|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Apr 21, 2019 23:36:03 GMT -5
Some of the filler scenes seem to have been lifted from somewhere else. Despite that the message was still clear. The workers will protect kiddy B kinders.
|
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Apr 21, 2019 23:37:29 GMT -5
Those arches and the preacher were a bit off but mostly I thought it was a reasonable presentation of the church. There will of course be members who get stuck on little inaccuracies including the comment on women not cutting their hair. I think for a long time it was easier for many in the fellowship to ignore victims than acknowledge that such a thing could and did happen among God's people. I imagine there were also some who kept quiet to protect the image of the fellowship and the weaker members. Sex and by extension sexual abuse were taboo topics in the fellowship. No doubt that makes it more difficult for victims to speak up or be heard by others in meetings. The video did not touch on this, but, it was and likely is still seen as a good thing for meetings children to remain naive about the human body and sex. This puts the children at risk of abuse. As far as not being allowed to cut our hair.... for me this was right ! I was NOT ALLOWED to have my hair cut or trimmed! I had wondered if it were true for the victims but that degree of legalism didn't seem consistent with the short shorts photographed. |
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Apr 21, 2019 23:41:38 GMT -5
As far as not being allowed to cut our hair.... for me this was right ! I was NOT ALLOWED to have my hair cut or trimmed! Seeing professing women being portrayed as wearing sandals in meeting was another really cringeworthy moment for me. Some people wore open toed shoes in our mtg many years ago. I think the workers discussed it with the females but they had issues with their feet and the open toed were recommended by drs. However even 30 years back, we wore sandals to mtg but always wore hose with them. But in the last 10 years, young ladies and girls of school age wore sandals without hose or socks. Even some wore flip-flops in the hot summer. However most people going to mtgs have few places they go to they’re required to dress up, so Sunday mtg is the one place, people can break out their Sunday best and see who looks the best! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2019 0:11:55 GMT -5
Alan Kitto was given the opportunity to be interviewed by 60 minutes but declined. Big mistake, will only prolong the problem. I can't imagine that any competent lawyer would advise him to be interviewed regarding this situation. But where was the response or statement by Graham Snow, Alan's boss and the actual Head of the Truth in Australia. The twobies were all claiming that he was there to assume responsibility for dealing with this situation and "make straight the way of the lord". Correction there Openingact. Graham Snow is not the Head of Truth in Australia. He stated in a letter recently that there is no such position, it was just a figment of a person's imagination. So that sort of puts paid to that idea, it came from the man himself. Perhaps an old Army idiom might be appropriate, SNAFU. |
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Apr 22, 2019 0:17:38 GMT -5
I can't imagine that any competent lawyer would advise him to be interviewed regarding this situation. But where was the response or statement by Graham Snow, Alan's boss and the actual Head of the Truth in Australia. The twobies were all claiming that he was there to assume responsibility for dealing with this situation and "make straight the way of the lord". Correction there Openingact. Graham Snow is not the Head of Truth in Australia. He stated in a letter recently that there is no such position, it was just a figment of a person's imagination. So that sort of puts paid to that idea, it came from the man himself. Thanks for clearing that up @redback, considering we questioned it at the time ! |
|
aus1
Junior Member
Posts: 68 
|
Post by aus1 on Apr 22, 2019 0:40:50 GMT -5
All I can say after watching the 60 minutes episode is, what brave brave women.
