and Rael states that "people must realize that underage sexual experience doesn’t necessarily harm children and traumatize them for life. What’s more, some children actually benefit from such experience in their sexual development – even if we don’t want to hear about it!”Since she claims that 95% of sexual experiences forced on children are not traumatic, perhaps next she will advocate legalization as long as there is no physical pain and there is at least one consenting adult? That seems to be the direction the Raelians are going. I wonder if it is just coincidental that her article shows up on a site that offers equally informative articles like "I had my First Orgasm and my Husband Doesn't Even Know It!" |
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 20, 2014 16:27:03 GMT -5
Very interesting article. Susan Clancy has the support of the Raelians. Great endorsement. That probably stems from her earlier research in which she declares that people who are abducted by aliens are not crazy. Raelians agree with Clancy on her non-traumatic view of child sex and Rael states that "people must realize that underage sexual experience doesn’t necessarily harm children and traumatize them for life. What’s more, some children actually benefit from such experience in their sexual development – even if we don’t want to hear about it!”Since she claims that 95% of sexual experiences forced on children are not traumatic, perhaps next she will advocate legalization as long as there is no physical pain and there is at least one consenting adult? That seems to be the direction the Raelians are going. I wonder if it is just coincidental that her article shows up on a site that offers equally informative articles like "I had my First Orgasm and my Husband Doesn't Even Know It!" Well if the Raelians said it it must be true lol. I had a lot more to say about the article when I wrote the 'interesting article' then I erased it all. I can see why she might have run into some opposition with this view. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 20, 2014 17:53:31 GMT -5
Very interesting article. Susan Clancy has the support of the Raelians. Great endorsement. You can not always choose what group will endorse you. I think this type of comment could be considered poisoning the well.There is an article regarding her research into claims of alien abduction in the Harvard University Gazette.. Or perhaps a review of Abducted: How People Come to Believe They Were Kidnapped by Aliens in the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal.The discussion was regarding the writings of Susan Clancy. The question is, does Clancy agree with the Raelians? What did Clancy write that led you to this conclusion? From an interview Clancy did with Salon:Salon: It’s a very fine line between what you’re saying and saying that children aren’t hurt by sexual abuse.Clancy: I will never say that. I could not be more clear. This is an atrocious, disgusting crime. People have a tendency to assume I’m saying it’s not a big deal or it’s the child’s fault. Most people don’t want to think too hard or thoroughly about these things.Salon: One could argue that your claims could encourage child abusers — or convince them that what they’re doing isn’t wrong. How do you respond to that?Clancy: Forcefully! As I hope to have made clear in the book, sexual abuse is never OK. No matter what the circumstances are, or how it impacts the victims, sexual abuse is an atrocious, despicable crime. Just because it rarely physically or psychologically damages the child does not mean it is OK. Harmfulness is not the same thing as wrongfulness. And why is it wrong? Because children are incapable of consent.
