Posts by familycomesfirst4

8

Song: 'The Bible--A Priceless Treasure', then concluding prayer

by sd-7 in

jw
friends

brings faithful slaves and popes to humankind.. its meaning's subject to interpretations.

that can at times truly screw with your mind.. this often-misused book is called the bible--.

'twas written long ago and then compiled.

familycomesfirst4

"No doubt they paid close attention to the drama today and may be...finding themselves struggling because all the best looking brothers are either married, disfellowshipped, or closeted homosexuals--whom you especially condemn....Please help them to know that that brother who may look like a turtle, yet is loyal to your organization, is by far the better choice"

From there I was rollin! I don't think I've laughed so hard from a post.

And just when I thought I was done.......

"I could probably stab an apostate's heart out and store it in my refrigerator for DECADES, so long as two witnesses did not see it. Perhaps, someday, if it is not immodest of me to ask, Jehovah, may you move the faithful and discreet slave class to recommend such direct, zealous action against all apostates who oppose your sovereignty."

I'm still laughing!

35

Why Is Toasting Wrong? Why Can't You Stand For The National Anthem?...

by minimus in

jw
friends

why can you stand for the pledge of allegiance?.

why is "whole" blood bad but "blood fractions" permissable?.

why is eating a bird on thanksgiving day a sin?.

familycomesfirst4

Nevermind, I just saw the lunacy in asking such a question.

35

Why Is Toasting Wrong? Why Can't You Stand For The National Anthem?...

by minimus in

jw
friends

why can you stand for the pledge of allegiance?.

why is "whole" blood bad but "blood fractions" permissable?.

why is eating a bird on thanksgiving day a sin?.

familycomesfirst4

Blondie: About the national anthem, flag salute, that all came up after 1929 when the WTS decided the "superior authorities" of Romans 13 were God and Jesus not the secular governments...in 1962 the WTS returned to the teaching that they were secular authorities again.

I can be a little slow on the uptake, but are you implying the whole issue of flag salutes/national anthem (pledge of allegiance at school?) was instituted by Rutherford because of a misinterpretation of Romans 13:1-2.......and that the Society never bothered to change or retract this stance once they correctly understood the scritpures?

If so, anything to further support this?

12

A letter about blood fractions from the WT Society

by ldrnomo in

about 4 years ago i sent a letter to the watchtower society asking them why taking blood fractions was a conscience matter and taking components of blood was a removal matter.. if i can figure out how to post the pdf of their reply i will post it here.

i was removed as an elder soon after receiving their letter the co we had at the time had a copy of my letter to them and also the letter they sent to me.

any suggestions on how i can post the letter would be appreciated.. .

familycomesfirst4

Idrnomo, I'd be very interested to read this letter. I am not sure how to post a pdf....perhaps just copy/paste text if nobody else has any ideas?

I'm not familiar w/ your current status as a JW, or if you've stated it before. Are you still active? If not, did this doctrine have anything to do with any futher action on your part or theirs? I know many are still in and don't want to reveal too much personal info for fear of having the powers that be make a choice for them (myself counted as one of those in 'fear'), so feel free to leave out anything too personal or identifying.

The blood issue is just a major concern for me, and seeing that you were an elder I'm very curious to learn where this led you and anyone else you know of personaly.

35

Why Is Toasting Wrong? Why Can't You Stand For The National Anthem?...

by minimus in

jw
friends

why can you stand for the pledge of allegiance?.

why is "whole" blood bad but "blood fractions" permissable?.

why is eating a bird on thanksgiving day a sin?.

familycomesfirst4

Therevealer:

A thread like this one makes me realize that they (wt leaders) have picked out issues that guarantee that they will stand out as different. Any other reason or basis for some of these no-nos is simply not viable when put under scrutiny.

Much of what I'm finding concerning 'torture stake' seem to echo this. Especially when much of the debate on the cross/torture stake is steered by Society and JW apologists to how it's idolatry, and less on evidence or research.

I tend to struggle with an issue that is brought up from time to time on this board, namely are they victims like the general r&f or knowing participants. Some of the things that they have made into issues to cause so much anguish in the lives of the adherents suggest the latter. And the reason some just say "bastards"

This is a sticky one for me, especially with doctrines and practices that go beyond those affecting one's self such as children/no-blood and shunning. Can the 'Rank and File' be lumped together simply because they follow and hold to what they've been told (many from birth) is truth? I'm not so sure. But what about those that still go along as devout even though they've been shown proof time and time again with no sensible retort? This might further qualify.....but even still I find it hard to completely agree with.
However, I have no problem holding some of the GB to the fire.

