WSJ Says: Blood transfusions now Ok for JW's!

by Sara Annie 17 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Sara Annie

  Wall Street Journal, December 9, 2002. Marketplace Section in an article about Mormons...

  "The Mormon Church, of course, isn't the only religion to shun or cast out dissenting members, scholars say. The Vatican has excommunicated Catholics for disobeying papal edicts. Many Orthodox Jews disown family members for marrying outside the faith. For years, Jehovah's Witnesses who received blood transfusions--a practice barred by the faith--were excommunicated, although they aren't anymore."

  Since when?
• 

  blondie

  Don't get too excited, Sara, it is just semantics. JWs will consider that you have disassociated yourself if you take a blood transfusion. Either way you are shunned.

  Blondie
• 

  NameWithheld

  Yea, same as the voteing thing. You are no longer DF'ed for it. Just DA'd. Since there is no difference between the two other than the name, and the fact that they can at any time announce for any reason you DA'd (no need to even break out a judical commitee) it's a nice neat little spin they put on it to make them look better to the press. Won't make you feel better when your family shuns and abandons you though.

  It's like, saying "We won't murder you, just kill you". Some comfort!
• 

  Elsewhere

  Sara Annie,

  I would like to write a letter to them explaining that a person is still shunned if they accept blood.

  Could you give me the title of the article, the author's name, and the page number?

  If you can post a scanned copy, that would be GREAT.

  Thanks,
  Elsewhere
• 

  Double Edge

  Cool hat Elsewheres.... it's reeeeally you.
• 

  No Apologies

  Umm, I don't think voting is a DA offense. I could be wrong, but I know there have been some changes in regards to voting recently.
• 

  NameWithheld

  As regards voting, what's in writing and what policy is enforced, is two different things. It was made clear at least in the US, that voting is still 'not allowed' from the COs onstage.
• 

  Roddy

  NameWithheld >>As regards voting, what's in writing and what policy is enforced, is two different things. It was made clear at least in the US, that voting is still 'not allowed' from the COs onstage. <<

  That was strange. I guess that is why I still remember it so well. After that WT article came out, when our CO came for his visit he basically contradicted everything that article said without saying he contradicted it. Strange smoke and mirrors.

  Makes me wonder if that WT article was a strategic ploy for 'public' consumption rather than for the rank and file JW to use and, heaven forbid!, think for themselves.

  Getting back to the WSJ article.

  True, take blood and you are instantly DA.

  DF or DA - different bullets, same gun, same result. More smoke and mirrors!
• 

  hawkaw

  WHAT WAS THE FULL TITLE OF THE ARTICLE AND WHO WAS THE REPORTER!!!!!

  CAN YOU GET THIS TO ME ASAP AS I WANT TO SEND AN EMAIL THAT I HAVE JUST PREPARED!!!!!

  hawk

  -p.s. sorry about the large font - I just want to get your attention and I know you can't link to Journal articles

  Edited by - hawkaw on 17 December 2002 8:35:17
• 

  hawkaw

  bttt