Is hemoglobin now a conscience matter? (page 2)

blondie

Some people don't want to see it. Many JWs (and others) live in the Land of Denial. They feel that what you don't know won't hurt you (or you won't be held responsible for it), ha.

Blondie

That is pretty messed up . How come the blood they claim should be thrown on the ground can be used to make fractions yet to take whole blood is against Gods law ? The bible does not mention blood transfusions and when it talks about abstaining from blood they are talking about animal blood from slaughtered animals . It's a pretty sound argument to say that blood used in blood transfusions is living tissue .

trevor

Until recently the Society had insisted that the use of all blood parts such as red or white cells including hemoglobin, plasma and platelets were also banned. To accept any such treatments was the same as having a transfusion. This ruling was based on the Biblical admonition to ?abstain from blood.? Now they have decided that some of these blood parts can be used!

Members in the USA are expected to fill in a ?Durable Power of Attorney? and distribute this legal document to friends, relatives and their doctor so that in the case of an accident, the hospital would know that they were not to give the injured person a blood transfusion.

On 1 December 2000, elders in the USA were informed in writing by the Society that in line with articles appearing in both 15 June 2000 and 15 October 2000 Watchtower magazines, the DPA forms had been amended to allow members to accept the previously forbidden fractionated blood parts.

Using the name Lee Elder, the founder of AJWRB, a group that has been set up to determine the feelings of Witnesses regarding the ban on blood, stated the following:

? Even more significant is this further comment from the Watchtower Society: ?only a small percentage of the brothers have filled out the Society?s DPA form.? This recent statement from the Watchtower Society is very important in that it shows that level of commitment to the Watchtower Society policy is very small. If a Jehovah's Witness is unconscious and exsanguinating and no DPA can be presented, I believe a very strong argument exists that the person is not committed to the Watchtower Society policy. Especially in light of this recent disclosure by the Watchtower Society, which reveals dwindling support for its partial blood policy. It is also noteworthy that nearly a year after ceasing its policy of disfellowshiping Jehovah's Witnesses who accept blood or the blood products that are still forbidden; the Watchtower Society has never informed the general membership of the change. Only the congregation elders have been informed to date.? (www.ajwrb.org)

One elder, writing under the pseudonym Mr Shilmer, to avoid disciplinary action has asked the Watchtower?s head office to justify this turn-around and clarify the position. A copy of his letter was sent to The Regional Ethics Council in Portland USA. A reply was received from Dr. Osamu Muramoto, which reads in part:

?I appreciate Mr. Shilmer?s comment as an active Witness elder. Compared with Mr. Bartlett's letter, the opinions of Mr.Shilmer and Mr. Elder testify how diverse the views are on this issue among Jehovah's Witnesses. Since Mr. Shilmer raised the question of partial abstinence from blood, I would like to add one example to show how the new WTS blood policy is NOT abstaining from blood.

As I stated in this paper, and as clearly stated in the new version of the Durable Power of Attorney form printed by the WTS and distributed to the JWs in the United States last week, the new policy allows JWs to accept ?all fractions? of ?any primary component.? The WTS has emphasized in its literature that those "fractions" are "small? and therefore acceptable.

When I ask JWs why those "fractions" are acceptable, most would reply, ?because they are tiny fractions.? Under this new policy, the most important ?fraction? JWs are now permitted to accept is hemoglobin-based blood substitutes, which had been prohibited until recently. How ?small? is hemoglobin as a fraction of the blood? Let me quote a simple sentence from a college- level anatomy textbook: ?Discounting its water content, an erythrocyte [red blood cells, which WTS determined unacceptable] is over 97% hemoglobin, the molecule that binds to and transports respiratory gasses.? (Reference 1. Marieb E. Human anatomy and physiology. 4th ed. Menlo Park, CA:Addison Wesley Longman Inc; 1998:630)

?If God commands to abstain from red blood cells, as the WTS teaches, why does the WTS also teach that accepting 97% of what God prohibits does not violate God's command?? (US spelling)

heathen

Because they are stubborn and refuse to admit they were wrong all along and having killed so many people over it are probly afraid of law suits . They are very crafty when it comes to the law and getting around it while covering their own bottoms .

XBEHERE

?If God commands to abstain from red blood cells, as the WTS teaches, why does the WTS also teach that accepting 97% of what God prohibits does not violate God's command??

So based on this statement, if the bible forbids fornication why then does WT policy consider something such as.. say mutual masturbation a DFing offense. After all, arent you basically commiting a certain percentage of sex but not actually having sex? Shouldn't this also be a conscience matter? I know, I know, the bible also cautions against uncleanness and loose conduct but my point is that the WT seems to be modifying the bible's stance on blood.... at least their interpretation of it anyway. So contradictory and stupid.

Odrade

Hemoglobin is currently one of the trickiest parts of the blood dogma, IMO. The only thing the changes do is make it a "conscience matter" for the JC deciding what happens to the poor sick JW.

"Hmmmm, let's see what new light is on hemopure.... well, it really doesn't come right out and say... so... hmmm.... WE think it's BAD! OFF WITH HIS HEAD!"

I don't think the WTS will really clear up this hemopure/hemoglobin thing. To really explain it to the rank and file would open up a can of worms. Too many questions. I think they get away with the f-d up blood doctrine simply because no one can understand it without a whole LOT of research. In fact, for myself, this was the thing that started my cognitive dissonance and depression with the Org. (There were other questions later on that really motivated me out, but this was the first thing that I ever allowed myself to be dissatisfied with doctrinally.) I mean, who the hell should have to go take a CLASS down at the HOSPITAL to understand how to fill out the blood section on the DPI???

IP_SEC

You can basically have a whole blood transfusion without judicial action as long as its injected one fraction at a time. It is a hypocritical pharasaical ridiculous law.

Take plasma for example. Thats a big no no. But if you dehydrate a plasma donation, seperate out the fractions, like clotting factor, re hydrate the indiviual fractions with the same water you dehydrated from the plasma in the first place, you can transfuse those til the cows come home. You can have a plasma transfusion solong as it is one fraction at a time. Hhahahahahhahaha most dubs dont know this.

BluesBrother

The June 15th 2004 Watchtower left many unanswered questions. Firstly the chart does not name any parts of blood, just says that "Fractions from ..... red cells, white cells, platelets, & plasma are for a "Christian to decide"

Page 23 discusses small fractions such as serums containing antibodies , and says "Some have concluded that such minute fractions are , in effect , no longer blood"........ "The conscience of another moves them to reject anything made from blood"...

Importantly it then says ;

"Moreover, some products derived from one of the four primary componants may be so similar to the function of the whole componant and carry on such a life sustaining role in the body that most Christians would find them objectionable.

So where does that leave the average Joe Dub? On the one hand anything short of the big four componants is ok. But a strong implication is here given that such things as hemoglobin substitute blood is just too similar to the original to be acceptable...

If I were practising the faith, I do not know what I would do.

ithinkisee

I agree with Blues Brother. I will look at the actual magazine when I get home. I don't believe it specifically mentions hemoglobin anywhere. I believe that chart from Blondie assumes hemoglobin-based serums (or whatever). I'll check in a couple hours and report back.

-ithinkisee

undercover

Remember the original blood card? Compare it to the new blood card handed out this year.

Here's the old one:

I guess God changed his mind about what parts of blood his people can use.

Is hemoglobin now a conscience matter?

Share this