Moscow ban on JW's causes confusion

DevonMcBride

http://www.profindpages.com/news/2004/04/05/MN073.htm

MOSCOW BAN ON JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES HIGHLIGHTS CONFUSION
(05.04.2004)

Since running our original article on the activities ban placed on Jehovah's Witnesses in Moscow, we have received a number of letters that clearly show confusion within the group itself.

The most confusing area of all seems to be the truth on Blood Transfusions for Jehovah's Witnesses. We have received many letters (some from Jehovah's Witnesses as well) and they all offer different versions of what they believe is the correct ruling for Blood Transfusions.

Our latest letter came from a Mr. J.G. Mc...who was worried that our article (and perhaps others) were not reporting the facts, he quotes "Though often not adhered to it is the responsibility of all in the news business to report the facts." He then pointed out some information taken from JAMA (The Journal of the American Medical Association). We should point out that the article was published in 1981 and all the other references were dated from 1967-1981 (Strangely enough, most of the letters we received quoted the same "old" extracts).

JEHOVAH?S WITNESSES THE SURGICAL/ETHICAL CHALLENGE

"Physicians face a special challenge in treating Jehovah's Witnesses. Members of this faith have deep religious convictions against accepting homologous or autologous whole blood, packed RBCs [red blood cells], WBCs [white blood cells], or platelets. Many will allow the use of (non-blood-prime) heart-lung, dialysis, or similar equipment if the extracorporeal circulation is uninterrupted. Medical personnel need not be concerned about liability, for Witnesses will take adequate legal steps to relieve liability as to their informed refusal of blood. They accept nonblood replacement fluids. Using these and other meticulous techniques, physicians are performing major surgery of all types on adult and minor Witness patients. A standard of practice for such patients has thus developed that accords with the tenet of treating the "whole person." (JAMA 1981;246:2471-2472")

Mr, J.G. also provided the following extract:

WITNESS POSITION ON THERAPY

Jehovah's Witnesses accept medical and surgical treatment. In fact, scores of them are physicians, even surgeons. But Witnesses are deeply religious people who believe that blood transfusion is forbidden for them by Biblical passages such as: "Only flesh with its soul?its blood?you must not eat" (Genesis 9:3-4); "[You must] pour its blood out and cover it with dust" (Leviticus 17:13-14); and "Abstain from . . . fornication and from what is strangled and from blood" (Acts 15:19-21).1

While these verses are not stated in medical terms, Witnesses view them as ruling out transfusion of whole blood, packed RBCs, and plasma, as well as WBC and platelet administration. However, Witnesses' religious understanding does not absolutely prohibit the use of components such as albumin, immune globulins, and hemophiliac preparations; each Witness must decide individually if he can accept these.2

It is perhaps not surprising that people are confused, as the Biblical passage reads like a riddle and the article suggests that " each Witness must decide individually if he can accept these ". This shows that there is no clear ruling on the subject and indicates a faith that is uncertain of what is right. This problem has been mentioned by many Jehovah's Witnesses who have shown some anger at the constantly changing "rules"and the response to these changes (by the leaders) has usually been "The light is getting brighter!"

As to whether Moscow were right in banning the group, only history will decide. But in our opinion, should Moscow decide to review this situation, they should insist on seeing a clear and exact statement from the group on what their real thoughts are on Blood Transfusions (and other areas), so there is no misunderstanding to the general public or to the followers of this faith.

Finally, we report the "facts" as they are presented to us and highlight the problems. We also make a point of giving all sides an opportunity to speak their minds. However, we feel that this subject is still not clear and producing articles that are at least 23 years old hardly supports the argument. Only articles like ours will have any chance of getting to the "Flesh with its soul" of the subject and we don't "pour" out any information and "cover it with dust". If Jehovah's Witnesses want to be better understood, they could try adapting their Biblical references from a language format that people stopped using hundreds of years ago.Or do they prefer to keep it this way, in order to be able to interpret it in a way that suits them?

Nosferatu

Our latest letter came from a Mr. J.G. Mc...who was worried that our article (and perhaps others) were not reporting the facts, he quotes "Though often not adhered to it is the responsibility of all in the news business to report the facts."

Such a typical JW. The media's full of lies and half-truths!

I must say that this is an excellent article on the whole wishy-washyness of the WTS.

pc

I love the line about "scores of them are physicians and surgeons". Does anyone here have a name of a JW doctor or surgeon. When your not suppose to go to college where do you get your degree? (Out od the Awake). LOL PC

DevonMcBride

I must say that this is an excellent article on the whole wishy-washyness of the WTS.

I agree. It shows how the public views JW tactics and teachings.

Devon

Xena

But in our opinion, should Moscow decide to review this situation, they should insist on seeing a clear and exact statement from the group on what their real thoughts are on Blood Transfusions (and other areas), so there is no misunderstanding to the general public or to the followers of this faith.

Yea good luck on that...they hate to be pinned down...

pc I laughted at that comment too...they discourage higher education but boast about "scores of doctors" yea right

Bryan

"they could try adapting their Biblical references from a language format that people stopped using hundreds of years ago.Or do they prefer to keep it this way, in order to be able to interpret it in a way that suits them?"

Haaaw, bwaah, haaah... rolling on the floor.
Even those worldy goats understand it now! GB praying for amageddon before the word really gets out!
Posted with great love for greater news articles like this one.
Bryan

SixofNine

Finally, we report the "facts" as they are presented to us and highlight the problems. We also make a point of giving all sides an opportunity to speak their minds. However, we feel that this subject is still not clear and producing articles that are at least 23 years old hardly supports the argument. Only articles like ours will have any chance of getting to the "Flesh with its soul" of the subject and we don't "pour" out any information and "cover it with dust". If Jehovah's Witnesses want to be better understood, they could try adapting their Biblical references from a language format that people stopped using hundreds of years ago.Or do they prefer to keep it this way, in order to be able to interpret it in a way that suits them?

LOLOLOL!~

Elsewhere

Does anyone here have a name of a JW doctor or surgeon

I grew up knowing a Dr... Dr. Morino. She served on the Liaison Committee in SE Texas. It?s been years since I?ve heard anything about her so I have know idea what she is up to right now.

blondie

If the article was wrong, did the complainer give specifics and list their sources?

Blondie

wednesday

I knew of 3 docs in this area years ago. One i think is still here. All of them became docs long before they became jws . If they had grown up jws, they'd probably never have become docs. One left the area and the other quit attending rather suddenly . Never heard what happened, except it had to do with his family..

Moscow ban on JW's causes confusion

Share this