I have now met a real life creationist.

[blastula]

I find it bizarre that you find this convincing. I think you've fetishized God to such an extent it's preventing you from thinking straight about it. Move this scenario to any other domain and I think it'll be easier to understand what claim you are making.

Imagine a guy having wronged you somehow and you're about to punch him. To protect himself he says that his big brother is about to come out at any moment and he will kick your ass if you touch him. You both wait. Nothing happens. His excuses start. This is how you sound.

Even if we assume God really exists and is omnipotent. Any action for God has zero cost to him. Being passive aggressive, like you are describing him to be, is just such a dick move. He is clearly an idiot not worthy of worship. This would be true even if God existed.

If you punish those you're supposed to lead by hiding from them when they doubt your existence, you're doing everything wrong. In leadership communication is critical. You've got to communicate with those you are leading clearly. This seems apparently to be above God's limited skill set = an idiot. He makes Trump look competent. Why are you worshiping this utter fool of a deity? That's assuming God really exists. Not even if God would make himself known to me is that enough to get me to worship him. He's got to earn it first. So far it's not going so well for God in that department.

Jehovah will not force anyone to believe in or worship him.
You have not answered the question: Is the world innocent of these charges?
Well? If you are guilty of all charges, what do you rightly deserve?
What would justice demand?
And.........
What claim are YOU making? Aren't you implying that the sins, crimes, murders, wars, etc, do not matter? That he should allow you to continue your oppression of the weak and do nothing about it? Do you realize that the cries of those billions of oppressed are heard by him? He has every right to take action, whether you like it or not.
You tell your children that they are the descendants/products of animals, so you should not be surprised when they behave like animals.
This attitude fills your children with consternation and they come up with questions like these:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUQEyHejtFI

How do you answer kids with questions like these?
There is a price to pay for everything we do. You do not seem to be willing to pay the price.
You would be singing a different tune if you were among the oppressed and not among the oppressors.

And how about this?:
"He sent his own special representative to talk to you. His son was convincing enough to warrant his removal - so you murdered him.
What do you want him to say to you now?"

Yes, please think of the children.

How Jehovah’s Witnesses Leaders Hide Child Abuse Secrets At All Costs | KPBS

 

[wilson]

If a cop interrupted a man raping a woman, I would expect the cop to intervene. Not shrug his shoulders and say, "Sorry, lady, you only have yourself to blame. I certainly can't interfere with his free will, can I? How can he be expected to learn to make good choices if I jumped in every time he made someone else suffer? But I promise to ride with you in the ambulance and hold your hand as we rush you to a hospital. You can give me credit later for being there in your time of need."

We interfere with other people's free will all the time.

Who interferes with yours?

Why is it so impossible for God?

You know what else doesn't interfere with people's free will? A non-existent deity.

There are so many things you fail to see.
Jehovah says that mankind does not have the ability to rule himself in the right way.
“. . .It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his (own) step.” (Jeremiah 10:23)

People like you say: "YES, WE CAN!"
So, he allows you to try and do things your own way. You have messed up totally! No form of government has ever been successful in bringing justice, peace and equality for everyone. The trouble is that what is good for some people is very bad for others. All sides can never be satisfied. So, you kill people and take what you want. Some people have always had the ability and the will to dominate others.
If he intervenes when things go so badly for you, would you not continue to do things your way, hurting others along the way, taking all the credit for his benevolent interventions; and would he not be supporting you in your efforts to rule yourself independent of him while you continue to deny his very existence?
You keep saying you don't need him and yet you seem to be screaming for his intervention when the hammer falls on you.
Who fed you today?

 

[Keith&Co.]

There are so many things you fail to see.

What he means, of course, is there are things where you don't agree with wilson.

Jehovah says

Actually, people who say they know what Jehovah says are telling us...

that mankind does not have the ability to rule himself in the right way.

And isn't that very handy for those who say they can tell us what Jehovah wants us to know...?

 

[wilson]

Yes, please think of the children.