|
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Apr 22, 2019 0:56:46 GMT -5
I can't imagine that any competent lawyer would advise him to be interviewed regarding this situation. But where was the response or statement by Graham Snow, Alan's boss and the actual Head of the Truth in Australia. The twobies were all claiming that he was there to assume responsibility for dealing with this situation and "make straight the way of the lord". Correction there Openingact. Graham Snow is not the Head of Truth in Australia. He stated in a letter recently that there is no such position, it was just a figment of a person's imagination. So that sort of puts paid to that idea, it came from the man himself. Perhaps an old Army idiom might be appropriate, SNAFU. ha, havn't heard that old one for ages. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2019 1:11:13 GMT -5
Curly as I am pure as the driven snow, I use the nice version, " Fowled Up"
|
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Apr 22, 2019 1:15:08 GMT -5
Curly as I am pure as the driven snow, I use the nice version, " Fowled Up" Very good, a spade is not a trowel. |
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Apr 22, 2019 1:35:10 GMT -5
I think this may work; www.9now.com.au/60-minutes/2019/extras/latest/april/the-truth-hurtsI am a little stuck on the inaccuracy of the how they know a certain gentleman is still attending church meetings with children present.....I personally know he is NOT!!! Such a small inaccuracy.....or a purposeful comment to condemn. All I can say is we are all victims and perpetrators....of what...thankful God knows....Rom 3:23 can therefore the whole program be treated with a little skepticism or can it be taken as whole truth? The presenter said she could confirm the offender was still attending meetings. Maybe at the time she enquiried he was. He may not be now but was apparently then. When did he stop going - likely the result of outside pressure. |
|
|
|
Post by nswelshman on Apr 22, 2019 6:44:58 GMT -5
I can't imagine that any competent lawyer would advise him to be interviewed regarding this situation. But where was the response or statement by Graham Snow, Alan's boss and the actual Head of the Truth in Australia. The twobies were all claiming that he was there to assume responsibility for dealing with this situation and "make straight the way of the lord". Correction there Openingact. Graham Snow is not the Head of Truth in Australia. He stated in a letter recently that there is no such position, it was just a figment of a person's imagination. So that sort of puts paid to that idea, it came from the man himself. Perhaps an old Army idiom might be appropriate, SNAFU. Considering he has the power to remove state head workers he's pretty much arguing semantics. One of the state head workers made it clear to me that Graham Snow was higher up in the pecking order than he was. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 22, 2019 6:46:50 GMT -5
Please stay on the topic. Thanks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2019 8:08:06 GMT -5
One of the things that came up in the program was that the unnamed convicted person was granted name suppression for 20 years. Presumably the Court of Appeal judgment gave the reason for this, as 20 years is a very long time (it possibly goes on until beyond the perpetrator's death?). Without requoting legalese language, is anyone able to state in a couple of very simple sentences what the judge's reason was.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmy80 on Apr 22, 2019 9:34:25 GMT -5
I have the deepest sympathy for the women interviewed. I see CSA is one of the most horrendous crimes - both at the time of the offending and for the life-long scars it leaves. Perpetrators should face the full weight of the law. I am horrified that the law in our country has effectively allowed one perpetrator life-long concealing of his identity.
I am an active member of "the truth". I have no doubt that such events could have been dealt with much better within the church. As has been the case with almost all forms of institutional abuse. I don't believe it is appropriate for any organisation to be their own police. The offenses are in breach of Australian law (as well as the teachings of Christ) and I would encourage any victim to report to police first, who can have an unbiased investigation and the appropriate resources to support the victims.
I would hope that any CSA conviction would legally limit any exposure to children the perpetrators of CSA would have. Personally, I do not feel I could show a "christian" attitude to the perpetrators were our paths to cross - and thankfully to date they have not. Of course the greatest harm is to the victims of CSA, but the people who were supposed to present the Gospel of Christ who commit these crimes, they betray every soul who has ever listened to them. As far as I know, the Victorian perpetrators have not been allowed in fellowship or at convention etc.
I found the 60 minutes report quite inaccurate for where the faith sits now on some of the more traditional (dare I say it inconsequential) aspects of our faith. It represents where "the truth" was some decades ago but there is definitely less enforcement of these "rules" than in the past (although that seems to vary depending on where you are). Like someone else on here I felt that Ross appeared to be enjoying his moment of fame a little too much. However, I did agree with what he said that some have had a tendency to worship the workers. Personally, I respect the ones who have earnt it, as I do any one else. However, we still individually have the responsibility to ensure we are comfortable that their message aligns with Christ.
