My apology, Euphemism is correct. Thank you for pointing that out.
I hope that means the review process would be even more stringent prior to publication in the Journal of Church and State.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul
Journal of Church and State: WT NO-BLOOD EXPOSE'
by AndersonsInfo 328 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
AuldSoul
-
Rabbit
The Bible says 'abstain' from blood. In every case it was talking about 'eating' blood. It is a deliberate misrepresentation of secular facts when they say, "transfusions are the same as 'eating' blood." It is never digested or used by the body as nutrition. They lie when they say it's the same as 'being fed intravenously" like glucose.
The Bible does not say a word about transfusions. The WT purposefully decided it was 'eating blood', which is direct 'misrepresentation' (lie) of known secular and medical science.
"Can't never could..."
One thing for sure...NOTHING will ever happen if we don't try to use this tool. All the ones who want to complain and 'sit on their butts' and wait for others to do the work should know that the rest of of will try our best. Maybe you'll benefit from everyone else's work and you won't have to lift a finger. I hope you'll come back and apologize to Barbara, when and if, something 'Big' comes out of this.
Personally, when I start counting all the newbies and lurkers that...because of Barbara's thread...have had the extra 'push' they needed to start posting. That's a BIG WIN right there !
Rabbit
-
Dansk
Personally, when I start counting all the newbies and lurkers that...because of Barbara's thread...have had the extra 'push' they needed to start posting. That's a BIG WIN right there !
Absolutely! It's given them the courage they needed and we're glad to have them! Just goes to show what will happen when Watchtower is really pushed against a wall!
Ian
-
FSMonster
Perhaps not 'amateurish', but we're not talking about a trained professional with years of experience either. If you take this essay exactly as it had been proclaimed by Barb then you're just gullible. Without anything smarter to say all you could come up was a typical forum flame-bait.
-
rwagoner
Any update on when the report will be posted to Highbeam.com ??? The original post said a day or two so I signed up for my free 7 day trial membership.....time is marching on and still no report posted.
Thanks
-
DannyHaszard
High ranking on news Editorial: Rights require your vigilance
Ventura County Star (subscription), CA - Dec 15, 2005
... In the late 1930s, Jehovah's Witnesses, acting from their belief that saluting a flag violated a biblical command against bowing to graven images, told their ... http://www.haloscan.com/comments/venturacountystar/editrightsALL4315780/Jehovah's Witness Flag salute.
I was born into the Jehovah's Witnesses in 1957,i was the good little JW boy who got the bleep beaten out of me in the school yard for not saluting the flag and remaining seated for the Star Spangled Banner as demanded by my JW leaders.
This was the 'better dead than red' era of the 1960's I suffered much,only to learn that the Watchtower corporation (Jehovah's Witnesses) are just another religion. I now proudly fly the Flag at my home.
----
God bless America, Danny Haszard
5:48:10 a.m. on December 15, 2005
DANNY HASZARD | Homepage| 12.15.05 - 2:55 am | #
Religious freedom is one of our basic rights in this nation. Currently the foundation is being laid to test whether individual religious freedom will be protected from religious corporations who use deceit and manipulation of secular data to influence the choices of their adherents.
The Watchtower Organization has come under scrutiny for manipulating data that it uses in the "How Can Blood Save Your Life?" teaching booklet. Therein, JWs are taught, once again, that a single New Testament scripture, Acts 15:29, tells them they should not use blood in any form of medical treatment. Whether this scripture is accurately interpreted is a matter of theological debate.
What is more significant to the critical thinker, is the Watchtower's chronic misrepresentation of secular sources and medical data, in order to bolster their theological stance with medical "proof" that it is the intelligent thing to do. This generates a great deal of unwarranted fear for a legitimate, (though not without some risk,) medical procedure.
Over and over, the Watchtower uses snippets of quotes from medical journals, papers and doctors, many of which are not representative of the whole or intent of the original material. Some of which are outright distortions that completely reverse the intent and meaning of the original author.
So the question becomes, if the individual Jehovah's Witness chooses to accept the "no-blood doctrine," based on, not only the theological argument, but is swayed by this secular argument, should the Watchtower Corporation be held culpable for any damage resulting to a person who is injured or dies, based in part on these lies?
This is another freedom that honest and caring people are hoping to test in the next few years.
2:20:22 p.m. on December 15, 2005
ODRADE ATREIDES | Homepage | 12.15.05 - 11:27 am | #
Your editorial about the Bill of Rights was very interesting. Most of the populace actually have little concept of just what the Bill of Rights is, and what it protects. There have been a number of college exercises done (mostly law schools) where students were sent out to collect signatures on a proposition which was actually the first ten amendments, without the title. The results were all the same -- most people refused, giving the reason that it 'provided too much freedom to those not deserving it'. The Constitution has been under assault ever since the term of James Madison. It was Madison himself who once stated that the primary purpose of the Constitution was to protect the minority from the majority. Almost every politician seeks to consolidate ever more power over others. Today, the Consstitution's protections are mostly memories. People never know what they're missing, until it's gone.
