HOW can a Jdub accept BLOOD FRACTIONS?? hmm?

by martinwellborne 12 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  martinwellborne

  I thought the main thing with the blood issue was that it was to be viewed from God's point of view. Not that it would be up to individual choice and conscience.

  My point that I am trying to get to is this, HOW can a Jdub accept BLOOD FRACTIONS if they want to view blood in the same light as God would.

  Am i making this clear? To me it is hypocritical if a witness would accept blood fractions, knowing full well that they must have been donated to a blood bank by someone giving blood who has no regard for God's view of blood. Also how many times must they have walked by a blood donation station and turned up their noses thinking "how horrible to think what goes on in that place!" All the work by well trained

  To me the stand taken on this issue is wrong if they want to hold to the view that taking blood is wrong. How can they say that the main four parts are wrong to take but if you cut up those fourth parts into subsequent fourth parts etc it then becomes OK??

  DOH!

  SORRY IT MAKES NO SENSE!

  I think the reason for the HLC visits is to enforce this double standard viewpoint.

  mw
• 

  frozen one

  I've asked a few of my witless relatives about the contradiction of no blood donation vs. ok to use certain products that came from donated blood. Not one has even tried to answer the question. In fact the impression I get is that they have a complete disconnect between the two. I would be interested to know if anyone has had a witless explain how they justify the practice.
• 

  jacethespace

  Makes perfect sense to me now

  Just after i was baptized and i recieved my blood card i thought carefully about blood fractions and decided not to accept them

  Well the elder came round to see me and told me they were concerned that i hadnt accepted fractions and suggested i should change my card

  So much for making a decision based on conscience!
• 

  sspo

  Most witnesses know it does not make sense about taking fractions of blood

  but no one dares to talk about it and question it because of fear of being labeled

  as an independent thinker and lacking faith in the GB and the " NEW LIGHT FROM JEHOVAH".

  We all played the game for many years or decades
• 

  martinwellborne

  yes jace, exactly my point, i remember reading all the questions from readers since the fifties on blood, and all the brochures and references to try to reach what i thought would be a conscientious decision. anyway i

  was more confused by the end, especially when you research about blood as FERTILISER then it really gets crazy. blood is to be poured out on the ground was the WTs reasoning since it says so in leviticus17:13.

  yet to use blood as fertiliser. w64 11/15 680-683, on page 681 it says "Naturally, a Christian could not properly encourage persons to obtain blood goods rather than those free from blood and he could not advocate

  any misuse of blood." What are blood fractions if they are not a misuse of blood.

  This comment to was astounding on p682 of same article...

  "The Society does not endorse any of the modern medical uses of blood, such as the uses of blood in connection with inoculations. Inoculation is, however, a virtually unavoidable circumstance in some segments of

  society, and so we leave it up to the conscience of the individual to determine whether to submit to inoculation with a serum containing blood fractions for the purpose of building up antibodies to fight against disease.

  If a person did this, he may derive comfort under the circumstances from the fact that he is not directly eating blood, which is expressly forbidden in God’s Word."

  Doh, is this not the same as saying well it's ok to take a blood transfusion as it is not directly eating blood.

  MW
• 

  eyeslice

  It is a problem that I discussed with other elders when I was an elder. The problem with blood fractions is that often individual fractions have to be extracted from multiple donations. So for example if you decide to take factor 8 for hemophilia, then that product may have come from hundreds of individual donations, which is why many hemophiliacs developed AIDS in the 1980s. So in my mind the ‘pollution factor’ of accepting blood is far worse if you accept a fraction than if you were to accept a couple of pints of whole blood. Also, another thing that elders cannot answer is; why if I can accept a blood fraction in all good conscience, is it not totally selfish if I cannot donate blood in return? The official answer here is that if you donate blood, you cannot dictate what it is used for. The bottom line is that the whole blood fraction thing is a total mess. Eyeslice
• 

  martinwellborne

  Thank you Eye.. it's a change to get some sense. i remember asking to get my blood directive signed and being questioned over the fact that i had put ABSOLUTELY NO BLOOD or any FRACTIONS.

  i think the elders on the committees are thicker than many of the lay folk.
• 

  TD

  You mentioned that you read all the articles since the 50's. You probably noticed then that orginally, the teaching was that you should not accept blood in any way, shape or form. Serum albumin was specifically condemned. Gamma globulin was specifically condemned, The 1961 publication, Blood Medicine and the Law of God stated, "...regardless of whether it is whole blood or a blood substance that is involved, God's law remains the same." (i.e. It is wrong.)

  Gradually though, blood became more and more ubiquitous in medicine. For example, if you've attended school in a developed country, your parents have allowed you to receive the standard battery of childhood immunizations. Albumin (Either human or bovine) is used in the preparation of a number of these immunizations.

  The original draconian position is virtually impossible for anyone to live by today. Blood is everywhere in medicine.

  So while the current position of forbidding some parts of blood while allowing others doesn't make any kind of logical sense at all, it still makes sense in a cynical, purely pragmatic sort of way. Those that have formulated the current doctrine apparently don't believe their own arguments. They have some other motive for perpetuating the doctrine.
• 

  jeanV

  every JW should read the Jensen letters. if those do not open their eyes on the subject, nothing will.

  Available here: http://www.quotes-watchtower.co.uk/blood_-_jensen_letters.html
• 

  still_in74

  So while the current position of forbidding some parts of blood while allowing others doesn't make any kind of logical sense at all, it still makes sense in a cynical, purely pragmatic sort of way. Those that have formulated the current doctrine apparently don't believe their own arguments. They have some other motive for perpetuating the doctrine.

  this is the kool-aid test. If you'll die for something you will probably live for it too.
  If this is taken away alot more of what the org. says might not seem so important after all will it?

  Martin.... I like your reasoning. It is simple but effective. How can such a 'major' issue like this be a conscience decision? Was eating blood a conscience matter for Jews? If this was so important to Jehovah, why the lack of clarity? How can one justify not only refusing/taking blood, but making this a matter of conscience? It either is or isn't.

  I have opened up to a few JW's lately about blood and I always get them scratching their chin. I had an elder the other day actually agreeing with me. He was amazed about the point that fractions come from blood not poured out on the ground. He kept going back to that and commenting on it. I even went to the degree to tell him I felt that the blood issue was too full of holes to be finished with,,,, that I think in time blood as a whole (pardon the pun) will a conscience matter. He could only say that it would shake the organization.

  I think he is right.....