If any victims of CSA are reading here, please know your pain is felt and love is extended to you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Apr 22, 2019 15:16:50 GMT -5
The presentation could have been better but the essential delimna a victim of pedophilia in the "truth" is faced with was nailed. I'll share it with my "good" 2x2 parents.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2019 16:27:49 GMT -5
One of the things that came up in the program was that the unnamed convicted person was granted name suppression for 20 years. Presumably the Court of Appeal judgment gave the reason for this, as 20 years is a very long time (it possibly goes on until beyond the perpetrator's death?). Without requoting legalese language, is anyone able to state in a couple of very simple sentences what the judge's reason was. Lance from the record of the Court's finding. Decision: (1) Grant leave to appeal against the decision of Williams SC DCJ on 23 January 2019 to refuse to make a non-publication order in respect of the applicant’s identity.
(2) Allow the appeal.
(3) Order pursuant to s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW):
(a) that the applicant be referred to by the pseudonym AB.
(b) that publication of any information:
(i) tending to reveal the identity of AB, a party to these proceedings, in connection with these proceedings or in connection with the evidence given in these proceedings or in connection with information about evidence given in these proceedings; or
(ii) tending to reveal the identity of AB's spouse or children in connection with these proceedings or in connection with the evidence given in these proceedings or in
connection with information about evidence given in these proceedings;
be prohibited.
(4) Order (3) shall apply:
(a) to all media including but not limited to print, radio, television, internet and social media;
(b) anywhere in the Commonwealth;
(c) until 20 years from the date of this order.
(5) Order (3) is made on the ground under s 8(1)(c) of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) that the order is necessary to protect the safety of any person, namely, AB and AB’s spouse and children. It would seem the reason for the order was to protect the safety of any person, namely, AB and AB’s spouse and children. |
|
|
|
Post by Get off of TMB on Apr 22, 2019 17:13:10 GMT -5
A man on Professing Open Air described this video as Satan persecuting the church.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2019 17:31:14 GMT -5
A man on Professing Open Air described this video as Satan persecuting the church. That was bound to happen, that is one of the main accusations that gets trotted out. Just part of a distorted thinking. We have heard that many times, that is why so many miss the message. |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 22, 2019 18:01:08 GMT -5
Has he attended Convention howitis ? No, and no fellowship meetings with children either.....this is just one instance where many people have got many things very wrong .....the truth will prevail and there will be quite a few burnt fingers. I'm quite happy with the broadcast it has shown the inaccuracies......it has brought to light a problem that is rampant in all facets of society and has also shown a glimpse of how some people really are, some of which I once believed were good honest folk.....oh how 5 minutes of a spotlight can change our view....I'm grateful. Is this common knowledge among those professing howitis? Could you please outline what all in the broadcast that you know for sure is not accurate? It would be good to know. I asked this question on another thread, but I'll repeat it here. How could a judge not sentence someone to prison after this abuse and how could he not be identified for 20 years? They made a comment about immature sexuality due to a conservative upbringing in the Truth. But what about the survivors who also had a conservative upbringing in the Truth? Their lives were ripped apart and he literally gets away with it. That's how it seems after that video. So I am genuinely interested in what the truth is here. If you don't feel comfortable answering, I understand and you don't have to. But I thought you might have a good insight into it seeing as you are still professing and know the people involved. |
|
|
|
Post by joanna on Apr 22, 2019 18:08:21 GMT -5
Get off of TMB . How would you prove his accusation that 'satan is persecuting the church' to be false?
