This is an invitation for you to become of Jehovah's Witnesses. I'll answer any questions you have

>In 2015, it was disclosed that the Australia Branch of Jehovah's Witnesses had records of 1,006 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse, relating to more than 1,800 victims since 1950, none of which were reported to police by the group

>In 2016 a UK judge upheld a ruling against the Jehovah's Witnesses for failing to protect a victim of child sexual abuse, and the supreme court rejected an attempt by the Watch Tower Society to block a Charity Commission inquiry into how the organisation's charity handles allegations of abuse. This was the culmination of two years of legal proceedings in five different courts and tribunals. The commission's attorney said "WTBTS has at every stage relentlessly challenged the legal basis and scope of the Charity Commission's inquiry"

>An abuser who is judged repentant by a committee of elders is given a 'public reproof', wherein it is announced to the congregation that the named individual "has been reproved",

Yes that was nefligence on the part of the congregation of Alameda

Thankfully, they learned from their mistake

However I'm not sure why the Watchtower Society has to pay for a crime they dodn't commit. The Watchtower Society is a piblishing company, it is not aware of what happens in every single congregation in the country

Why isn't the rapist the one who pays?

The congregations are decentralised to a large extent in terms of how they handle wrongdoing.
They have procedures to follow, but the branch and headquarters aren't getting involved in everything by any stretch of the imagination.

Failings in this regard thus are the fault of individuals or bodies of elders in these congregations.

It is important to keep this in mind when considering these accusations about harboring child molesters. Why would a religion so strongly dedicated with keeping itself “morally clean” by excommunicating rapist, murderers, thieves, and the like, then turn around and “protect” pedophiles? Furthermore, the men who decide to excommunicate sinners are not some aloof bishop or deacon who lives many miles away, as may exist in Churches of Christendom, but are in fact the local men who oversee the local congregation. These men charged with keeping the congregation morally clean are nearly always local men, who probably have families of their own, men who will certainly know the perpetrator personally. They have their own children to care for and consider. Why would they knowingly and happily keep a pedophile in their midst, hiding his acts from the Police, and exposing his own children to danger?

The truth of the matter is that Jehovah’s Witnesses, like most people in your community, will view child molestation with the same abhorrence as most human beings. There is no question that child abuse is as disgusting to Jehovah’s Witnesses as it is to most anyone. Their own religion teaches that fornicators, including child molesters, who do not repent will be destroyed forever by God and shall “not inherit God’s Kingdom”.

These elders went against the policy. The policy states that someone with a history of child abuse cannot have a responsibilities in the congregation

Still don't understand why it's the Watchtower Society that has to pay for their mistake

>An elder from the Australian branch office said that when not required by law to report abuse allegations to authorities, the church left the decision to report to authorities with the victim and his or her family.[59] The commission found that the Watch Tower Society legal department routinely provided incorrect information to elders based on an incorrect understanding about what constitutes a legal obligation to report crimes in Australia.[60][61] In March 2017, the Royal Commission reported that since its initial 2015 investigation, the Watch Tower Society reported 15 of the 17 allegations it received from members to authorities, indicating that the remaining two were not reported at the request of adult survivors of historical abuse.

Why doesn't Australia make it mandatory by law to report cades of child abuse?

They don't hide it, the victim is free to report

Moreover, they reported cases as individuals, not as a group

Because the victim already has

If elders want to peotect pedophiles, then why do pedophiles get disfellowshipped each year from the congregation?

January 1, 1986 Watchtower: "Shocking as it is, even some who have been prominent in Jehovah’s organization have succumbed to immoral practices, including homosexuality, wife swapping, and CHILD MOLESTING. It is to be noted, also, that during the past year, 36,638 individuals had to be disfellowshipped from the Christian congregation, the greater number of them for practicing immorality. Jehovah’s organization must be kept clean!(1 Corinthians 5:9-13)"

>"Has been removed"

So what is the issue?

>they let the victim report it
>let

Would you rather she not report? I don't understand

Which is why making a huge fuss about how it was a single beam instead of to crossed beams is a bit hypocritical. Seeing as how the entirety of Christendom has referred to it as a cross. It just comes across as an attempt to stand out from among all Christians, like every other minute difference.

Why do churches make it a big deal then?

So if you saw a child being raped you wouldn't call the police? because thats what the elders did, they saw and did nothing.

Yes I would if she cannot

>because thats what the elders did, they saw and did nothing.

