[Vigilantes versus pedophiles - our community shame]

Clergy sexual abuse in the "other" religions.

Clergy pedophiles "per-capita" among the Jehovah's Witnesses exceed the Catholic church .

This is due to the church elders enforced 'code of silence' aka the notorious,"two witness take-down".

The Jehovah's Witnesses Church leaders absurd requirement of having TWO WITNESSES to the crime of child molestation.

The Worldwide Problem of Child Abuse and Jehovah's Witnesses

Is it Really a Pedophile Paradise ? What is the truth, what is the myth?

Myth 1: Jehovah's Witnesses protect children within their organization against confessed or convicted child molesters.

What is the TRUTH and what is the MYTH?

Get the answers to these questions. http://www.silentlambs.org/answers/index.cfm

SPECIAL for ONEBACKPACK

Mate... if ur going to contradict another contributor here, at least read the act properly ! No offence but I will quote it shortly, and 2ndly I even went as far as asking the Attourney Generals office and the sexual crimes squad of Vic police about this.
You got the right area,but didn't read the fine print.
Section 45 (not section 47a but it does have a relevant section)

(3) Sub-section (1) does not apply to an act of sexual
penetration if—
(a) the child is aged between 10 and 16; and
(b) the persons taking part in the act are married
to each other.

The point I find ludicrous in all this, is that section 47a is titled
"Indecent Act" with child under the age of 16.

It then goes on below to state

(2) Consent is not a defence to a charge under sub-
section (1) unless at the time of the alleged
offence—

(c) the accused believed on reasonable grounds
that he or she was married to the child.

So, what this is saying, is that 'indecent' acts are ok if ur married or believe your married, which raises the question 'Why are they indecent' ? Which further raises the question, if it IS indecent, why does the law suggest that indecent acts are "ok" if you believe you are married to the child ? This sounds like legally sanctioned abuse to me !!

So, backpack..I hope that clears up the matter. I contacted all the major news agencies, asking them to take this matter more public to get the law repealed, but nothing happened.
This allows technically for a 'cult' in combination with a 'non english speaking person' to engage in a ceremony of "marraige" (legal or otherwise) where the man could claim 'I believed I was married to her" Perhaps this is one reason why the JEHOVAH WITNESSES are said to be more guilty of child sexual abuse than the Catholic church ?
go figure...

My suggestion, is that you personally contact the Attourney Generals office (as I did) and demand that this law be cleaned up !!!!

JCL ....

my point exactly ....you said...

"My problem with that is, while I think it is a very good idea, that there is different motivation for different types of abusers. Some types of abusers may respond, but the data on whether or not it works will be unclear as it all seems to get lumped in together under one label of "pedophile".

response... yes.. this is the reason that gun control won't stop murder. If u want to kill someone, and can't get a gun, then poison or a baseball bat would work just as well. Would u call a help line to stop urself doing this ? highly doubtful. Its too knee jerk.

Jcl,
You mention “While sexual abuse may be the least common form of abuse (and I say "may" because it is difficult to get accurate statistics on child abuse as its very nature is secretive) it is one of the more difficult to deal with because it is actually a perversion and a mental illness.”

There is a lot of mention of pedophilia and child sexual abuse in the media, but in terms of overall child abuse, child sexual abuse is the least common.

The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare publishes a yearly report into child abuse that provides some detailed statistics (EG Child Protection Australia 2002 – 2003). I say “some” statistics because more should really be provided to get a better idea of when / where / why child abuse is likely to occur.

Statistics will vary from year to year and from state to state, but child sexual abuse is normally at 10% of all cases of child abuse substantiated by the child protection agencies. Neglect, physical abuse, and emotional abuse normally run at about 30% each. It could be said that neglect, physical abuse, and emotional abuse etc do not affect children as much as sexual abuse. This is debatable, as neglect, physical abuse, and emotional abuse can lead to hospitalization, and possible removal of the child from the parent. It could be said that sexual abuse is much higher than being reported, but the same could be said of the other three forms of child abuse.

What is rarely discussed or made known to the public is that normally over 40 % of child abuse occurs in single female parent families, making such families the highest risk type family for child abuse.

So again, due to general levels of misinformation or misunderstanding, it can result in public hysteria regards child sexual abuse, and eventually this can lead to males being unnecessarily excluded from children’s lives. For example: - there could be fewer male kindergarten teachers (although there are almost none now), fewer male teachers, fewer male sport coaches, and fewer fathers etc.

Domestic Violence agencies are notorious at releasing highly biased and inaccurate statistics, and then trying to brainwash the public into believing those statistics. This eventually leads to fewer people believing any domestic violence statistic, and legitimate cases of domestic violence may eventually go unnoticed.

It would not be at all appropriate if Child Abuse or Child Protection agencies started to do the same.

When in prison, sex offender prisoners are quarantined and "protected" from the attitudes of "non-sex offending prisoners".

These prisoners have high recidivism rates and an abnormal intellectual processes which rationalises the "trauma" they inflict on their victims into a belief that the victim consented and even "loved" them.

As a parent I have no hesitation and see No Shame in taking whatever measures needed to ensure general society is safe from these dangerous predators in the same way we would control rabid dogs.

Pretending every problem is solvable is niave. Pretending Sex offenders will reform is dangerously niave.
They stand up as a good reason for reintroduction of the death penalty.
No shame in society protecting itself - especially when it is our children who need the greatest protection from this sort of scum.

So Barbara Biggs is either pitifully naive or plain stupid if she thinks she can blame ordinary individuals for running a dangerous predator out of town.

Since this was in Queensland, maybe the locals should have left this piece of slime tied up near a crocodile infested river and let him experience, first hand, the receiving end of "predatory" behaviour.

Col,
Passion is no substitute for clear thinking.
Can you tell me why an 'indecent act' is ok if ur married to a child ?
Is it less damaging ? is it damaging at all ?
Moral relativism.... sigh...
If the law doesn't have much of a clue.. maybe we need to look elsehwere and u already know where that is for me