by AndersonsInfo 53 Replies latest watchtower medical
It was that article in the newspaper that talked about Kerry Louderback-Wood's tort on blood transfusions. After that I started asking questions of the other elders which eventually got me removed and got me looking beyond the Watchtower publications. It was a turning point in my life.
LD
Oregon surgeon Osamu Muramoto wrote several excellent articles attacking WTS hypocrisy on blood transfusions and in particular the level of control over JWs and the level of information control.
In part 3 of that series (Journal of Medical Ethics, 1999), he noted the WT Society's false and hypocritical claim to the European Commission of Human Rights that JWs have "free choice" to receive blood transfusions "without any control or sanction on the part of the association." As Muramoto pointed out, a JW spokesman in the UK claimed on BBC radio, when challenged, that an unrepentant JW who received blood would be disfellowshipped not because they took blood, but because they abandoned the doctrine of the religious organisation.
Trickery. Cunning. Sleight of hand. Deception. Outright lies. Yep, God would use that organisation as his sole channel, no worries.
Hi Barbara! I remember that time five years ago very well! I've been quiet on these sites for the past couple of years, but paying attention all the same.
It's obvious your article made some important impacts - as some of these posts show. A couple of years ago I lost a former JW friend. He'd had some minor surgery, did more than he should have afterward, then went to a District Convention. He was bleeding internally, began to spit up blood, was hospitilized, but died due to refusing blood. I'm sure he had a rather limited understanding of "current" WTS blood policy. He might have survived.
I hope you are well, and it's nice to see some old friends on this thread as well.
S4
Time flies when you are having fun. Thank you for the update, Barbara. And thank you for your hard work.
Perhaps some clarification would be in order in regards to your statement that blood transfusions are said to be a conscience matter. I don't know who is saying that, but it certainly isn't coming from "God's channel of communication". The recent Elder's manual clearly outlined that accepting a blood transfusion was an act that constituted disassociation by actions.
Thanks for the update and Good Job. May the Gods bless you.
@Donuthole, I think that is their loophole, and I have heard it argued thus:
Q: Are JWs free to accept blood transfusions?
A: Yes. It is entirely up to their conscience.
Q: If they do, will the congregation impose any punishment or discipline as a consequence?
A. No. There is no need to. Once a JW accepts a blood transfusion and indicates they are not repentant, they have indicated by their actions they no longer wish to abide by the religion's fundamental beliefs. That means they have disassociated themselves and are no longer JWs.
@MrMonroe
Using the that logic any sin could be considered a conscience matter.
Is there a link online to the article or video or recording?
I am also interested in something crystal clear regarding blood (whole blood? Fractions?) being a conscience matter?
Thanks for taking the time on this article.
