Flipper,
The issue is one of "false statements" or at least "exagerrated statements".
There is no doubt that the WT's blood policy has caused 100's perhaps 1000's of lives since its inseption, but that is NOT what was stated.
Opening Pandora's Box - By Barbara Anderson
by flipper 86 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
JWoods
One or another thought occurs to me - and this is probably why I reacted with skepticism when this "thousands die per year" theory was presented:
Most likely thousands of witnesses certainly die per year - simple actuarial statistics can readily prove this. These deaths can of course be from a myriad of causes - ranging from simple old age through accident through childbirth complications.
I know for a fact that my father (an ex-JW) was given blood toward the very last of a long illness of old age. My personal experience here was that it neither saved him nor killed him. The doctor admitted that he simply did not know, and of course he was trying to do everything possible out of concern for the family and also concern for his own ethical standards.
This would certainly have been a "blood issue" had he still been a JW - non JW parts of the family would have raised an uproar, and then the issue is argued over the blood card, elders come to hospital, etc. But here is the deal - Paul Woods most certainly did NOT die from lack of a blood transfusion, and provision of this blood transfusion also most certainly did not extend his life at all; he was comatose at the time.
I submit that a great majority of the witness deaths under the shadow of the blood question are just like this - unfortunate ending of life where a blood transfusion is not going to pull the person through and get them back into a reasonable life.
Here is a second point of logic: The cases where a blood transfusion could plainly and simply SAVE A WITNESS LIFE (like a childbirth or a traumatic blood loss) are practically certain to receive a strong media coverage. Just like the sextuplets in Canada, or (in a similar non-JW ethical case) - like the boy with leukemia whose parents tried to hide him from court ordered treatment. This kind of tragedy will practically always find it's way out into the media if there is the slightest chance of saving the patient...and I personally don't think that thousands of such extreme cases could possibly be happening under public scrutiny.
Child molestation statistics, BTW, are far different from the above as loss of life is not involved, the cases are hidden in secret by the very nature of the crime, and so on. Also along the side points, it is thought by the most reliable figures that while the Malawi persecutions was unfair and terrible, there were only a few persons actually killed...
I still stand by the point that we ex-JWs who hate and abhor this ridiculous blood transfusion doctrine do not need to go to extreme or questionable lengths to prove our point. The doctrine itself condemns the Watchtower Society who thought it up all on its own - no matter what the numbers are. I just hate to hand our JW anti-blood adversaries "talking points" when we really don't have to by using a little more circumspect wording.
-
flipper
ETNA- I understand how you may feel brokenhearted at learning many things Jehovah's Witnesses taught were false , and an illusion , not real. You ask about what the real truth is. Well, my friend - that is a very open ended question. The truth of how each of us live our lives can be very different. I feel everyone has their own version of what they consider to be " truth " in their life. I can share with you MY truth- but yours may differ- and that's fine , that's a good thing . What I consider to be truth and real is to live your life everday in the here and now- because we don't know how long we'll live and we have to make the best of what time we've got on earth while we have it. Show love and kindness to people , relatives, friends, anybody on the street, homeless - because it makes for peace and happiness and better relations with your fellow man or woman. So that's basically my truth, nothing less, nothing more. We don't know WHAT will happen after we die- so make the life you have now a good one.
PSACRAMENTO- Well, the WT society would have to plead guilty as to making " false " statements and " exagerrated " statements, wouldn't they ?
JWOODS- You mentioned, " I just hate to hand our JW blood adversaries " talking points " when we really don't have to by using a little more circumspect wording. " Understood. But one thing you need to understand about our " adversaries " ( WT society ) is that it doesn't matter WHAT WORDING you or I use - they will find something to attack in WHATEVER we say that is negative towards the WT society. You could use the most clever, careful words ever- but these people are TRAINED to dismiss ANYTHING ex-JW's say that is the slightest negative towards the WT cult on ANY subject. That's what cults do - it's how they roll and operate in mind controlling their members.
So the big hoopla that's being made if it's thousands or hundreds of JW's that die - is really irrelevant. We all know that many have died who REALLY NEEDED blood transfusions in a critical way- but were mind controlled to minimize the importance of their life in the here and now. True- some like your father who was older and others like him might have died, with or without blood - but that doesn't minimize the imprtance of how many in critical medical situations DO NEED BLOOD. And I really don't think that ALL witness blood hassles end up in the media- far from it . Just like there are many acts of child abuse going on in the Jehovah's Witnesses that will never make media news. So I think you seem to be arguing with yourself here
-
Marvin Shilmer
JWoods writes:
"Here is a second point of logic: The cases where a blood transfusion could plainly and simply SAVE A WITNESS LIFE (like a childbirth or a traumatic blood loss) are practically certain to receive a strong media coverage. Just like the sextuplets in Canada, or (in a similar non-JW ethical case) - like the boy with leukemia whose parents tried to hide him from court ordered treatment. This kind of tragedy will practically always find it's way out into the media if there is the slightest chance of saving the patient...and I personally don't think that thousands of such extreme cases could possibly be happening under public scrutiny."
That is not a point of logic. It is a proposition, and it is false.
It is false because media coverage varies wildly from region to region.
It is false because most patient outcomes on planet earth occur in highly populated regions that are remote from mainstream media coverage.
