JWs: more covering up of child sex abuse

Originally posted by @dj2becker
So in other words you are saying it’s impossible to ultimately know for sure the true answer to any moral question.

We act upon the answers or solutions or routes or stances that our moral sensibilities provide us with and which seem to us to be the correct ones. If perceived better answers arise, we can adopt them. Same goes for you.

Originally posted by @fmf
Zero sarcasm.

Here it is again:

Your parents kept what they did and when they did it secret from you. Did they not share some sort of "objective morality" lesson with you?

Would you tell your six year old that his sister had been raped if you found out or would you wait till he is older?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Would you tell your six year old that his sister had been raped if you found out or would you wait till he is older?

I would tell the authorities that my daughter - my six year old's sister - had been raped. Not to do so would be morally unsound if the rapist might rape other women or children. Do you agree? I see no reason to tell a six year old child that his or her sibling has been raped. And, besides, it is not the issue. The issue is your favouring a cover-up of a rape [pages 2 and 3 etc.] versus [my stance] preventing future rapes by informing the authorities about the rape and subsequent death threats. Perhaps if your family had taken the morally correct steps in the aftermath of the rape, the rapist may not have ended up committing the murder that landed him in gaol.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
All I know is that when I found out he was already in jail. I would be speculating if I told you my parents did or didn't know before he was in jail.

It seems strange that your parents have kept all this secret from you. You aren't six years old anymore.

Originally posted by @fmf
I would tell the authorities that my daughter - my six year old's sister - had been raped. Not to do so would be morally unsound if the rapist might rape other women or children. Do you agree? I see no reason to tell a six year old child that his or her sibling has been raped. And, besides, it is not the issue. The issue is your favouring a cover-up of a rape [ ...[text shortened]... ath of the rape, the rapist may not have ended up committing the murder that landed him in gaol.

You have totally misjudged my position. Not once have I stated that I favor cover ups. I was merely pointing out reasons why they may occur, and I asked you a few questions about certain scenarios.

Originally posted by @fmf
It seems strange that your parents have kept all this secret from you. You aren't six years old anymore.

What secret are they keeping from me?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You have totally misjudged my position. Not once have I stated that I favor cover ups. I was merely pointing out reasons why they may occur.

You indicated that you thought my moral stance - the obligation to inform the authorities - was "meaningless" and you favoured prioritizing your sister's feelings instead, because she was shocked and ashamed. It's all on pages 2 and 3.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
What secret are they keeping from me?

The ones that you have been revealing bit by bit in the comments you have been posting and which I have been commenting on post by post.

FMF: How many hours was it before [your parents] warned women and mothers with daughters?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I am not privy to this information.

If you don't know how your parents handled the situation because they have been keeping what they knew and what they did secret from you all these years, how on earth can you claim that your "experience" or "knowledge" of facing and handling a case of rape justifies your support to robbie carrobie when he was defending the cover up of sex abuse by the JW organisation? It seems pretty clear that you haven't given any meaningful thought to the moral repercussions and implications of what you say happened.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
It would in fact be meaningful if moral absolutes such as ‘rape is always wrong’ existed.

Thanks to my moral compass, I am not going to rape anyone. Thanks to your moral compass, you are not going to rape anyone.

Thanks to the laws in the country where I live, anyone who rapes someone - as a result of having a moral compass that doesn't preclude raping people or despite having one that does - will have broken the law and will be punished. It's the same where you live.

Some people don't rape because of their moral compasses; some don't rape because they are afraid of being caught; some people do commit rape regardless of what their moral compasses tell them.

I think rape is morally unsound for the reasons we have discussed. You also think it's morally unsound. I support laws that forbid rape and other kinds of sexual assault. So do you.

Originally posted by @fmf
You indicated that you thought my moral stance - the obligation to inform the authorities - was "meaningless" and you favoured prioritizing your sister's feelings instead, because she was shocked and ashamed. It's all on pages 2 and 3.

I simply asked you a question about a scenario involving your sibling I said nothing about my own sibling you made your own conclusions.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I simply asked you a question about a scenario involving your sibling I said nothing about my own sibling you made you own conclusions.

For all your rhetorical self-aggrandizement, you seem all at sea with regard to the moral issues surrounding what you say happened to your relative.

Originally posted by @fmf
For all your rhetorical self-aggrandizement, you seem all at sea with regard to the moral issues surrounding what you say happened to your relative.

You sound like a moral absolutist when you say that. I would fully agree that there would have been a right way and a wrong way to handle the situation. I have no illusions as to what the right way would have been. It's amusing to see you as a moral relativist enforcing your opinions upon others because that is what a moral absolutist should be doing. Within a context of moral relativism there isn't only one correct way to behave, yet that is what you are implying.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You sound like a moral absolutist when you say that. I would fully agree that there would have been a right way and a wrong way to handle the situation. I have no illusions as to what the right way would have been. It's amusing to see you as a moral relativist enforcing your opinions upon others because that is what a moral absolutist should be doing. Wit ...[text shortened]... moral relativism there isn't only one correct way to behave, yet that is what you are implying.

What does "enforcing" mean?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I have no illusions as to what the right way would have been.

So it would seem your moral compass is non-functional on this issue.