Mormons and Jehovahs Witnesses involved in child abuse

[Tcg]

Catholics aren't the only Christians guilty of child abuse:

"How child abuse goes unchecked for Mormons and Jehovahs Witnesses

A reckoning is taking place in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Jehovahs Witnesses as stories emerge of child sex abuse.

Years ago, outrage erupted over how the Catholic Church allowed such abuse to go unchecked, but fewer may be aware of how other faiths are covering up abuse in their ranks.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, also known as Mormons, and Jehovahs Witnesses are reportedly making use of a legal exemption for clergy which allows abuse to go unreported. The exemption dictates that religious members who hear about abuse through confession are not required to report it to authorities."

https://the1a.org/segments/how-child-ab ... witnesses/

Why would anyone who cares about the health and welfare of children support either of these groups of people?


Tcg

[1213]

....Face it, in the OT we have a vengeful, petty, war God. In the NT we have a 'loving, caring' God.

Sorry, that seems to be the case only in your interpretation. Not good enough for me. I think God is the same in both.

.... (killed the entire biosphere minus the occupants of the ark during the flood, killed every first born in Egypt before the exodus, killed Uzzah for trying to help, killed some children with bears because they made fun of someone, and at the end of times, apparently will kill everyone who doesn't bend a knee).

So, you think people would live eternally, if only God would not killing them? But, in Biblical point of view this "life" is meant to be temporary. Even if a righteous person dies, it is not a problem, because God has promised eternal life for righteous people and they can continue, even if their body dies.

And even if God would kill people, I have not a problem with that, because God has given life, and therefore has the right to decide how long life He gives.

[1213]

The problem there is the 'Local flood' fail. If one argues that a thing happened naturally, there is no reason to credit that a god did it.

In natural world everything happens naturally, even if God would be behind some thing that happens.

Either god struck someone in which case, He and his motives take the blame, or it happened 'naturally' in which case the god...

If God struct someone, and it happened in natural world, there is some natural way how it happened. The crucial question in this case is, how God struct. I have not seen you giving any idea how it would have happened.

The Churches have kept the dirt covered up and have attacked and denigrated anyone who spoke up....

I think they should be treated the same way as "pedophiles in democrat" party. It is disturbing when accusations are enough for to give judgment in case of a religious group, but not enough in the case of "democratic" party. If I would be the judge, I would require strong evidence for the crime, before giving the judgment.

[TRANSPONDER]

The problem there is the 'Local flood' fail. If one argues that a thing happened naturally, there is no reason to credit that a god did it.

In natural world everything happens naturally, even if God would be behind some thing that happens.

Either god struck someone in which case, He and his motives take the blame, or it happened 'naturally' in which case the god...

If God struct someone, and it happened in natural world, there is some natural way how it happened. The crucial question in this case is, how God struct. I have not seen you giving any idea how it would have happened.

The Churches have kept the dirt covered up and have attacked and denigrated anyone who spoke up....

I think they should be treated the same way as "pedophiles in democrat" party. It is disturbing when accusations are enough for to give judgment in case of a religious group, but not enough in the case of "democratic" party. If I would be the judge, I would require strong evidence for the crime, before giving the judgment.

The crucial question is, if a thing can happen naturally, why there is any reason to think there is a god behind it? You have of course flagged up the basic and common theist fallacy of assuming a god, when it has not been validated. (1)

You also flag up your bias by assuming bias in pointing up church scandals. The fact is that scandals pop up everywhere, but churches should be better since these people want to lecture us on how to be examples of better living so as to be fit for Jesus and they are fit only for jail. And the worst thing is that the believers try to excuse them. Nobody is excusing those outside the churches who get accused of scandals. I have even seen one or two came damn near being ruined by accusations which turned it to be false.

cue "Well church accusations are false". Maybe, but the scandal is we never get them in trial. Or I have never sen it. It all seems to be hushed up. Why do churches keep getting away with it? And why do they still have so much support? Sure, the catholic scandal in Ireland made for a lot of changes. Ireland is no longer as hag - ridden by Catholicism as it was, but it still has so much support. No doubt the faithful make the same excuses you do.

I can tell you that if a high profile atheist spokesbod was accused, i would demand a full investigation and, if he was guilty, jail, and no excuses from me.

(1) cue The Bible. Which is the only Evidence. Faith and the bias - sampling of answered prayers or other Thing in life are ...bias sampling. But The Bible is a Book and contains evidence and.."If you don't believe the Bible, you cannot believe any other book".

But any book or account is open to question. Historical accounts are open to debate all the time, and re - thinking. It is still a long way to go with Bible re - evaluation, because of a general mindset even amongst Bible skeptics that the gospels are a reliable record, even if they no longer credit the OT (though the Exodus is now being doubted and high time). But in time, the Bible will be understood to Not deserve acceptance as valid until debunked, because it has been debunked to my satisfaction, and only lack of realisation seems to be giving the Bible credibility amongst those capable of open - minded assessment. And that's why I'm here.

[1213]

You also flag up your bias by assuming bias in pointing up church scandals. The fact is that scandals pop up everywhere, but churches should be better since these people want to lecture us on how to be examples of better living so as to be fit for Jesus and they are fit only for jail.

I agree that Christians should be better and I think all alleged crimes should be investigated. However, I think everyone should be judged with the same standard. If you accept any accusation against Christians, without any evidence, should you accept the same against any other group also?

I can tell you that if a high profile atheist spokesbod was accused, i would demand a full investigation and, if he was guilty, jail, and no excuses from me.

Would it then be fair to accuse all atheists to be criminals, as in the case of other religious groups?

[TRANSPONDER]

You also flag up your bias by assuming bias in pointing up church scandals. The fact is that scandals pop up everywhere, but churches should be better since these people want to lecture us on how to be examples of better living so as to be fit for Jesus and they are fit only for jail.

I agree that Christians should be better and I think all alleged crimes should be investigated. However, I think everyone should be judged with the same standard. If you accept any accusation against Christians, without any evidence, should you accept the same against any other group also?

I can tell you that if a high profile atheist spokesbod was accused, i would demand a full investigation and, if he was guilty, jail, and no excuses from me.

Would it then be fair to accuse all atheists to be criminals, as in the case of other religious groups?

Of course. Same rules should apply to everyone. The outrage is not just in what was done but in how the organisation (Church/churches) tried to cover it up.

Atheists are not a 'church' or any other kind of organisation that connives in covering up misdeeds of its' membership. If an atheist is accused of a crime, he should stand in court like anyone else, and no atheist group would rush to say 'Leave him be; we'll make sure this doesn't happen in future'. Leave that to the churches, or some at least. Or that is the point of the OP.