ForumGarden

Ok. There's a bunch of language in that link that I don't pretend to understand, and it's very lengthy, and I admit not having the patience to read the whole thing, but am I understanding this right? This "church" (I use the term loosely in regard to Jehovah's Witlesses) is NOT "obligated" to report abuse under the law? What about a moral obligation? How about just pretending, for a minute, that you have a conscience? It's becoming as bad as the friggin' Catholic church that hides, transfers, protects and lies for it's clergy who molest children.

If someone has the patience and vocabulary to read that whole link, please fill me in on what I missed, or if I'm mistaken. Being Jehovah's Witlesses, I bet I'm not. :-5

Far Rider wrote: If that church cared at all they would have made restitution as best as possible for their own conscience sake.
Well, there's your catch, Far. I know about this "church", and what the members are capable of, from close personal experience. They DON'T care, about anything except their own ideas, and anyone who disagrees with them is unworthy. It's so extreme, I know of a person raised in this "church" who, at 3 years old was so brain-washed by their teachings, when he saw his fathers Christmas tree, he stated that it was "the work of the devil." 3 years old. These Jehovah's Witlesses are out-and-out dangerous. And they're growing in leaps and bounds. Think "cult" and "Waco" and poisoned kool-aid. Whackos, each and every one of them.

I call BULLSHIT on any abuse.