From: kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown)
Subject: Re: JWs Child Custody booklet, and why a judge might have felt it promoted "untrue" testimony under oath
Reply-To: kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown)
Organization: Minimal.
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 04:31:43 GMT

I realize that this article is relatively old.  There are some on this
newsgroup who have complained that Walter has pulled things out of
context.  While I don't agree that he has done so on purpose, there is
one quote whose context isn't entirely clear to me.  Thus, I am requesting
clarification.

Obviously, if Walter is not attempting to make the statements he
quotes mean something other than what they say in context, he will
honor this request.  Thanks in advance, Walter.

In article <1992Apr7.185636.19018@apollo.hp.com> smith_w@apollo.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
[...]
>"As a result, the suicide rate of both adults and teenagers in Utah
>is also above the national average, and consumpsion of tranquilizers
>and pep pills, among other drugs, by Mormons far exceeds that by
>the population at large...this paradox is the product of Mormonism's
>unique and bizzare concept of the nature of God and man."
>(Awake, 12/22/82, p.25)

The context of this isn't quite clear.  "As a result" of what?

That's the only quote I was able to find that lacked clear context.  The
rest seemed clear.

There is no way, of course, that I can verify that Walter did not pull
quotes from various sources in an evenhanded manner, as I don't have
access to those sources.  So I am not about to accuse him of doing
such a thing, since I have no reason to.  I wish those who *do* accuse
him of this would substantiate their claim.  I haven't yet seen an attempt
that Walter hasn't rebuffed eloquently.

As for the idea that the WTBTS leadership encourages their members to
mislead the authorities in what being a JW is all about, I think the mere
existence of a book designed to "help" those dealing with a child custody
case by providing them and/or their attorneys with pat answers to expected
questions speaks volumes.  In a child custody case, the judge/jury is going
to be concerned primarily with the specific beliefs and values of the
parents and how they view raising their child(ren).  As such, giving pat,
predetermined answers to questions the judge/jury may ask is indicative,
to me, of an attempt at either deception or protection of the WTBTS
leadership.  The existence of the book indicates to me the *need* to
give predetermined answers instead of honest answers.  If the WTBTS is
clean, it does not *need* protection.  If the JW parent in the case is
*really* fit to raise his/her child(ren), as seen by the judge/jury,
that parent needs no such set of pat answers; the answers they themselves
give will be sufficient.  If what they actually believe is something
along the lines of the answers they are encouraged to give, they will
give similar answers *independently* of such a book.  Thus, that the book
exists at all indicates to me that the WTBTS leadership or organization
*needs* or wants the protection such a book may provide, and thus needs
to encourage its members to say things they would (the leadership feels)
not say otherwise, i.e. to deceive the judge/jury.

I would be interested in a better explanation for the existence of the
book being referred to here.  Unlike some of the people here, who
insist on holding to their beliefs regardless of what is pointed out to
them, I try not to do this.  If my conclusion above is incorrect, I
would like to be corrected with evidence from an unbiased source (a
WTBTS tract, presented by a JW, is not what I consider to be an unbiased
source here.  That would be the equivalent of any Christian pointing
to his Bible as evidence that the authors of the Bible were writing
the truth in the Bible, or a Moslem pointing to the Quran as evidence of
the validity of their views).

		Kevin Brown (kevin@taronga.taronga.com)