It is false because mainstream media is more concerned with the dramatic than the subtle, and the rate of people dying because of Watchtower's blood doctrine is very subtle compared to other far more dramatic events.
It is false because as a population the Witnesses community is no more than a gnat flying amidst a flock of geese. As a result of finite resources and competing for ratings, media does not focus too much on the gnat.
It is false because medical providers are relectant to admit they were complicit in treating a child patient to death, or any patient for that matter.
Marvin Shilmer
-
wha happened?
wasn't there an Aake article that brought light to children who refuse blood transfusions and die as a result. For some reason I remember that it gave the number of those dying in the thousands. Anyone able to recall that?
-
flipper
MARVIN SHILMER- Very true what you say about the media coverage being minimal due to the " gnatlike " size of the WT society and Jehovah's Witnesses. Still lots of child abuse and blood transfusion fiasco's going on though. Just doesn't get revealed that much in media.
WHA HAPPENED- I don't recall what the Awake article was that stated " thousands " of children died from refusing blood transfusions - but if anybody reading this could help us and post the info here - it would be appreciated. Thanks
-
JWoods
JWOODS- You mentioned, " I just hate to hand our JW blood adversaries " talking points " when we really don't have to by using a little more circumspect wording. " Understood. But one thing you need to understand about our " adversaries " ( WT society ) is that it doesn't matter WHAT WORDING you or I use - they will find something to attack in WHATEVER we say that is negative towards the WT society. You could use the most clever, careful words ever- but these people are TRAINED to dismiss ANYTHING ex-JW's say that is the slightest negative towards the WT cult on ANY subject. That's what cults do - it's how they roll and operate in mind controlling their members.
Here is another idea on the subject: Wouldn't the JW logic be somewhat tempted to self-promote these "thousands" of persons dying each year just like they did on that horrible awake with the pictures of a dozen kids or so?
I don't see why they should want to hide it - they over-counted those killed in the holocaust, Malawi, and always make a big deal about persecution.
That is not a point of logic. It is a proposition, and it is false.
It is false because media coverage varies wildly from region to region. (JKW - edits remaining points for length)
What I was saying is simply that if "thousands of people are dying specifically because of the lack of blood transfusions" - I mean obvious cases - such a thing could not be hidden from the emergency response teams, the health care industry, and of course would be picked up as a major story in the media. If people died just by choice of no-blood (like my dad), then NO - there is no story there. But then, would it be honest to say that "thousands are dying from lack of blood" - if in fact blood would not save them anyway?
Of course, if anybody can come up with believable, factual proof that thousands really clearly die in this way, I will accept the point.
-
Marvin Shilmer
JWoods writes:
"What I was saying is simply that if "thousands of people are dying specifically because of the lack of blood transfusions" - I mean obvious cases - such a thing could not be hidden from the emergency response teams, the health care industry, and of course would be picked up as a major story in the media. If people died just by choice of no-blood (like my dad), then NO - there is no story there. But then, would it be honest to say that "thousands are dying from lack of blood" - if in fact blood would not save them anyway?"
Apparantly you are unaware that Watchtower's blood doctrine has been picked up as a major story over and over again precisely because the major risk to life and health that it poses. This would not be the case were it a rare occurance or if the risk were low, and scores or even a hundred or so of such instances worldwide annually would be rare occurance speaking to a low risk. The medical establishment understands the high risk associated with this doctrine precisely because of the "obvious cases" of mortality and morbidity that are reported because of the wide range of patient presentations that fit the same at-risk profiles. Evidence is already presented to prove the minimal level of this risk, and specifically to the doctrine in question, yet you fail to as much as acknowledge it. So be it. Believe as you will.
JWoods writes:
"Of course, if anybody can come up with believable, factual proof that thousands really clearly die in this way, I will accept the point."
Other than the evidence already presented above by me, what sort of evidence do you need? A thousand ghosts knocking down your door annually? The rest of us are content with solid evidence in the form of peer reviewed published articles that impinge the subject.
Marvin Shilmer, who is happy for people to believe as they will
-
JWoods
I meant something other than and beyond statistical conjecture.
I would also like to say that I do not want there to be "thousands of JW deaths per year specifically due to lack of blood transfusion" - just out of basic regard for human life. For reasons mentioned, I think that probably in the U.S. the number would range maybe in the hundreds at most - - -
less, in civilized nations with good medical care available, meaningless in 3rd world nations where even hospital care is pretty rare...
BUT IF there were anywhere this many (1000s in the world), then certainly we ex-JW activists should do everything we can to clearly document every single such death we can find starting perhaps in 2010. Many here on the board still have informational ties to many in the organization, and a lot of this knowledge would be available to us - missing some, but with something as sensational in a congregation as a "faithful death from refusing blood" would hardly be unmentioned and we would pick up many blood policy deaths.
Then this number, if at all significant, could be presented to some journalistic source which has already covered JW blood danger in the past, and then we could see where the cards will fall.
-
JWoods
I bumped this up again because of significant rewording of the last comment.
BTW, I think that Blondies conjecture of perhaps 1,000 JW deaths in the U.S. is at least plausible. Again, if this could be documented and presented to the media, it could be a valuable service not only to ex-JW causes, but probably to the poor helpless JWs themselves if it got anything changed.