Yes - we NEVER treat them this way:


http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/78/590x/secondary/137626.jpgView attachment 10622


Or this?:
View attachment 10623
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lecnMtC...600/war+victim+palestinian+child+beheaded.jpg


Or this?:
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03054/23-08-1968_3054900k.jpg
View attachment 10624

How Jehovah’s Witnesses Leaders Hide Child Abuse Secrets At All Costs | KPBS

Accusations - accusations. So many accusations.
So few arrests and convictions.
"In the United States, over 80,000 elders currently serve in over 12,300 congregations … During the last 100 years, only eleven elders have been sued for child abuse in thirteen lawsuits filed in the United States; In seven of these lawsuits against the elders, accusations against the Watchtower Society itself were dismissed by the courts." (Wikipedia)
Why?
Accusations do not amount to much.
In one court appearance as a witness in behalf of an accused client, I was accused of being drunk by the plaintiff's lawyer and I don't even drink!

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

In one court appearance as a witness in behalf of an accused client, I was accused of being drunk by the plaintiff's lawyer and I don't even drink!

Good to know I'm not the only one.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Oh, look. Pictures of evil a loving omnipotent God is somehow not omnipotent enough to stop.

You agitate for the freedom to run things your way and when the results go against your wishes, you want him to intervene? Why should he?
You cannot blame him for your evil actions. You are only looking at the results of following your own ways.
You really want him to stop you from doing what you really want to do?
Wouldn't you then be complaining about not having free will and all that?

I'm not agitating for anything. I'm just interpreting the rules you are establishing and taking them seriously. It looks to me like I'm taking what you are saying a hell of a lot more seriously than you are.

Humans are limited by all manner of things. Our biology. We are a mammal with an unusually big brain. This means we have to constantly feed ourselves. We're adapted to a tropical climate, yet have spread to regions we haven't evolved for. This means that without lots of effort all the time the elements will kill us. We're also very good at procreating. Which means that we're putting a strain on finite resources for our sustenance. This means that inevitably there will be conflicts around how those finite resources are distributed = war. Each time we do anything we have to do a cost/benefit analysis. These are all limitations on our freedom. They're so severe that they will dominate the choices made by any human. They're so severe that they often lead to good humans doing evil things, just to survive.

God, on the other hand is omnipotent. He doesn't ever have to do a cost/benefit analysis. Preventing evil is hard for humans. It's easy for an omnipotent God. Not only easy, but zero effort. If God exist and he doesn't intervene to help suffering children, then he is evil. I'm not stating it as a fact. I don't believe God exists. I'm just taking what you are saying and taking it to it's logical conclusion.

I don't think you have thought this through at all.

 

[funinspace]

How Jehovah’s Witnesses Leaders Hide Child Abuse Secrets At All Costs | KPBS

Accusations - accusations. So many accusations.
So few arrests and convictions.

Yep, it reminds me a lot of how the RCC operated. Bury the problem, lie about it, hide the information, refuse to turn over documents to the courts, and make sure the victims (you know those cute children that are supposed to be what is important) know that they should not talk about it and be embarrassed, and at all costs keep it hidden cuz it was probably their fault to begin with. I always find it odd, when a sect/church thinks that their sect reputation is more important than protecting children…talk about horrible ethics.

Jehovah Witnesses think they are above the law, and work their damnedest to keep it hidden:
https://www.revealnews.org/article/...1st-amendment-to-hide-child-sex-abuse-claims/

“Not every individual who has sexually abused a child in the past is considered a ‘predator.’ The (Watchtower), not the local body of elders, determines whether an individual who has sexually abused children in the past will be considered a ‘predator.’ ”
— 2012 Watchtower memo
<snip>
The Lopez case was remarkable for another reason. It forced the Witnesses into a rare admission: Somewhere within the organization, there is a trove of documents with the names and whereabouts of known child sexual abusers in its U.S. congregations.
<snip>
Subsequent memos reinforced the Watchtower’s policies, culminating in a 1997 letter that directed elders to report all known or suspected child sexual abusers – past, present and future – to the organization’s New York headquarters. This memo appears to be the foundation of the database referenced in Jose Lopez’s case.

The memo lists 11 questions that must be answered in each case, including the name of the perpetrator, age of the victim and how many times the abuse occurred. Other questions appear to be designed to gauge the perpetrator’s risk of exposure: “How is he viewed in the community and by the authorities? Has he lived down any notoriety in the community? Are members of the congregation aware of what took place?”

