Blood cards - before screaming too loudly,

by TheOldHippie 34 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  ianao

  Ok Sexy, if "allogenic" was a mere printing error, then perhaps they ment "autologous" blood? Nah,

  "I will not take autologous blood..."

  Would make no sense. "Printing error" sounds about as dumb as a fake moon landing.
• 

  AlanF

  SexyTeen said:

  : Alan, I respectfully disagree.

  Based on what? Have you seen, or been informed as to the content of the aborted blood cards? I have, and that is what I base my comments on.

  : In the following sentence: "The decision not to distribute the 2001 printing of the blood cards was not due to a "printing error" but to a change in policy at the highest levels of the Watchtower political machine, and it took place very recently."

  : This is only you speculating the worst case scenario and then you make it sound like it is a fact.

  Obviously you have no idea how things work in Bethel. As I said, the language that goes on the blood cards is jealously guarded both by the Legal and Writing Departments. No changes will be made without approval from the highest levels of these departments, and of course, the Governing Body. Therefore, adding the word "allogenic" to the language of the new cards was a deliberate policy decision made before the cards were printed last summer. It is therefore not speculative to state that the decision not to distribute these cards involved a reversal of the previously agreed upon policy. And since these decisions are deliberate, and not just a mistake on the part of some junior Bethel member, the policy reversal cannot be attributed to a mere "printing error".

  If you still disagree, then present your reasoning along with some facts.

  AlanF
• 

  dubla

  nytel-

  please do not reply if you have no intelligent reply.....so far, that has been your practice. you seem to think you have answered the argument, when in actuality you have answered nothing.

  really your "car scenario"
  has nothing to do with anything.....if the cards were made
  obsolete it would change nothing regarding the doctrine of blood..

  the "car scenario" i gave you has everything to do with the topic. i asked you how a witness could believe in "no blood" without carrying the card, and you gave no answer (what a surprise). until you can intelligently answer this question, explaining how this witness would uphold their beliefs in the event of an emergency (i.e., "car scenario"), then you have nothing more to add to the conversation, and in turn you have proven your argument hasnt a leg to stand on. thanks for coming to class today.

  aa
• 

  nytelecom1

  thanks for coming to class today.

  biting so soon???..booahhahaha

  i asked you how a witness could believe in "no blood" without carrying the card, and you gave no answer (what a surprise). until you can intelligently answer this question, explaining how this witness would uphold their beliefs in the event of an emergency

  reeeed fiiiirrsst poooooosssst sllllllooooowwwwlllleeeeeeeee

  i really dont think your that stupid..but i could be sadly mistaken
• 

  dubla

  nytel-

  reeeed fiiiirrsst poooooosssst sllllllooooowwwwlllleeeeeeeee

  okay, read it, as slow as i possibly could, and it still obviously doesnt answer the question ive posed. perhaps the real problem is that you do not or cannot understand the question ive posed. either way, heres your first post:

  i dont need a card to say i dont believe in the Trinity.......
  remember the Pioneer cards, pioneers use to get ???.....where are they now??
  ............and pioneers are.??

  again, these completely irrelevant comparisons do not answer the question: "how would a jw hold the "no blood" belief without holding the card? im starting to think indeed you dont understand the question due to the fact that you refuse to answer it.

  i understand your references, and i also understand they lend nothing to this conversation. then again, it is quite rare that you actually add something of value to any conversation.

  aa