That's not what it says. It says she told the elders, the elders sent her home and she could report her rapist to the police

So what is the issue?

If so, the elders should have done something earlier, yes

That's why it's important to follow the policies properly

If we are talking about child sexual abuse, there has been individual cases of persons who failed to do the right thing, but certainly not as a rule or as a policy.

• If the victims or their families are Witnesses, they have the right to report the abuse. They do not need the elder’s permission to do so.

• If individual Witnesses learn about a case of abuse, if the laws of the country mandate anyone who knows to report, they are expected to obey the law. If it is not mandatory, it is their decision; neither their government nor their religion force them to do so.

• If the abuse comes to the knowledge of the elders, if reporting is mandatory in their country, they will. Unless the victim or their family have done so before.

• If the abuse comes to the knowledge of the elders and reporting is not mandatory in their country, they will report it anyway, when there is reason to conclude that the victim or other children are in danger.
(Let’s imagine, for example, that in my country, an 18 year old boy touching his 16 year old girlfriend’s breast is considered as child abuse, but reporting is not mandatory. Let’s imagine that his girlfriend does not want to report. In that case, it might be concluded that no child is in danger.)

You can check a detailed explanation of our procedures here, especially from page 12 on:

https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20221215014916/https://www.iicsa.org.uk/key-documents/20943/view/CJW000052.pdf

I'm sorry that your father was abusive. You should speak up when something is not handled correctly. The congregations are decentralised to a large extent in terms of how they handle wrongdoing. They have procedures to follow, but the branch and headquarters aren't getting involved in everything by any stretch of the imagination.
Failings in this regard thus are the fault of individuals or bodies of elders in these congregations.

Using the suffering of children as a weapon to defame a religion you don’t like speaks volumes of your moral turpitude.

Recently, a court in Germany has considered that accusations like this are slander against Jehovah’s Witnesses:

https://bitterwinter.org/fecris-sentenced-in-germany-for-defaming-jehovahs-witnesses/

The policy of Jehovah's Witnesses clearly states:
"In addition to making a report to the branch office, the elders may be required by law to report even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations to the authorities. If so, we expect the elders to comply. Additionally, the victim may wish to report the matter to the authorities, and it is his or her absolute right to do so."

Did you notice the phrase above: 'even UNCORROBORATED or UNSUBSTANTIATED allegations'?

It is anyone's absolute right to report even uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations to the authorities.

If we are talking about child sexual abuse, there has been individual cases of persons who failed to do the right thing, but certainly not as a rule or as a policy.

Tell me this, why should I believe the Watchtower's Policies when they are so often ignored?

If they want me to help I would

Both of the words used by Bible writers to describe the instrument of Jesus’ death suggest one piece of wood, not two.

The Greek word stau·rosʹ, according to Crucifixion in Antiquity, means “a pole in the broadest sense. It is not the equivalent of a ‘cross.’

”The word xyʹlon, used at Acts 5:30, is “simply an upright pale or stake to which the Romans nailed those who were thus said to be crucified.” (A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament, 11th Edition, by Ethelbert W. Bullinger, pages 818-819.)

>An elder from the Australian branch office said that when not required by law to report abuse allegations to authorities, the church left the decision to report to authorities with the victim and his or her family.[59] The commission found that the Watch Tower Society legal department routinely provided incorrect information to elders based on an incorrect understanding about what constitutes a legal obligation to report crimes in Australia.[60][61] In March 2017, the Royal Commission reported that since its initial 2015 investigation, the Watch Tower Society reported 15 of the 17 allegations it received from members to authorities, indicating that the remaining two were not reported at the request of adult survivors of historical abuse.

>The BBC reported allegations of a cover-up in July 2002, in an episode of Panorama entitled "Suffer the Little Children".[35] The report revealed that the headquarters of Jehovah's Witnesses, the Watch Tower Society, requires all congregations to submit details of child abuse allegations and maintains an internal database on all cases of child abuse reported to them.[9] It described one case where a child came forward to the elders of her congregation to report sexual abuse by her father, but was sent home, despite their having known for three years that her father was an abuser. When the girl eventually went to the police, her father was convicted and sentenced to five years in prison.

The elders knew it and let it happen, they did nothing, because they wanted to protect a pedophile.

So if you saw a child being raped you wouldn't call the police? because thats what the elders did, they saw and did nothing.