In the Lopez trial, the Watchtower refused to provide its list of perpetrators, in violation of an order upheld by the California Supreme Court. It also refused to provide the longest-serving member of the Governing Body, Gerrit Lösch, who was subpoenaed.

"In the United States, over 80,000 elders currently serve in over 12,300 congregations … During the last 100 years, only eleven elders have been sued for child abuse in thirteen lawsuits filed in the United States; In seven of these lawsuits against the elders, accusations against the Watchtower Society itself were dismissed by the courts." (Wikipedia)
Why?
Accusations do not amount to much.

That is cute subterfuge. It would have been far more informative if you had included the preceding sentence…one might even think your omission was intentional. I wonder what the odds are that a JW worked to get this reference into the Wiki article….hum? Also, it was cute to cite a 2007 JW press release, as it conveniently jumps back in time before the deluge of more recent suits. And I find it interesting that you didn't bother to provide the link for your quote.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah's_Witnesses'_handling_of_child_sex_abuse

In a press release dated November 21, 2007, Jehovah's Witnesses' Office of Public Information stated:[62]

"In the United States, over 80,000 elders currently serve in over 12,300 congregations … During the last 100 years, only eleven elders have been sued for child abuse in thirteen lawsuits filed in the United States; In seven of these lawsuits against the elders, accusations against the Watchtower Society itself were dismissed by the courts."

In 2004, a Canadian court awarded CAD$5000 to a plaintiff for the negligence of an elder who failed to follow the official policy of the church. However, the court dismissed charges against the Watch Tower Society, and directed the plaintiff to pay the Watch Tower Society's legal fees amounting to CAD$142,000.

In 2007 during a trial motion in the Napa, California court against the Watchtower Society, victims' lawyers convinced the court that 'ecclesiastical privilege' does not supersede the legal obligation of clergy to report child sex abuse to secular authorities. The Watchtower Society paid an undisclosed amount without admitting wrongdoing in an out-of-court settlement with 16 unnamed victims of alleged sexual abuse within the religion.

From 2015:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/jehovahs-w...child-abusers-congregations/story?id=29586778

Whatever the outcome of her case, Candace Conti’s public fight appears to have opened the floodgates. The Jehovah’s Witnesses are now facing a series of lawsuits across the country. Attorney Irwin Zalkin is trying 15 of those cases.

“For some reason [church leaders] believe they’re above the law,” Zalkin said.

Now in 2016, this one law firm has 18 cases running against your sect:
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2016/dec/12/how-jehovahs-witnesses-leaders-hide-child-abuse-se/

Meanwhile, Zalkin currently has 18 lawsuits pending against the Watchtower.

 

[wilson]

You agitate for the freedom to run things your way and when the results go against your wishes, you want him to intervene? Why should he?
You cannot blame him for your evil actions. You are only looking at the results of following your own ways.
You really want him to stop you from doing what you really want to do?
Wouldn't you then be complaining about not having free will and all that?

I'm not agitating for anything.

Of course you are! Why else are you here?

I'm just interpreting the rules you are establishing and taking them seriously. It looks to me like I'm taking what you are saying a hell of a lot more seriously than you are.

What rules am I establishing?

Humans are limited by all manner of things. Our biology. We are a mammal with an unusually big brain. This means we have to constantly feed ourselves. We're adapted to a tropical climate, yet have spread to regions we haven't evolved for. This means that without lots of effort all the time the elements will kill us. We're also very good at procreating. Which means that we're putting a strain on finite resources for our sustenance. This means that inevitably there will be conflicts around how those finite resources are distributed = war. Each time we do anything we have to do a cost/benefit analysis. These are all limitations on our freedom. They're so severe that they will dominate the choices made by any human. They're so severe that they often lead to good humans doing evil things, just to survive.

God, on the other hand is omnipotent. He doesn't ever have to do a cost/benefit analysis. Preventing evil is hard for humans. It's easy for an omnipotent God. Not only easy, but zero effort. If God exist and he doesn't intervene to help suffering children, then he is evil. I'm not stating it as a fact. I don't believe God exists. I'm just taking what you are saying and taking it to it's logical conclusion.

