Shunning Or Refusing Blood - Which Is Worse? (page 2)

Simon

I love how they try and claim that people aren't shunned or disfellowshipped for having a blood transfusion BUT if you have one you will be DF'd for rejecting Jehovahs (read 'their') rules... Does that make any sense to anyone? It's just a load of legal bullshit to get them out of the responsibility that they bear.

Fredhall

Simon,

It is no such thing of legal bullshit while applying the bible.

hillary_step

Tabby,

This is not 1929, it is 2001.

Congratulations, you finally got something right.

E'Man,

You present a powerful argument.

The DF system that the WTS uses is not of their own making. A history of the Rules Of Discipline of the early history of the Quakers for example bear a remarkable resemblance to those instituted by the WTS. Rules which may have mirrored a social acceptability in the late C19th but are clearly out of tune with the majority theological thought of a more enlightened C21st. The Quakers very much followed an early Methodist framework for disciplining members.

As with most of these controversial issues, the WTS picked them up from other belief systems and adapted them, then proclaimed them as unique.

The point that you make in that at those who refuse blood and die have eventually to make a personal decision that they impose upon themselves, whereas those who suffer through DF system have that system imposed upon them by others, often against their own will, is imho a valid one.

For example, pressure is put on JW’s by doctors to accept transfusions, often accompanied by evidence of its necessity to guarantee continued life. Though pressure is bought to bear by the HLC's on the hospital, eventually the patient makes the decision.

Who counter-argues for you in a closed trial, which is what a Judicial Committee is? Only one decision is allowed, and not your own.

A good thread, thank you - HS

Yerusalyim

Which is worse, kinda like a rock and a hard place. They both suck.

YERUSALYIM
"Vanity! It's my favorite sin!"
[Al Pacino as Satan, in "DEVIL'S ADVOCATE"]

radar

Fred is this 1961 also?

*** w61 9/15. p559 Respect for the Sanctity of Blood ***
19 In view of the emphasis put on the use of blood in the medical world, new treatments involving its use are constantly being recommended. But regardless of whether it is whole blood or a blood fraction, whether it is blood taken from one’s own body or that taken from someone else, whether it is administered as a transfusion or as an injection, the divine law applies. God has not given man blood to use as he might use other substances; he requires respect for the sanctity of blood

Radar

All that we see or seem/ Is but a dream within a dream.

-Edgar Allen Poe

Grout

The blood doctrine has the potential for causing individuals a great deal more harm than the shunning doctrine. Granted, if an adult refuses blood, that is his choice, and he mostly harms himself. But if an adult refuses blood FOR HIS CHILD and the child DIES, well, that's worse than any shunning.

On the other hand, one could argue that the number of shunned people is so large, and the number of dead children is so small in comparison, that the total suffering caused by shunning is larger than that caused by blood refusal. And will we ever know how many suicides were caused or abetted by shunning?

On the gripping hand, I think this is basically a silly question. Both doctrines are evil.

alliwannadoislive

crikey - what a choice

i have to say that until i came to this bulletin board, i didn't realise the cruel scale of the shunning doctrine - i can't even bear to think what it must be like to be totally ignored by your own family - my heart goes out to all those of you who suffer through such an unchristian wickedness

blood - it despairs me to think that at one time i would have sacrificed my children at the alter of the blood doctrine - or would i have ? ... i dunno - but to see the governing body decide to 'allow' certain other bits - who are they to play with our lives ? ... it appalls me to see these people strain out the gnat ...

which is worse ? they are different - but thanks for discussion eman ...

hillary_step

Grout,

On the gripping hand, I think this is basically a silly question. Both doctrines are evil.

It might appear to be so at first glance but it is this fundamental argument that is at the basis of most court cases regarding JW's and blood transfusion and JW's and the 'mental cruelty' issues that have been fought in the courts over the past four of five decades.

It is a question that does have serious implications - HS

Grout

Hillary, I can see why the two doctrines would be fodder for cruelty suits and even criminal cases. But I can't see why a comparison between them is important. (Though it is interesting.)

hillary_step

Grout,

But I can't see why a comparison between them is important.

Perhaps because it tests the boundaries of free or imposed will, which of course, has implications on the way law is legislated in our communities.

Best regards - HS

Shunning Or Refusing Blood - Which Is Worse?

Share this