For Neologist, and anyone else affiliated with watchtower.

http://www.ajwrb.org/images/oldcardA.gif

0 Replies

Thats just another group of ppl taking the bible a bit to seriouslyly, that verse is mainly stating we shouldnt just drink blood, but some ignorant ppl take it as madical help is the tool of Satan.

0 Replies

So those wonderful Polish blood sausages are right out the window, huh? No duck's blood, no goose blood?

0 Replies

UH oh....this might be bad for my Vampire Christmas party for my church. huh?

0 Replies

Re: For Neologist, and anyone else affiliated with watchtowe

Doktor S wrote:

Would you, Neo, let your child die if a blood transfusion was the only method that might save his/her life?
This is obviously not an attack, but it has been puzzling me how you might rationalize this.

Keep in mind, please, that the blood issue is the only issue Jehovah's Witnesses have with the medical profession. And it is much less of a contention now than in the past, considering the nasty diseases and conditions associated with transfused blood. It may soon become a non issue with the anticipated arrival of artificial blood for general use. A Google search of 'blood transfusion diseases' turns up over 5,000,000 results. You may read them yourself.

That being said, I question the merit of your asseveration that a blood transfusion might be the only method available to save a life.

And, regardless of the medical experts, I would answer yes to refusing a blood transfusion for myself or any of my dependents (who are now well past the age of majority)

0 Replies

Quote:

That being said, I question the merit of your asseveration that a blood transfusion might be the only method available to save a life.

Neo, you know such a scenario is not that hard to imagine.
This scenario could take place in pretty much any situation where the victim has lost too much blood to live.
So your answer is yes, and your rationalization is that there is a possibility of getting a bad batch of blood?
Really?

0 Replies

Doktor S wrote:

Quote:

That being said, I question the merit of your asseveration that a blood transfusion might be the only method available to save a life.

Neo, you know such a scenario is not that hard to imagine.
This scenario could take place in pretty much any situation where the victim has lost too much blood to live.
So your answer is yes, and your rationalization is that there is a possibility of getting a bad batch of blood?
Really?

Answer yes without qualifications.
Does that help?

Sufficient emotional impact?

0 Replies

I find your position to be mind boggling

0 Replies

I find the JW stance to be absoultely EVIL.

THey would sentence themselves or their children to die cause cause they do not wish to have a blood transfusion.

That is sheer lunacy.
It is also MURDER.

You JW's are committing MURDER, you know that the transfusion could save them and by NOT ACCEPTING the transfusion you are thereby committing yourself or your children to die.

That IMO is premediated MURDER and every single one of you JW's that allow such should be brought up on charges of MURDER.

Jehovahs Witnessess is a relgion of MURDERS.

0 Replies

Do the Witnesses also refuse organ, marrow or other tissue transplants? I don't know, so I thought while we're on the subject, (sort of), I'd ask.

0 Replies

Scary. Really, truly scary.

0 Replies

Doktor S wrote:

I find your position to be mind boggling

Sorry if my wart offends you. I must admit the Witness' stand on the blood issue was not the compelling reason for my accepting a study. And I certainly did not accept it without soul searching.

It also is much easier to accept on a personal level than to apply it to one's offspring. Whether these decisions are morally acceptable to you, judge for yourself. It should be noted, however, that a growing number of doctors are willingly and successfully accommodating our beliefs.

In fact, where whole blood is not available, the techniques learned by operating on witnesses have facilitated ever increasing success in bloodless surgery.

Scott777ab wrote:

I find the JW stance to be absoultely EVIL.

THey would sentence themselves or their children to die cause cause they do not wish to have a blood transfusion.

That is sheer lunacy.
It is also MURDER.

You JW's are committing MURDER, you know that the transfusion could save them and by NOT ACCEPTING the transfusion you are thereby committing yourself or your children to die.

That IMO is premediated MURDER and every single one of you JW's that allow such should be brought up on charges of MURDER.

Jehovahs Witnessess is a relgion of MURDERS.

Thanks for your input, Scott.

Perhaps you will feel the same about the 800,000 people, mostly Tutsi, who were murdered in 1994 by their fellow countrymen, mostly Hutu. The Religious breakdown of the Rwandan population is Roman Catholic 52.7%, Protestant 24%, Adventist 10.4%, Other 12%, including 2600 Jehovah's Witnesses.
Source = Google search "Rwanda religions"

Many of those 'murderous' Jehovah's Witnesses risked their lives to protect members of the other tribes. Some were killed for their efforts. This is a far cry from the activities of other so-called 'christians' whose clergy often participated in the slaughter.

So, I guess its a matter of perspective, Scott. I'll stack the humanitarian efforts of the Witnesses against those of any other religious group any time, any day.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Do the Witnesses also refuse organ, marrow or other tissue transplants? I don't know, so I thought while we're on the subject, (sort of), I'd ask.

These are matters of one's conscience. Some, including those who are not Witnesses, may view organ transplants as a form of cannibalism. The Bible is silent on this, however.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

real life wrote:
Do the Witnesses also refuse organ, marrow or other tissue transplants? I don't know, so I thought while we're on the subject, (sort of), I'd ask.
These are matters of one's conscience. Some, including those who are not Witnesses, may view organ transplants as a form of cannibalism. The Bible is silent on this, however.

OK. I just didn't know if the Witnesses had a position on this or not.

I thought that at one time they did. Has that changed?

0 Replies

In what respect is a blood transfusion eating blood?

0 Replies

Doktor S,

I really think that was a low thing to do to Neo. I really do. It appears to be one more way to attack someone because they have a strong belief in something that you don't. If it was obviously not an attack then I don't think you would have needed to make that statement. :wink:

I believe, in the past, you have been one to say that believers should butt out of the lives of those practicing homosexuality or any other thing because it's none of their business (if you never said that, then I'll gladly apologize) or at the very least had something to say about those that talk against homosexuality or your particular brand of belief, etc. Why are you butting into Neo's business? I think if you really wanted to know this you should have taken it private with Neo. You put him on the spot and if it had been me I would have told you to go suck an egg.

Sorry Neo if I'm butting in but I think this was very inappropriate of Doktor S to ask you and that's my story and I'm sticking to it Laughing

.

0 Replies

I find myself in agreement with Arella Mae on this.

It is one thing to ask a question regarding any subject. It is quite another to ask the question directly of a member because said member has been open enough to provide information on his chosen religion. Especially since the original poster (Doktor S) has his own brand of religion that is not in line with Neo's. There can only be one reason to bring this up. It seems to have had it's expected result.

It is for this very reason that I think many do not provide information as to their specific religious denomination. I find this abominable. No, I am not a Jehovah Witness.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. I hope that Doktor S knows enough to duck.

0 Replies

Neologist,

I also agree with what Arella says and I apologize for the offensive tone of this thread.

There is no call for screaming murder over religious beliefs.

I understand the controversy, and in a respectful tactful way this could be an interesting discussion.

But holding up the religious beliefs of a fellow A2K member and subjecting him to personal attacks is shameful.

I won't dignify this thread with any further response and I suggest that this is an appropriate action for anyone.

0 Replies

I agree with Doc S and support him/her whole-heartedly.

0 Replies

For Neologist, and anyone else affiliated with watchtower.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know