I don't think you have thought this through at all.

Let's see if I did.
You own words (above) demonstrate that human rule is a dismal failure. You are seeking a materialistic solution to your problems and you cannot find one, despite your best efforts.
Preventing evil, and even avoiding evil is not at all hard for humans IF they know what to look for and IF have the right heart condition.
No form of government on this earth has, or ever can, bring justice and fairness to humanity. Greed and selfishness form an impenetrable barrier to justice. There would be no "strain on finite resources" if some men were not grabbing for more than they need.
If you think I'm wrong, then go ahead and name me a government that is successful in governing with peace and justice. Show me a government that is not in a state of crisis. Every department of every government is in a state of crisis, with no hope for improvement.
You have muddled your way almost to extinction and you want God, if he exists, to bail you out.

Jesus Christ also taught us to pray for God's rulership to take over the earth:
“. . .Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified.  Let your Kingdom come. Let your will take place, as in heaven, also on earth.” (Matthew 6:9, 10)
And.......
There would be no conflicts if bullheaded men heeded the wise admonition from Jesus Christ:
“. . .“All things, therefore, that you want men to do to you, you also must do to them.. . .” (Matthew 7:12)
Millions of us are living by this principle and have learned how to avoid the conflicts that now plague materialists. We are not involved in the miseries and disappointments of politics, the horrors of warfare nor the disease of materialism. Yes, we have learned to love each other.

Now - tell me how that could fail.
Besides.........

You are merely seeking to avoid the question:
"You really want him to stop you from doing what you really want to do?"
You feel justified in fighting and killing for what you think you need when your needs are few indeed.

 

[blastula]

How Jehovah’s Witnesses Leaders Hide Child Abuse Secrets At All Costs | KPBS

Accusations - accusations. So many accusations.
So few arrests and convictions.
"In the United States, over 80,000 elders currently serve in over 12,300 congregations … During the last 100 years, only eleven elders have been sued for child abuse in thirteen lawsuits filed in the United States; In seven of these lawsuits against the elders, accusations against the Watchtower Society itself were dismissed by the courts." (Wikipedia)
Why?
Accusations do not amount to much.
In one court appearance as a witness in behalf of an accused client, I was accused of being drunk by the plaintiff's lawyer and I don't even drink!

Your response is why they feel free to continue their corruption at the expense of children.

 

[Lion IRC]

How Jehovah’s Witnesses Leaders Hide Child Abuse Secrets At All Costs | KPBS

Accusations - accusations. So many accusations.
So few arrests and convictions.
"In the United States, over 80,000 elders currently serve in over 12,300 congregations … During the last 100 years, only eleven elders have been sued for child abuse in thirteen lawsuits filed in the United States; In seven of these lawsuits against the elders, accusations against the Watchtower Society itself were dismissed by the courts." (Wikipedia)
Why?
Accusations do not amount to much...!

Accusations of child abuse should be reported to the police - not the local bishop or your next door neighbor or talkback radio or Facebook......

 

[funinspace]

Accusations - accusations. So many accusations.
So few arrests and convictions.
"In the United States, over 80,000 elders currently serve in over 12,300 congregations … During the last 100 years, only eleven elders have been sued for child abuse in thirteen lawsuits filed in the United States; In seven of these lawsuits against the elders, accusations against the Watchtower Society itself were dismissed by the courts." (Wikipedia)
Why?
Accusations do not amount to much...!

Accusations of child abuse should be reported to the police - not the local bishop or your next door neighbor or talkback radio or Facebook......

That is something I can agree with completely!

 

[wilson]

Accusations - accusations. So many accusations.
So few arrests and convictions.
"In the United States, over 80,000 elders currently serve in over 12,300 congregations … During the last 100 years, only eleven elders have been sued for child abuse in thirteen lawsuits filed in the United States; In seven of these lawsuits against the elders, accusations against the Watchtower Society itself were dismissed by the courts." (Wikipedia)
Why?
Accusations do not amount to much...!

Accusations of child abuse should be reported to the police - not the local bishop or your next door neighbor or talkback radio or Facebook......