|
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 22, 2019 18:12:08 GMT -5
Seeing professing women being portrayed as wearing sandals in meeting was another really cringeworthy moment for me. Some people wore open toed shoes in our mtg many years ago. I think the workers discussed it with the females but they had issues with their feet and the open toed were recommended by drs. However even 30 years back, we wore sandals to mtg but always wore hose with them. But in the last 10 years, young ladies and girls of school age wore sandals without hose or socks. Even some wore flip-flops in the hot summer. However most people going to mtgs have few places they go to they’re required to dress up, so Sunday mtg is the one place, people can break out their Sunday best and see who looks the best! I think it matters what kind of climate you live in. I know I wore sandals to meeting when I lived in a warmer climate but didn't when I lived in a colder one. One thing I did think was different from what I remember was sleeveless dresses or blouses in the meeting. That was taboo many year ago when I attended, so I guess that has changed. Or maybe again, it's due to the warmer climate? |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 22, 2019 18:36:28 GMT -5
For me, bottom line to take away from this 60 minutes was how Allan Kitto responded to the survivor when she told him that he needed to do something about her father or she would go to the police. To threaten her with excommunication should be what is focused on, because it speaks volumes about why kids (not just in the 2x2's) don't come forward to report CSA. They don't feel they will be believed. Anyone who has been raped or sexually abused already feels guilt about it. They second guess why it happened. Did I do something to have this happen to me is one that I asked myself after I was raped and one I heard all the time when I worked on the Distress Lines. Survivors of sexual assault blame themselves at some level, even though they know it's not true. The predator will likely have told those girls that it was their fault to some degree. They were too sexy, or they dressed like they wanted it or other lines that they use to justify to themselves the rapes in the first place. So it's important that the workers make sure that they do not make it hard for children to come forward because they are afraid of not being believed. And hopefully they've learned their lesson that threatening the survivor with excommunication is just not acceptable, ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by speak on Apr 22, 2019 18:43:35 GMT -5
I have the deepest sympathy for the women interviewed. I see CSA is one of the most horrendous crimes - both at the time of the offending and for the life-long scars it leaves. Perpetrators should face the full weight of the law. I am horrified that the law in our country has effectively allowed one perpetrator life-long concealing of his identity. I am an active member of "the truth". I have no doubt that such events could have been dealt with much better within the church. As has been the case with almost all forms of institutional abuse. I don't believe it is appropriate for any organisation to be their own police. The offenses are in breach of Australian law (as well as the teachings of Christ) and I would encourage any victim to report to police first, who can have an unbiased investigation and the appropriate resources to support the victims. I would hope that any CSA conviction would legally limit any exposure to children the perpetrators of CSA would have. Personally, I do not feel I could show a "christian" attitude to the perpetrators were our paths to cross - and thankfully to date they have not. Of course the greatest harm is to the victims of CSA, but the people who were supposed to present the Gospel of Christ who commit these crimes, they betray every soul who has ever listened to them. As far as I know, the Victorian perpetrators have not been allowed in fellowship or at convention etc. I found the 60 minutes report quite inaccurate for where the faith sits now on some of the more traditional (dare I say it inconsequential) aspects of our faith. It represents where "the truth" was some decades ago but there is definitely less enforcement of these "rules" than in the past (although that seems to vary depending on where you are). Like someone else on here I felt that Ross appeared to be enjoying his moment of fame a little too much. However, I did agree with what he said that some have had a tendency to worship the workers. Personally, I respect the ones who have earnt it, as I do any one else. However, we still individually have the responsibility to ensure we are comfortable that their message aligns with Christ. If any victims of CSA are reading here, please know your pain is felt and love is extended to you. Jimmy80 thanks for that the same resonates in my own heart. |
|
|
|
Post by pa on Apr 22, 2019 18:52:02 GMT -5
Seeing professing women being portrayed as wearing sandals in meeting was another really cringeworthy moment for me. Very common in areas I've been. |
|
|
|
Post by joanna on Apr 22, 2019 19:03:11 GMT -5