Children do not understand the meaning or significance of sexual behavior. Adults know this, and thus they are taking advantage of innocent children — using their knowledge to manipulate children into providing sexual pleasure. Sick.Again, the references were regarding Clancy, not the Raelians. It also shows up in the New York Times. Coincidentally, next an informative article titled Exercise 'Snacks' to Control Blood Sugar.It was also reviewed in The Globe and Mail. Coincidentally, next an informative article titled Want sleek, strong legs? Try these three easy yoga moves .A detailed essay of the book for people who want more in depth reading. Coincidentally, not next to an informative article.I do not see any credible criticism of the methodology of Clancy's research or conclusions. Some have launched personal attacks of her life. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2014 21:40:12 GMT -5
Susan Clancy has the support of the Raelians. Great endorsement. You can not always choose what group will endorse you. I think this type of comment could be considered poisoning the well. I didn't pick the article on the Raelians, you did. You introduced the Raelians into the discussion. Are you dismissing their views out of hand? [/quote] Where did you get the idea that I concluded that about Clancy? I just asked the question at that point. She has never stated that it should be legal, not yet anyway. You left out the whole quote. It was the Raelians whom I stated appeared to be going in that direction. Since you introduced the Raelians in support of Clancy, I figured you must have researched them as credible supporters of Clancy's as I know you usually research things like this quite thoroughly. If not, what was your purpose in presenting the views of Rael? Any research that claims that 95% of sexual encounters between children and adults are non-traumatic are irresponsible. Yes, I realize that she states physical trauma only but then she states that it "rarely" damages children psychologically. So, no harm, no foul. She states the outright that there is no harm. She is ready to accept legalization of adult/child sex on the basis of no harm except for her statement that it is "wrong"........why is it wrong? Probably because it is legally wrong as the law states that a child is not capable of consent. Do I think she believes that? Not for a moment. There are good grounds here to ask the question if she is headed in the same direction as the Raelians who believe that adult/child sex can be beneficial to the child. First, no harm. Next beneficial. Next legalization. Again, you presented the Raelians in support of Clancy so that is part of the discussion. What is so credible about the Raelians' support of Clancy? We tend to not see criticism of things we agree with and what we do see, dismiss them out of hand. Her theory is widely controversial and broadly criticized. A few seconds of research uncovers it. I am surprised that any credible analysts even bothered to say anything at all. "Concerns with Clancy’s basic argument have been voiced by many, including trauma researchers Marylene Cloitre and Kathy Steele (Steele is a former president of the International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation). According to Cloitre, Clancy adopts a simplistic view on the concept of trauma, defining it far too narrowly, as necessarily violent and fear-inducing. In Cloitre’s view, trauma is much more nuanced than Clancy allows, with the word trauma itself stemming from the Greek word (also trauma) meaning injury or wound, and is an idea that “includes the notion that the creation of an injury does not necessarily have to hurt at the time, that the individual does not necessarily have to be aware of it as it occurs, and that individuals heal at different rates (quickly/slowly) and to different degrees.”The basic idea that child sexual assault is not harmful to children is one of the most despicable and idiotic ideas of the 21st century. If you don't understand the outrage, or understand why her primary support comes from Raelians, it may be useful to check into it a little further: talk to some victims of child sexual abuse for starters. Now, how about those Raelians? Why are you presenting their views as credible sources on this subject? I am going to let you have the last word on the Raelians and Susan Clancy. I won't devote another minute to either of them. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 21, 2014 10:22:54 GMT -5
This is OUR responsibility as adults, no longer vulnerable to predators. And this responsibility should never be obfuscated by any prognostications about the harm to a child. THIS SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN TO A CHILD. This should never happen to anyone. You are living in a dream world if you think that adults are not vulnerable to predators. I think one of the points was that the very systems/people that are currently in place to help past victims might be doing more harm than good. There is, for example, a whole industry built up to recover repressed memories. People have been jailed on the basis of 'recovered' memories. Memories which were planted and modified by the person 'recovering' the memories. There is little evidence that memories are repressed. Children in war torn countries remember the scenes vividly, the people involved in school killings recall all the details, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 21, 2014 20:42:32 GMT -5
You can not always choose what group will endorse you. I think this type of comment could be considered poisoning the well. I didn't pick the article on the Raelians, you did. As I clearly indicated in the link, it was a different point of view. The post was regarding the review of Clancy's book. Again, I posted the link from Salon and Raelians as reviews of Clancy's book. It does not indicate that I agree with everything posted in Salon or by the Raelions. Where did you get the idea that I concluded that about Clancy? I just asked the question at that point.[/quote] I probably got the idea from your statement: Since she claims that 95% of sexual experiences forced on children are not traumatic, perhaps next she will advocate legalization as long as there is no physical pain and there is at least one consenting adult?Not withstanding the question mark at the end, it is a declarative statement. OK Well, let's look at the whole quote and see if it supports your claim: Since she claims that 95% of sexual experiences forced on children are not traumatic, perhaps next she will advocate legalization as long as there is no physical pain and there is at least one consenting adult? That seems to be the direction the Raelians are going.