No, Sir!
You don't report accusations. They come by the millions and the police departments of the world couldn't handle them.
You report incidents.
Do you have one to report?

 

[Lion IRC]

Just to be clear.
The point I'm making is that if you have an accusation to make - an alleged incident you believe happened - you ought to go immediately to the police and make that accusation.

...for the sake of the victim(s).

 

[wilson]

Just to be clear. The point I'm making is that if you have an accusation to make - an alleged incident you believe happened - you ought to go immediately to the police and make that accusation.

...for the sake of the victim(s).

You are still not clear.
As an ex-policeman, I can tell you that "an alleged incident that you believe happened" is not investigated because evidence is needed.
You don't report an "alleged" incident. You report an incident that you know happened - something that you can testify to.
When you make an accusation, there is a "who" involved. Who are you accusing and what is the incident that you know of?
If you accuse a person or a group of a crime, you ought to be able to convince the authorities that there is something that they can take action on and not just to give the person(s) a bad name.
There is such a thing as slander or libel, you know; and there is a reason for that.
Some people lie out of hate.
And some people spread the hate by circulating the lie.
i.e. "One subreddit dedicated to Donald Trump posted the following:

“Three black man kidnapped and gang raped an engaged 18 year old white girl yesterday. IF THE RACES WERE REVERSED, THIS WOULD BE NATIONAL NEWS. THESE MEN DESERVE TO BE HANGED.”
http://www.theroot.com/texas-white-woman-jailed-after-lying-about-being-raped-1793558681
http://www.slate.com/articles/doubl...ns_why_must_be_pretend_they_never_happen.html
http://thoughtcatalog.com/janet-blo...o-lied-about-being-raped-and-why-they-did-it/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4371100/Woman-accused-lying-raped-coworker.html
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/l...eddie-Parish-Joel-Grover-Video-157985105.html

What would you do if, out of the blue, a person accused you of molesting them 10, perhaps 15 or 20 years ago. There is no evidence of such a deed besides the word of that person.
How do you defend yourself?

 

[Lion IRC]

Just to be clear. The point I'm making is that if you have an accusation to make - an alleged incident you believe happened - you ought to go immediately to the police and make that accusation.

...for the sake of the victim(s).

You are still not clear.
As an ex-policeman, I can tell you that "an alleged incident that you believe happened" is not investigated because evidence is needed.

I thought police in most western democracy jurisdictions took statements from people alleging that a crime has taken place.
And then they investigate further to see if a prosecution is viable.

...You don't report an "alleged" incident. You report an incident that you know happened - something that you can testify to.

Well, technically people are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
The police/prosecution present allegations.
I've never heard a public statement from a police officer talking about an accused person in terms that would prejudice that persons chance of a fair trial. (Eg. We know he done it. He's the murderer. He's guilty.)

...When you make an accusation, there is a "who" involved. Who are you accusing and what is the incident that you know of?

Um. Yeah. I agree.
When crimes are committed, people want to know "who" done it.
Thanks for sharing your ex-policeman insights

...
If you accuse a person or a group of a crime, you ought to be able to convince the authorities that there is something that they can take action on and not just to give the person(s) a bad name.

Right.
And then there's also those laws against perjury and making false police reports and perverting the course of justice.

...There is such a thing as slander or libel, you know; and there is a reason for that.

Yes. I've heard of those.

...Some people lie out of hate. And some people spread the hate by circulating the lie.
i.e. "One subreddit dedicated to Donald Trump posted....

Yes. Horrible stuff.

...What would you do if, out of the blue, a person accused you of molesting them 10, perhaps 15 or 20 years ago. There is no evidence of such a deed besides the word of that person.
How do you defend yourself?

By confronting my accuser in court.
That's why I made that earlier statement that such accusations ought to be made to the police.
So that I can clear my name by being found not guilty.
If there's "no evidence" of such a deed it's going to be hard to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
...there's also that whole statute of limitations thing which entails the assumption that waiting 10, 15, 20 years to report rape is not in the interests of justice. Memories fade. Physical evidence deteriorates.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I'm not agitating for anything.

Of course you are! Why else are you here?

ha ha. Thanks for reafirming a preconception I have about religious people. Primarily ego-driven and an inablity to listen to anything that doesn't inflate their ego.

