Is the GB guilty of crimes against humanity?

Chook

The changing of doctrine that cost brothers their lives or future happiness . Told flock to get no education .Told sisters for one hundred years that having children wasn’t gods priority . Deaths resulted from no organ transplants and blood fractions. Can these men really believe they are gods mouth piece.

flipper

Yes they are. It's a criminal organization masquerading as a religion

scratchme1010

No. At least not from a legal stand point.

LoveUniHateExams

Is the GB guilty of crimes against humanity? - in a word, no.

There are serious wrinkles in the WTS that need ironing out - and goverments should punish the org over the paedophile issue.

But let's get real here ... ISIS & Al-Qaeda, not the GB, are guilty of crimes against humanity.

The GB, bad though they are, simply are not on the same page.

Giordano

Coercion is a crime. In law, coercion is codified as a duress crime. Such actions are used as leverage, to force the victim to act in a way contrary to their own interests. Coercion may involve the actual infliction of physical pain/injury or psychological harm in order to enhance the credibility of a threat.

Such as the threat of shunning!

Is it criminal coercion to threaten a person with Shunning if they want to order a blood transfusion for a child or wife or husband?
If a person leaves the JW world and is shunned by family and close friends is it coercion to specifically threaten a family member with shunning if they want to have a non spiritual family relationship with a close even aging family member?
At what point is a legal line crossed that takes it from the incompetent WTBTS theology into the realm of bodily injury or mental torture?
The WTBTS can not burn a witch at the stake because the Bible says it's the right thing to do. The WTBTS can not demand that the congregation stone a sinner even though the Bible says you should.
Following your personal religious beliefs is one aspect of religious freedom........ Causing harm and using coercion on others because your religion says that is the right thing to do is totally another issue.
Banning Blood Transfusions, and for an 11 year period, transplants, and decades before......... Vaccines...... cost the untimely deaths and suffering of a vast number of JW's.
There is no way around it the WTBTS and it's followers are as guilty as Jim Jones and his followers. The tragedy is that while Jonestown happened once........... in the JW world its an on going crime each and every day.And let me not get started on their treatment of Pedophiles and their victims.The law is circling the wagons around the JW's........ no religion can be held blameless for evil and vile practices......... ask the Mormons, Ask the Catholic Church, ask radical Muslims. Ask any snake handlers who might still be alive.

LoveUniHateExams

Coercion is a crime - this maybe so but it doesn't necessarily follow that the GB has committed crimes against humanity.

On 9/11/2001, Al-Qaeda killed 3,000 innocent people in the worst single terrorist attack in history. This is definitely a crime against humanity.

From 2013 to the present day, ISIS have massacred Yazidi people, thrown gays from rooftops and beheaded many innocent people. These are definitely crimes against humanity.

The GB & WTS, bad as they are, just aren't on the same page ...

Giordano

Uni your a good poster but you......... a lot of us........ get hung up on who's the worse not poster but criminals. This isn't a contest about who is worse ISIS or the WTBTS. If you want to go in that direction then we have something like 100 million people killed in the reeducation centers, concentration camps and Gulags by Mao, Stalin and Hitler.

The JW's have been discouraging Blood Transfusions earlier but harder since 1945, in 1960 or so it became a shunning offense. Do you have any idea what the state of medical treatment was like in 1945 through the 1960s? Blood was a given .......no blood no surgery. Hell I had open heart surgery in November of 1987 and found out I needed five liters of blood to survive during the operation.

The WTBTs also discouraged transplants. Its hard to put an exact number of deaths or suffering hastened by this foolish belief which they held for over a decade.

And it's gotten worse. This past year the American Red cross indicated that 4.5 million Americans would die each year without life saving blood transfusions.

The JW's would represent on a statistical basis 3500 each year ( I did the math re Population of JW in the USA & percentage of the public that needs blood).

What is the survival rate of the 3500 JW's that didn't accept blood..... lets put the best face on this number and say 2500 survived without blood. And a 1,000 died. Go back to 1945 when JW were being warned away from blood and 1960 when they would be DF if they accepted blood and factor in where surgery was in those decades. We could have something in the range of a thousand deaths a year for the last 73 years. We can fudge the numbers pro and con but remember this was just the USA not the entire world. 73,000 deaths is a crime against humanity.

Now the following is stuff I didn't know.

https://www.bnl.gov/hr/blooddrive/56facts.asp

There was a lot I didn't know about blood: The above has 56 reasons why blood is needed let's quote just 5 or 6.

People who have been in car accidents and suffered massive blood loss can need transfusions of 50 pints or more of red blood cells.

The average bone marrow transplant requires 120 units of platelets and about 20 units of red blood cells. Patients undergoing bone marrow transplants need platelets donations from about 120 people and red blood cells from about 20 people.
Severe burn victims can need 20 units of platelets during their treatment.
Children being treated for cancer, premature infants, and children having heart surgery need blood and platelets from donors of all types.
Cancer, transplant and trauma patients and patients undergoing open-heart surgery require platelet transfusions to survive.
Sickle cell disease is an inherited disease that affect more than 80,000 people in the United States, 98% of whom are of African descent. Some patients with complications from severe sickle cell disease receive blood transfusions every month - up to 4 pints at a time.
Severe burn victims can need 20 units of platelets during their treatment.

To withhold this treatment would be criminal. To coerce a person not to get blood is criminal.

The death toll is much higher in many other parts of the world.

LoveUniHateExams

You make good points Giordano (which is why I gave your latest comment a like) and I hear what you're saying.

The WTS/GB definitely deserve to have their collars felt.

But have they committed crimes against humanity? ... Really?

If you want to go in that direction then we have something like 100 million people killed in the reeducation centers, concentration camps and Gulags by Mao, Stalin and Hitler - Mao killed 45 - 60 million; Stalin killed 12 million; Hitler killed only 6 million.

Marxism has been responsible for more deaths in the 20th century than Nazism & the West combined.

BTW it's often the West's liberal political commentators who go down the 'whoever killed the most is worst' crap. When Palestinian rockets fired at Israel kill a handful, and Israel responds with bombing the shit out of Gaza, killing hundreds ... Mehdi Hassan claims that Israel is worse than Hamas.

Heal thyself, physician ...

Brokeback Watchtower

I think it's a matter of degrees. While not to the same degrees as Hitler, Stalin, and other mass murderers though out history. They are definitely guilty of crimes against humanity, for how many thousands have died not getting proper medical treatment because their teaching on using blood to save one's life.

LoveUniHateExams

They are definitely guilty of crimes against humanity - they are definitely guilty of crimes, but are they guilty of crimes against humanity?

Crimes against humanity suggests something huge and/or beyond the pale - Mao & Stalin murdering tens of millions of their own people in peace time, Hitler massacring Jews, ISIS massacring Yazidi people and beheading aid workers ...

The GB are definitely guilty of crimes, of something ... but are they guilty of crimes against humanity?

I may not be debating it very well but I believe it's up for debate.

Is the GB guilty of crimes against humanity?

Share this