Jehovah's Witnesses and Blood Banks

by MacHislopp 2 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  MacHislopp

  Hello everyone,

  Few years ago I came across an interesting article
  (pub. In the Free Minds Journal and still avalaible in the www), wrote
  by Marlene Marcado concerning the JW and the RH Factor.

  The article, was well written, very clear and factual and with many
  correct quotations of WTS publications.
  Among other things what impressed me, where some questions asked ,
  like these:

  **What gives Jehovah's Witnesses the right to dip into the nation's blood supply when they themselves don't donate any?

  **How do they justify this?

  **Over the years I have heard such harangues against blood banks from them; these are looked upon as places of absolute evil where the sanctity of blood is profaned. But if it weren't for these very same blood banks, where would they get their albumin, fibrinogen, Factor VIII, Factor IX, and Rhogam?

  **Where would all these blood products be processed from non-JW donors and stored so that JWs might have access to them?

  **Since the most prevalent protein in plasma, albumin, is acceptable for them to take, but plasma itself is not, who would spin the albumin out of the plasma for them if they are burn victims or have a liver disease?

  Then, concerning a woman patient she made this observation:

  "Let me point out that the last JW patient I had who was taking blood was getting 250cc of albumin. It takes 10 liters of plasma to get that much albumin!

  If the albumin came from whole blood donations, which it most likely did, we are talking about 19 liters of whole blood. Since one donor gives about one pint, this means that 38-40 people donated their blood so that she could have that albumin."

  I do remember thinking that her questions were very, very specific , and no JW would have
  been able to give " a satisfactory answer " based on the current WTS teaching.

  Today the questions are still valid , I would add even more in view of the articles
  published on June and October 2000(QfR) with the latest WTS position, view
  point on blood transfusion. Furthermore , even today who would be able to debate,
  to give reasonable, logical answers to her questions?

  Agape to you all, J.C. MacHislopp
• 

  Maximus

  ::who would be able to debate, to give reasonable, logical answers to her questions?

  I started to reply, Fred Rusk; two out of three ain't bad. But that's so flip.

  The real answer is, NO ONE. And there is no oracular Fred Franz around today to charismatically and fancifully "adjust" the policy in a way acceptable to others, as he did with vaccination, which was virtually accomplished overnight by fiat. New members of the GB are theological lightweights. Long-time member Lyman Swingle had been opposed to current policy for many years; but he's dead now. Hard feelings have developed over this issue, within the GB and assistants.

  Reason and logic have gone out the window. All they can trot out is such nonsense as, "What part of 'abstain from blood' don't you understand?" Fact is, this issue has been the subject of hot discussion (there is no true debate) among the governing body and those decision makers closely associated with them who clearly understand the glaring inconsistencies in this horribly flawed policy that has cost so many lives, particularly children's.

  "Debate? Discussion?" I thought the holy spirit ..." For those who do not know it, JW policy is set by majority vote. Just one person can make the difference.

  Imagine, you can take blood from a cow and make Hemopure which is an acceptable product to take. (Shades of the Masai warrior drinking cow blood.) But you cannot take packed red cells which carry the same hemoglobin, DONATED by some generally unselfish human who may very well altruistically want to help another human being--and who did not have to give up his life.

  Fractions JWs take come from DONATED blood, and it takes a ton of such to provide what they take; you've accurately supplied the figures. No pun intended, JWs have long been a drain on the blood supply in just taking fractions, without reciprocating by donating blood. Love your neighbor as yourself?

  Take a look at the new JW video on blood and you will lose your lunch. It's for idiots only, and will be ridiculed by any thinking professional as being ignorant and slanted. But that's not whom they are aiming for.

  The overriding point is, How can one literally let a child bleed to death, to symbolically show respect for the sanctity of life? The Pharisees live!

  Why does it not disturb JWs that not ONE single scholar, anywhere, agrees with their interpretation of the scriptures? (See my post on Blood, the Watchtower and Deceipt. Should have titled it Boobs or the like.)

  Someone posted the other day what is an excellent overview of the issue, which many inside Bethel secretly subscribe to: http://www.jwbloodreview.org/

  The material there is not being refuted. All they will tell you is that "this is not the Society's position" at the present time, although you may get someone to whisper that "maybe something will be printed in the future on this," which is not very satisfying.

  Maximus
• 

  JW72

  I think, in general, the reason why they keep up with their stand on blood and other crazy doctrines is that they can't back down, coz thay couldn't possibly back down now after all the controversy and expect people to believe that it was the shining of 'new light'.

  That would be a LAUGH!!!!

  Chris