I have no need to convince anybody of anything. Ever. I'm here to learn. To test my ideas. And also to be entertained. I love thinking. I love trying to understand other people's point of view. That is why I joined a Jehova's witness Biblical study group. I like learning for the sake of learning alone.

How about looking into a mirror and loving yourself for who you are? Why do you need all this bullshit to convince yourself you are good enough? You are. We all are. We're all deep down inside small, fragile and with a burning desire to be seen and loved. Why do you need the affirmation of others to feel you are good enough? The ego affirmation of the ability to convince others.

I'm just interpreting the rules you are establishing and taking them seriously. It looks to me like I'm taking what you are saying a hell of a lot more seriously than you are.

What rules am I establishing?

The non-limitations that govern God. Humans are governed by another set of limitations. These rules have consequences. If an entity is omnipotent and there is suffering, it means that this entity wants people to suffer = evil.

Let's see if I did.
You own words (above) demonstrate that human rule is a dismal failure. You are seeking a materialistic solution to your problems and you cannot find one, despite your best efforts.

I'd say that the pain of disease and other suffering is both spiritual as well as physical.

But it's not our failure. It's God's failure. If God created us and this is what we do based on our biology then we can just blame God. We have nothing to feel shame about and we certainly haven't failed at anything.

If we believe we were created by God we can just stop trying and just go with it. I think that the logical conclusion that follows from us being created by God is that we don't have to take responsibility for anything.

Preventing evil, and even avoiding evil is not at all hard for humans IF they know what to look for and IF have the right heart condition.
No form of government on this earth has, or ever can, bring justice and fairness to humanity. Greed and selfishness form an impenetrable barrier to justice. There would be no "strain on finite resources" if some men were not grabbing for more than they need.
If you think I'm wrong, then go ahead and name me a government that is successful in governing with peace and justice. Show me a government that is not in a state of crisis. Every department of every government is in a state of crisis, with no hope for improvement.
You have muddled your way almost to extinction and you want God, if he exists, to bail you out.

I'm sorry, but if it was easy we'd have done it already. The problem isn't our "heart condition". The problem is our "biological design". We grab for more than we need because we're wired for it. It's an instinct. It has to do with amassing wealth in bountiful times so we won't starve in lean times. This is an instinct that evolved in humans when there were very few of us around. Easy to explain if we believe in evolution. But if we believe in creationism is just means God created us to be greedy. Again God = evil.

Of course I expect God to bail us out, if he exists. Because God is omnipotent. It would be zero effort for God. The fact that God doesn't means, by necessity, that God does not exist. This is assuming God is defined as benevolent.

Jesus Christ also taught us to pray for God's rulership to take over the earth:
“. . .Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified.  Let your Kingdom come. Let your will take place, as in heaven, also on earth.” (Matthew 6:9, 10)
And.......
There would be no conflicts if bullheaded men heeded the wise admonition from Jesus Christ:
“. . .“All things, therefore, that you want men to do to you, you also must do to them.. . .” (Matthew 7:12)
Millions of us are living by this principle and have learned how to avoid the conflicts that now plague materialists. We are not involved in the miseries and disappointments of politics, the horrors of warfare nor the disease of materialism. Yes, we have learned to love each other.

Now - tell me how that could fail.

People like freedom, no matter what. I'm for democracy. Any dictator, no matter how good he is is still a dictator. I'd be the first to revolt.

Humans are wired in the head to be dissatisfied with stability. It doesn't matter how bountiful and stable society we live in, humans thrive on change. Again, this is down to our "biological design". If God made us this way it means God made us to revolt to God's rule. That's a damn stupid design for a king to make.

You are merely seeking to avoid the question:
"You really want him to stop you from doing what you really want to do?"
You feel justified in fighting and killing for what you think you need when your needs are few indeed.

I can't stop being human. We're born with a certain set of instincts. We have to obey them or we will be unhappy.