There seems to be two reactions to CSA within the 2x2 group by ex 2x2's. One reaction reveals an intolerance for CSA and a resultant disgust that the workers and others have failed to support victims and to report the perpetrators. Those reacting in this manner believe the workers and 2x2 members aware of CSA should immediately do the right thing and follow mandatory reporting laws so the abusers are stopped (hoping the courts will impose the correct responses). Additionally there is an encouragement that the victims will be empowered to speak up and will be properly supported by the 2x2 group. That honest and law-abiding action will replace the historical subterfuge and denial of the abuse. The second reaction to CSA within the 2x2 groups is from that cohort who are strongly anti-2x2. This group tends to be using 2x2 CSA as another excuse to criticise the 2x2 culture. Child sex abuse within the 2x2 group fits the motivated anti-2x2's narrative. And for this reason it can come across as if it is more about them and is a validation of their anti-stance, than it is about the victims of this abhorrent crime. The anti-2x2 can present as being satisfied or energised by this topic as they feel justified in their anti- 2x2 stance. The first reactors tend to apply a more objective approach by acknowledging that religious cultures provide a cesspool for paedophilia and the reasons for this have been identified. Therefore the more peculiar characteristics of a religious group, (and those of us on this forum are aware of the 2x2 peculiarities,)do not adequately explain the incidence of CSA within the 2x2's given CSA is also prevalent within major religious groups that do not necessarily share those peculiarities. It is not helping the victims of CSA to divert away from the evidenced CSA contributors by trying to single out tangential aspects of the 2x2 group as the cause. Just as it is unhelpful to single out religious organisations given CSA occurs within families and other non-religious facilities. A child is at potential risk of abuse within any hierarchical structure where additional negative elements exist. The following quote links to one of many research papers on CSA and i have included this to show that the failure of the 2x2 workers and other members to act in the interest of the innocent victims is tragically a common failure. It is all about saving face and children's welfare is not even respected. What sort of people are they who declare themselves to be following the alleged saviour of mankind yet are condoning the most heinous acts against the vulnerable? I believe that those who are proven to be aware of CSA and have failed to report the perpetrators should be jailed in the next cell - and if the 60 minute program contains factual information- that would include Alan Kitto. “While each church district had its idiosyncrasies,” writes the Grand Jury, “the pattern was pretty much the same. The main thing was not to help children, but to avoid ‘scandal.’”centerforinquiry.org/blog/the-privilege-of-predators/
|
|
|
|
Post by Get off of TMB on Apr 22, 2019 19:03:30 GMT -5
How would you prove his accusation that 'satan is persecuting the church' to be false?
()()
I was just stating his comments. It is very complicated.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2019 19:16:01 GMT -5
Snow, I think we would all like to know the answer to why the perpetrator escaped jail, and why now he has protection on his identity for 20 years. It seems so wrong and a real kick in the guts for the victims. They are the ones that we feel so sorry for, and the ones we should support and help. It is very hard for us lay people to understand decisions of the Court. So I guess under our system we have to accept the decision of those learned people even at times we disagree. There is an opinion around because of the campaign against the original sentencing Judge, by the media, etc, that the Appeal Judges took that into consideration and imposed the 20 year suppression order. We have to be ever so careful when we make comment about Judiciary, I found that out some years ago when brought before the Court. A hard lesson to learn.
I was impressed recently with the attitude of the Prime Minister of NZ, Jacinta Arden regarding the perpetrator of that tragic crime in NZ. She said she would never ever speak his name. And this is a good tactic, once a person is identified as a monster, there name should be thrown out of our mind, put out with the rubbish, and receive no consideration whatsoever. Our attention and concern should only be for the victims. Now I know that there are so many sincere people both within and outside the "Truth Church" that will concentrate on this. They will ensure that there is an improved system of pastoral care within the Church.
It is not good enough that these matters are discussed at secret Worker's only meetings. That clandestine treatment of it must cease. They owe it at least to laity to keep them informed as to what policy is being implemented to address the problem, in areas of prevention and support of victims. And also because it is a matter of extreme importance to the whole community, they must be transparent and make their intentions known to everybody. And unless they do this I know the sincere group of people I have mentioned will continue to campaign to make it happen. If it requires media exposure then that will happen. Let us hope that commonsense prevails, and that we work together for a good outcome without too much trauma. And ex's are not enemy of the "Truth" we don't accept the teachings, but we still love the people. That is why we bother.
|
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 22, 2019 19:24:07 GMT -5
Seeing professing women being portrayed as wearing sandals in meeting was another really cringeworthy moment for me. Very common in areas I've been. Common in my experience too--in Texas 30 years ago. |
|