As to the Jehovah's Witnesses and their battles to preserve religious freedom (not only for themselves, but for everyone else as well), it has not been easy. Your first reader comments were from Danny Haszard, who is almost always the first to make vitriolic comments whenever the mention is made of Jehovah's Witnesses, no matter where in the world any news article appears. He's made a life-time career of denigrating the JWs, and he's free to do so. I feel sorry for him though, since having that much hatred cannot be good for anyone. You also had a commentary from one ODRADE ATREIDES, about the JW belief in abstaining from blood. I'd suggest he do a better job of researching his facts more carefully before he writes such incorrect drivel. Prior to my retirement, I worked for a number of years in a leading medical center. It was in 1993 that the medical center went to all bloodless surgeries, and not for any religious reasons. [ 99% chance this is all fabrication & made up on the spot] It was due to their attorneys advice, when it was brought out that transfusions are inherently dangerous, and therefore leave the medical center wide-open for legal liability. As a side note; it was shown that JW patients almost always healed faster, and with far fewer complications following surgery than do those who accepted blood. Most people believe that blood is carefully checked for all problems, but that's simply not so. There are a few pathogens that are tested for, but since there are well over 200 pathogens that can be carried, there's simply no way each pint of blood can be checked for all of them. Think about that next time your physician says he'll need to give you blood. There are now many substitutes for blood that are readily available, and they cost less.
7:24:11 p.m. on December 15, 2005
ARTHUR CARDEN | Homepage | 12.15.05 - 4:31 pm | #
Arthur Carden, it sounds like you cut and paste from the JW brochure: "How Can Blood Save Your Life." I can only assume that you have fallen victim to the same propaganda about the medical efficacy of blood that the JW rank and file have bought. I was commenting on the Watchtower's misrepresentation of secular facts, which has been documented thoroughly...not the validity of the medical studies that you parrot. The fact is, those facts are not properly represented by the Watchtower Society.
10:58:55 p.m. on December 15, 2005 -
DannyHaszard
"As to the Jehovah's Witnesses and their battles to preserve religious freedom (not only for themselves, but for everyone else as well), it has not been easy. Your first reader comments were from Danny Haszard, who is almost always the first to make vitriolic comments whenever the mention is made of Jehovah's Witnesses, no matter where in the world any news article appears. He's made a life-time career of denigrating the JWs, and he's free to do so. I feel sorry for him though, since having that much hatred cannot be good for anyone. You also had a commentary from one ODRADE ATREIDES, about the JW belief in abstaining from blood. I'd suggest he do a better job of researching his facts more carefully before he writes such incorrect drivel. Prior to my retirement, I worked for a number of years in a leading medical center. It was in 1993 that the medical center went to all bloodless surgeries, and not for any religious reasons. It was due to their attorneys advice, when it was brought out that transfusions are inherently dangerous, and therefore leave the medical center wide-open for legal liability. As a side note; it was shown that JW patients almost always healed faster, and with far fewer complications following surgery than do those who accepted blood. Most people believe that blood is carefully checked for all problems, but that's simply not so. There are a few pathogens that are tested for, but since there are well over 200 pathogens that can be carried, there's simply no way each pint of blood can be checked for all of them. Think about that next time your physician says he'll need to give you blood. There are now many substitutes for blood that are readily available, and they cost less.
------------------(nearly everything that comes outta em is a fallacy,factoid distortion or outright lie)
-
Sunspot
I know it sounds harsh but why not just tell everyone to expect some news but not prefix it with 'big' and let the readers decide if it's really big or not?
Yup! You're right! It sounds harsh.
It also sounds picky and mean-spirited.
Annie
-
Sunspot
Perhaps not 'amateurish', but we're not talking about a trained professional with years of experience either. If you take this essay exactly as it had been proclaimed by Barb then you're just gullible. Without anything smarter to say all you could come up was a typical forum flame-bait.
Remember the scripture about the deliverers of good news being "unlettered and ordinary"? Keeping that in mind, I suggest you rethink your position of "if it ain't written by JAMA it ain't worthy" and your narrow mentality.
This OBVIOUSLY MUST HAVE HAD MERIT AND IMPORT, or it wouldn't have gotten past the teaching professor's desk.
Flame-bait? You could see it that way.....but it's high time that the WTS had it's feet held to the flames for all the deception THEY have taught as "food from God---straight from his lips". -
AuldSoul
Sic 'em, Annie!
LOL
How are you this fine day?
AuldSoul