 

[wilson]

Jehovah will not force anyone to believe in or worship him.
You have not answered the question: Is the world innocent of these charges?
Well? If you are guilty of all charges, what do you rightly deserve?
What would justice demand?
And.........
What claim are YOU making? Aren't you implying that the sins, crimes, murders, wars, etc, do not matter? That he should allow you to continue your oppression of the weak and do nothing about it? Do you realize that the cries of those billions of oppressed are heard by him? He has every right to take action, whether you like it or not.
You tell your children that they are the descendants/products of animals, so you should not be surprised when they behave like animals.
This attitude fills your children with consternation and they come up with questions like these:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUQEyHejtFI

How do you answer kids with questions like these?
There is a price to pay for everything we do. You do not seem to be willing to pay the price.
You would be singing a different tune if you were among the oppressed and not among the oppressors.

And how about this?:
"He sent his own special representative to talk to you. His son was convincing enough to warrant his removal - so you murdered him.
What do you want him to say to you now?"

Yes, please think of the children.

How Jehovah’s Witnesses Leaders Hide Child Abuse Secrets At All Costs | KPBS

Promise to think of the victims of false charges?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308141778_A_skeptical_view_of_repressed_memory_evidence

 

[Keith&Co.]

I am not a "creationist" whatever that is.

So, is anyone surprised that the ONLY place wilson posts is to defend creationists in a thread about creationists?
Despite his self-contradicting denial that he's a creationist?

 

[none]

We got a backslider

 

[wilson]

You are still not clear.
As an ex-policeman, I can tell you that "an alleged incident that you believe happened" is not investigated because evidence is needed.

I thought police in most western democracy jurisdictions took statements from people alleging that a crime has taken place. And then they investigate further to see if a prosecution is viable.

No. They do not take any statements from anyone alleging a crime has been committed. Only from those REPORTING a crime.

...You don't report an "alleged" incident. You report an incident that you know happened - something that you can testify to.

Well, technically people are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Technically? That still doesn't alter the fact that only reports of incidents are considered by law enforcement - not allegations.

The police/prosecution present allegations.

No, they don't. Allegations are usually unsupportable.

I've never heard a public statement from a police officer talking about an accused person in terms that would prejudice that persons chance of a fair trial. (Eg. We know he done it. He's the murderer. He's guilty.)

Cops make such statements off the record.

...When you make an accusation, there is a "who" involved. Who are you accusing and what is the incident that you know of?

Um. Yeah. I agree. When crimes are committed, people want to know "who" done it. Thanks for sharing your ex-policeman insights.

...If you accuse a person or a group of a crime, you ought to be able to convince the authorities that there is something that they can take action on and not just to give the person(s) a bad name.

Right. And then there's also those laws against perjury and making false police reports and perverting the course of justice.

If allegations are acceptable to the authorities, then the risks of making false police reports are greatly increased.

...There is such a thing as slander or libel, you know; and there is a reason for that.

Yes. I've heard of those.

...Some people lie out of hate. And some people spread the hate by circulating the lie.
i.e. "One subreddit dedicated to Donald Trump posted....

Yes. Horrible stuff.

It is happening right here. Allegations are widely circulated as facts and the spreading of lies continue.

...What would you do if, out of the blue, a person accused you of molesting them 10, perhaps 15 or 20 years ago. There is no evidence of such a deed besides the word of that person.
How do you defend yourself?

By confronting my accuser in court.

How do you get there? By a lawsuit, or by being dragged there by those who accept the allegation? If you are dragged into court on such charges, your chances of winning the case are greatly reduced. Ever took a good look at those tears on the victims?

That's why I made that earlier statement that such accusations ought to be made to the police.

I told you - police do not/can not act on accusations.

So that I can clear my name by being found not guilty.

Not guilty of an accusation? Who is? An accusation is not a misdeed of any kind.

If there's "no evidence" of such a deed it's going to be hard to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Was Jesus Christ guilty of sedition? Yet, he was found guilty and executed:
“Christus, from whom their name is derived, was executed at the hands of the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius.”—Tacitus -(Annals, XV,*44)

Guilt can be, and has been, assigned without evidence of any kind. There are organizations working against that right now.

...there's also that whole statute of limitations thing which entails the assumption that waiting 10, 15, 20 years to report rape is not in the interests of justice. Memories fade. Physical evidence deteriorates.

You only prove my point:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308141778_A_skeptical_view_of_repressed_memory_evidence