The Finger:

What i dont understand is that standing up for the National Anthem is worship, but "every knee shall bend" to Christ isn't

That just broke my brain.

Snowbird:

The orchestra at my daughter's college played the National Anthem so beautifully that it made me choke up.

Yeah, I said it!,

Take that WT.

Bastards!

That just made me bust a gut. Reminded me of one of those online videos where you have two computer/avatar characters talking to each other in computerized voices. Someone posted one made to show dialogue of someone witnessing to a JW. At the end the JW is frustrated, says "you're a goat", and walks off......I felt like I was laughing at myself on that one, but I couldn't stop laughing.

13

Article - Blood Refusal by Pregnant Women "a 65-fold increased risk of death"

by BluesBrother in

this article gives a frank assessment of the risks, see paragraph 2 where he says that they place themselves in "exceptional jeopardy" -.

" with obstetric hemorrhage being the second-leading cause of maternal mortality in the united states, pregnant jehovah's witnesses who refuse all blood transfusion are in exceptional jeopardy, having a 65-fold increased risk of death.4 it is of paramount importance for clinicians caring for pregnant jehovah's witnesses to understand the relevant ethical and legal constructs and to be well versed in the management and alternatives available to this population.".

it is a long and technical article which, i hope, will interest those with some medical knowledge but is understandable by anybody..i was particularly interested in the sub heading "informed consent" and the third paragraph discussing the wide variety of answers given on the "health care proxies" it seems that nearly 10% would accept red blood cells, which are strictly forbidden.

familycomesfirst4

Stuckinlimbo, would you say you are more in favor with 'midwife' types of births? My wife has spoken with one, and the midwife spoke alot like this. It's something we're considering (she more than I).

3

Blood Processed Beyond Those Primary Components

by Marvin Shilmer in

jw
friends

recently my observation is that participants here have rekindled interest in watchtowers blood doctrine.

this is particularly true of newer participants.

with this in mind, today i loaded a new article onto my blog that should stun the average witness.

familycomesfirst4

I thought this was a valid point, as well. I can't imagine a single JW thinking it would still be okay to eat black pudding after having learned of these things. And yet I can see many, many JW's saying it's okay to take a "blood fraction" medically because, and only, because it's been put in Society literature as 'up to you, but okay by us if you do'.

It boggles me how some of the smartest people I've known (regardless of what we feel, there are otherwise intelligent JW's) can still not get that their whole lives--and by extension their loved ones--rest in large part on WTS literature and the very few who decide what to print that month. This belief that once something is shown with various methods as being both in the Bible and in the literature--that it then must be 'truth'--is about as frustrating as it gets.

13

Article - Blood Refusal by Pregnant Women "a 65-fold increased risk of death"

by BluesBrother in

this article gives a frank assessment of the risks, see paragraph 2 where he says that they place themselves in "exceptional jeopardy" -.

" with obstetric hemorrhage being the second-leading cause of maternal mortality in the united states, pregnant jehovah's witnesses who refuse all blood transfusion are in exceptional jeopardy, having a 65-fold increased risk of death.4 it is of paramount importance for clinicians caring for pregnant jehovah's witnesses to understand the relevant ethical and legal constructs and to be well versed in the management and alternatives available to this population.".

it is a long and technical article which, i hope, will interest those with some medical knowledge but is understandable by anybody..i was particularly interested in the sub heading "informed consent" and the third paragraph discussing the wide variety of answers given on the "health care proxies" it seems that nearly 10% would accept red blood cells, which are strictly forbidden.

familycomesfirst4

Scully,

Thanks for the web link. I've looked it over and it helped relieve some of the anxiety. I've emailed it to her and will talk with her tonight about it. The risks are there for a v-bac, but they seem a bit smaller than I originally thought and that's comforting. As for the no-blood.....that's a different issue.

We've talked with the doctor and she has shown us she's both experienced w/ v-bacs and is also fine w/ the no-blood issue. She's also familiar w/ my wife's history. The hospital is familar w/ many non-blood techniques and surgeries. A few years back they did open heart surgery for an elder in our then-bookstudy using no-blood methods, and he came through w/ flying colors.