Yes, you said that the Raelians seemed to be going in the same direction as you speculated that Clancy was moving in. I didn't introduce them to be in support of Clancy. It was for an alternative point of view.For an alternative point of view from the one presented by Salon. Some people like to see different points of views even if it challenges their own beliefs. As has been clearly pointed out in the book, the use of trauma was narrowly defined by the author.Again, you are stating that Clancy is ready to accept legalization of adult/child sex. Can you support that claim?And you supplied the answer.An excellent example of the fallacy of the slippery slope. You can repeat it as many times as you wish but I presented reviews of Clancy's book. Oh, no doubt it is controversial. And there were many that disagreed with it. But there are few that were able to discount the research.The disagreement here is with the definition of trauma that is being used. I don't think anyone is saying that child abuse is not harmful to children. First - do you have anything at all to support your claim that "...her primary support comes from Raelians"? I thought it was funded by Harvard University. Second - one of the implications is that the people who are trying to help the victim actually are doing the opposite.. You can't paint all victims with the same brush. And there - you have said it again. Still not true. Then perhaps the discussion can refocus on Clancy without your continuing attempts to make the discussion about the Raelions. |
|
|
|
Post by Bad ger M on May 22, 2014 17:41:31 GMT -5
This thread seems to have got way off the track of its original intent.
CC's next Court Case is set for 9.30 am 29th May 2014 (next Thursday) at the Latrobe Valley Magistrates Court Case ID D12645169
|
|
|
|
Post by magpie on May 24, 2014 17:58:21 GMT -5
Bad ger M, CALLED EVADING THE TRUTH (REALITY).THANKS FOR UPDATE.ANY MENTION AS TO HOW MUCH THE 2x2 SUPPORTERS WILL RAKE OUT FOR THE PERPETRATORS LEGALS? OR WILL THEY BE TAKING THE HAT AROUND FOR THE DAMAGED VICTIMS? PERHAPS THERE WILL BE A CALL FOR PRAYER FOR THE VICTIMS TO SEE REAL JUSTICE,THIS TIME.DONATIONS NOW ARE NOT TO FURTHER GODS KINGDOM BUT TO PROTECT BUTTS AND THE SEXUAL CRIMES HITTING THE HEADLINES OF WORLD MEDIA.
|
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 25, 2014 10:54:15 GMT -5
Bad ger M, CALLED EVADING THE TRUTH (REALITY).THANKS FOR UPDATE.ANY MENTION AS TO HOW MUCH THE 2x2 SUPPORTERS WILL RAKE OUT FOR THE PERPETRATORS LEGALS? OR WILL THEY BE TAKING THE HAT AROUND FOR THE DAMAGED VICTIMS? PERHAPS THERE WILL BE A CALL FOR PRAYER FOR THE VICTIMS TO SEE REAL JUSTICE,THIS TIME.DONATIONS NOW ARE NOT TO FURTHER GODS KINGDOM BUT TO PROTECT BUTTS AND THE SEXUAL CRIMES HITTING THE HEADLINES OF WORLD MEDIA. Not likely. They only seem to care about protecting the workers and don't even really acknowledge the survivors of the abuse. That is really sad imo. |
|
|
|
Post by magpie on May 25, 2014 17:12:16 GMT -5
INTERESTING TO SEE THE FRIDAY MEDIA ARTICLES,TO MANY NATIONAL MEDIA OUTLETS TO TRY AND BUY A MILDER ARTICLE THIS TIME? NOW JUST ONE MORE,JUST ONE,OF THE OTHER 12 ERNIE BARRY'S VICTIMS TO SIGN THEIR STATEMENT AND CHRIS WILL HAVE A PLAYMATE TO KEEP HIM COMPANY.
|
|
