Another JW murdered by the Watchtower

by john123 18 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  john123

  Hey everyone,

  I just wanted to let you know that we have a disassociated JW who is about to die from ovarian cancer. The cancer spread because she would not take a blood transfusion during an operation that attempted to contain the cancer while she was a JW. Her name is C.J. I talked to her today, and she says she has weeks to live. Our Support group may hold a service in memory of her. Whoever would like to send flowers or cards please send them to:

  C.J Mauer

  c/o Approaches To Education, Inc.

  6901 E. Broadway Blvd. # 138

  Tucson, AZ 85710
• 

  Joyzabel

  Thanks for the info John123

  But I'm a little confused. This person refused blood herself, right? Then it sounds like she had a change of mind and has dissassociated herself. I'm glad she woke up to the mind control and I'm terribly sorry she has cancer, but I think its unfair to say the WT "murdered" another JW. That seems a little strong, imho.

  For us to move on from our past experiences, we need to take responsiblity for things we did. We may have been in a high control group, but we still made choices.

  I hope your friend has a pain-free life as long as she may live. And be surrounded by many of her surportive friends as possible.

  j2bf
• 

  bluesapphire

  I'm confused too. How can cancer spread simply because of refusing a blood transfusion? And she obviously refused it and lived. The WTS might have been responsible if she had died due to loss of blood but how can anyone claim they are murderers because a person got cancer? Please clarify. Thank you!
• 

  herself

  John123. Did she actually have the surgery? How did a lack of a transfusion cause her cancer to spread? I've never heard of that. Ovarian cancer can be deadly if not caught very early on, and unfortunately it is a difficult cancer to detect. If she lived through the surgery without blood, I'm not sure how not having it caused the cancer to spread. Can you be more detailed please?

  H.S.
• 

  john123

  Hi j2bf,

  I understand where you are coming from, but in mind control or undue influence groups it is being debated as to whether the person actually has free will or choice. This is a subject that was also discussed in my philosophy class in college last night. The debate between free will and determinism. For example, David Hume taught what is called "soft determinism." People have free choice apart from coercion and compulsion. On the other, hand Immanuel Kant taught that human behaviors are determined, but human choices are free.

  In my opinion my statement is not unfair. What she does with her life now is what counts. Take care
• 

  john123

  Hi everyone,

  I will go into some more detail. During the surgery the doctors got the cancer, but were not able to continue on to remove the surrounding tissue because of the drop in her blood count. Apparently there were some cancer cells left over in the surrounding tissue. The cancer spread. CJ's story is found in the "Womens Issues" section at freeminds.org. I hope this has answered everyone's questions.-- john
• 

  herself

  Thank you John. That is understandable. But I think it would be more fair and less alarmist sounding to say that the WTS policy on blood diminished her chances of a full recovery. The cancer may have metastisized already before the time of her surgery, but not yet shown itself in other parts of her body.

  Using terms like "murder" is inflammatory and sounds too aggressive and less rational. When you are speaking against the WTS, be sure to stay above them, not sinking to their level. The blood policy diminished her chances at a full recovery, but it wasn't murder and at this point, there is just no way to know if that was the cause or not.

  I agree that she was coerced into not having blood, but don't agree that it positively would have made any difference. There's no way to know at this point. How sad.

  H.S.
• 

  onthego

  Murder is a term that's right on. Stick with it. She is going to die now and to illustrate it would not have happened except for the cult that put the "gun" in her hand.

  Edited by - onthego on 3 December 2002 16:5:32
• 

  Aaac

  I agree! There are so many ex-JWs who still believe all this stuff.
• 

  herself

  onthego, how do you know for certain that it would not have happened if she'd not been a JW? How can you be so completely certain that it had not metastisized before the surgery? You cannot be sure.

  Overstating your case ruins it for many people. I'm less likely to listen to anyone yelling in my face some over-stated, irrational jumble of words, than I am to someone who quietly states their case and explains rationally how the lack of a transfusion diminished her chances for a full recovery.

  H.S.