However, I don't know if it's just the boyscout (pre-JW) in me always wanting to be prepared, or the insurance agent in me always concerned w/ the risk, but to just outright say 'no blood' still keeps me a bit anxious. She understands I'm not gunning for blood, but just want it there if it's absolutely needed as the only alternative. She's still pretty firm in her decision.

As for the delivery room, it's me and only me in there. If that means that the sister has less of a say-so, then she knows she's going to have to trust me. Frankly, I'm not sure how much she's thought that part through. But believe me, it's only me in that delivery room.

13

Article - Blood Refusal by Pregnant Women "a 65-fold increased risk of death"

by BluesBrother in

this article gives a frank assessment of the risks, see paragraph 2 where he says that they place themselves in "exceptional jeopardy" -.

" with obstetric hemorrhage being the second-leading cause of maternal mortality in the united states, pregnant jehovah's witnesses who refuse all blood transfusion are in exceptional jeopardy, having a 65-fold increased risk of death.4 it is of paramount importance for clinicians caring for pregnant jehovah's witnesses to understand the relevant ethical and legal constructs and to be well versed in the management and alternatives available to this population.".

it is a long and technical article which, i hope, will interest those with some medical knowledge but is understandable by anybody..i was particularly interested in the sub heading "informed consent" and the third paragraph discussing the wide variety of answers given on the "health care proxies" it seems that nearly 10% would accept red blood cells, which are strictly forbidden.

familycomesfirst4

Thanks, LC. That really helps. Here's to a great 2011 in many respects.

13

Article - Blood Refusal by Pregnant Women "a 65-fold increased risk of death"

by BluesBrother in

this article gives a frank assessment of the risks, see paragraph 2 where he says that they place themselves in "exceptional jeopardy" -.

" with obstetric hemorrhage being the second-leading cause of maternal mortality in the united states, pregnant jehovah's witnesses who refuse all blood transfusion are in exceptional jeopardy, having a 65-fold increased risk of death.4 it is of paramount importance for clinicians caring for pregnant jehovah's witnesses to understand the relevant ethical and legal constructs and to be well versed in the management and alternatives available to this population.".

it is a long and technical article which, i hope, will interest those with some medical knowledge but is understandable by anybody..i was particularly interested in the sub heading "informed consent" and the third paragraph discussing the wide variety of answers given on the "health care proxies" it seems that nearly 10% would accept red blood cells, which are strictly forbidden.

familycomesfirst4

First time poster, long time lurker. It took this article for me to post. I'm still considered a barely active JW...been out in my own mind for the past few years, but my wife is a 2nd-gen-lifer. I'm working my way out in a way that will hopefully one day help her out, even if it's not at the same time as me.

She's currently pregnant w/ our 2nd, and last night stated she still will not take blood should it be required during delivery. She's even said that she's probably going to have her sister (actual family & a jw) in charge of this matter. Not out of a lack of love for me, but because she feels I'd be emotionally compromised if it happened, as I've made it clear I don't believe in the no-blood doctrine. We've had several discussions, some heated, about it these past few years.

Making matters worse (at least to me), she's had an emergency c-section the last time but is going to attempt a vaginal birth this time around. I tell myself that these are commonplace for some doctors, that the risks are minute compared to the successes. More people die from car wrecks than v-back complications<--I have no idea of this is true....just something I tell myself.

I'm thankful to see this article posted, never one to want the blue pill as it were. Yet at the same time wondering if I'm better off for knowing as she is most likely already aware of this herself, and so it just adds to what seems, at best, needless and frustrating worry for myself.

If I can vent a little here, all I do is take advise on how to combat this "no-research, no-independent-thought mentality" by attempting to every slowly and patiently shed new light on the Society/GB and all that entails. She listens usually, but it's such a fragile process w/ that learned-mental-wall inching upwards. I was taking it slow and steady as I AM EVER FAITHFUL she will eventually understand (this I have no doubt).

But with a due date of May 2011 approaching, I'm feeling a desperate sense of urgency and anguish.

I've pushed it more than ever this morning by leaving a few pages of CoC for her to read. Parts that don't really talk about doctrine, but hopefully enough to quench her curiosity. I had mentioned this book in passing before, but this was sooner than I was hoping. I can be very patient with most respects to life, but these worries seem to be pushing everything along faster than I wanted.

I'm about as optimistic and positive as they come in many respects, occasionally to a fault I've been told, but sometimes the weight of what you know can be a bit crushing.