Awesome blog re blood issue

by rebel8 93 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  besty

  okay you have softened your stance a bit there SBF - thank you.

  the issue now is the role the WTS plays in influencing lay persons - it acts as a source of authority in peoples lives and therefore has a duty of care to protect its members with sound information

  or it could stay out of the medical field altogether and allow religious beliefs to play their protected role

  the problem is, as Kerry makes clear in the title of her paper, they misrepresent available facts and accepted best practice - that is undeniable.

  The issue for the WTS is why they feel the need to bolster their religious beliefs with medical misinformation.
• 

  slimboyfat

  or it could stay out of the medical field altogether and allow religious beliefs to play their protected role

  But Jehovah's Witnesses reject blood on religious not medical grounds. Everyone knows that. Whether they also have misinformed ideas about the relative safety of blood does not touch the central religious point.

  Kerry Louderback in her article even claims to show that Witness interpretations of Early Church Fathers are incorrect. That is to stretch the distinction between religious tradition and scientific knowledge to its outer limits.

  The issue for the WTS is why they feel the need to bolster their religious beliefs with medical misinformation.

  Any worse than what the Catholic church says about condoms?
• 

  rebel8

  TY for realizing some of the facts about Hemophiliacs, slim.

  Be aware that Hemophilia clotting factor was not available until the 70s. Before that the only treatment for us was whole blood.....and wts was clearly stating whole blood was not necessary to treat hypovolemia and replace lost red cells essential for keeping the vital organs alive. That was a complete lie. They intentionally twisted words from medical experts to make it seem as though they agreed with wts.

  Kerry explained why, in US law, that is considered to cause liability to the party lying. I guess I'm wondering if you feel you have more expertise in US law than a licensed US attorney does? I don't understand your dispute of her legal interpretation, to be honest??

  The same lie affected jws who weren't Hemophiliacs.

  I'm not clear on why you're mentioning the Pope's bad advice about condoms. The Pope is not in America so we can't sue him here.
• 

  purplesofa

  A Catholic will not be ex communicated for using a condom.
• 

  slimboyfat

  This comic strip illustrates well how the Muramoto-style intervention to "inform" Witnesses about to refuse blood really is a slippery slope we don't want to go down.

  http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0026/0026_01.asp
• 

  leavingwt

  JWs have "guns" to their heads. It's not about religious faith or medicine.

  They reject blood under THE THREAT OF EXPULSION.

  This is not a choice.

  A hostage victim held by his captor, with a gun placed to his head, could

  choose to run away. However, the very real threat of being shot and killed serves to eliminate such a choice. Thus, I feel that characterizing Watchtower’s current position on blood transfusions as a conscientious decision made by each Witness is misleading.

  The truth is this:

  Jehovah’s Witnesses are required to refuse blood or else they will be excommunicated. Such excommunication deems the Witness worthy of everlasting destruction in the eyes of the congregation.
• 

  slimboyfat

  A Catholic will not be ex communicated for using a condom.

  No just eternal damnation.
• 

  slimboyfat

  They reject blood under THE THREAT OF EXPULSION.

  None of them refuse because they actually believe it's wrong? How do you know.
• 

  leavingwt

  Children and babies are DYING because of the Watchtower blood doctrine. They brag about it, placing their photos on the front of the Awake magazine.
• 

  slimboyfat

  I know a Witness who has haemophilia. I have broached the subject gently but did not get very far. He's a dyed in the wool Witness. As I understand it the Society changed their mind on factor VIII but delayed publishing the change in the WT to save face. Meanwhile individuals who phoned the headquarters were informed of the change, but others were left in the dark. Many presumably refused necessary treatment needlessly for some time as a result.

  I don't claim to be an expert in US law, but I note the subsequent absence of legal victories on the basis of the argument Louderback made with little surprise.