For the Father judges no one at all, but he has committed all the judging to the Son
,
Ah, those confusing scriptures. This matter was touched on during a Tuesday Book Study that I was conducting (many years ago) in the presence of the CO. After official adjournment of the meeting, the CO asked me "who does the judging" and I answered "Jesus." He spent some time reaming me about my answer. He wanted to hear me answer "Jehovah." Quoting scripture was no defense in his opinion, or else he just enjoyed reaming me.
april 7, 2004. jehovah's witness parents became victims of "religious profiling" when the alberta government apprehended their son and gave him a blood transfusion they say was not only against their beliefs, but not medically necessary, lawyer shane brady charged tuesday.. the couple, who cannot be named to protect the identity of their son, is appealing an august 2001 treatment order issued in provincial court that gave a social worker temporary custody of their infant son to allow for the blood transfusion.. representing the family, brady argued before court of queen's bench justice adele kent that the province's director of child welfare was "closed-minded" when she failed to do a thorough investigation into the situation surrounding the baby's bowel infection.. furthermore, brady said, the director didn't question dr. douglas mcmillan's assertions that it was urgent the three-week-old, premature baby be given a transfusion, nor did she call the parents to ask for their input or any other doctor for a second opinion.. "it would have taken very little time for her to have spoken to another doctor," said brady, a toronto lawyer who previously represented the mother of calgary teen bethany hughes, who died from leukemia after receiving blood transfusions against her will.. "there is no evidence that demonstrates this was an urgent situation, no evidence to suggest the parents couldn't be given their fundamental rights," he said.. a lawyer for the director of child welfare, however, said not only is the director not qualified to discuss complex medical issues, but obtaining second opinions would have been untimely in a case in which mcmillan felt the child's life was at risk and the parents knew the treatment hearing was imminent.. brady maintains the parents, both of whom were in court with their now two-year-old son tuesday, were denied their right to a lawyer, to disclosure (access to other legal parties' material) and to call evidence at the treatment hearing due to the swiftness of the hearing.. "it is the constitutional right of the parents to a fair hearing and the state has interfered in the parent/child relationship," he said.. the boy developed the bowel infection on aug. 9, 2001.. according to testimony, mcmillan was aware of the parents' religious beliefs and even waited a day before going to the courts to ask for permission to give the transfusion.. on aug. 10, family court judge sharron prowse-o'ferrall ruled the transfusion could proceed.. tests determined it was a bacterial infection and the parents wanted it treated with antibiotics.. this, said brady, was well within the medical range of treatment for the diagnosed infection.. "the parents were not refusing an indispensably medically necessary treatment," he said.. at that point, mcmillan should have either treated the boy without a blood transfusion, asked another doctor to take over the case or asked the parents to find another doctor, said brady.. kent will hear arguments today from both sides pertaining to the federal charter of rights and freedoms.. the family is also suing the province, for the same reasons, claiming $50,000 in damages, alleging the blood transfusion was contrary to their legal rights and religious beliefs.. [email protected] the calgary herald 2004.
Hawk, what great letter; thank you for writing it!
Elsewhere, here is the reason JWs spend so much time on the medically necessary aspect and the dangerous aspect: Their "mother" sets the example. Look at the old "blood booklet" for example, only about 10% of its pages are spent on the scriptural arguments. In the remainder of its pages, it goes on ad nauseam about transfusion dangers and the superior approach of "alternatives" to blood products.
You already knew all of the above, though, didn?t you?
The issues to be concerned about, with respect to age, are not so much now as later. Ask yourself how you will feel when you are in your mid forties (in your sexual and hopefully physical prime) and he is in his sixties with lots of aches and pains and in addition he has ED.
Will you have the patience then to deal with the problems that his advancing age may bring? Remember that men often age more quickly than women do, therefore the physiological age difference may become more that 16 years.
Just something to think about seriously, before getting in too deep.
my sister, who is still in, has just recently graduated from college (four year university) with a good degree and has landed a great job.
its likely that she will never meet a jw man who is completely compatible with her, as she is educated, smart, and makes more money than about half her cong.
It is unfortunate that the scriptural council the WTS refers to (the reason your sister will date only JWs): "marry only in the lord" is interpreted to mean, and is read: "marry only a JW."
There are many fine people in "the world," but JWs cannot see that fact because they are programmed to view "worldly" people as under the influence of Satan
Are there any Professors, instructors, researchers, etc. that your sister met during her university years that she admired for there intellect, ethics or morals? Use anyone that she respected to help her understand that she will find more suitable friends among her "worldly" associates than she ever will at the Kingdom Hall.
Ironically, this situation makes JWs good bets as donors. It is too bad that their selfish ignorance prevents them from helping their fellow citizens in a time of need.
Is it true that initially, the elder system was designed so that the "Older Men" would be rotated from one position to the other?
Yes, each elder rotated through each "position," and stayed in any given job for a year before moving on to the next position. The rotation occurred in September. It soon became apparent that not all eiders could handle all jobs and that was one reason that the rotation was abandoned. The Holy Spirit was not aware of this lack a ability until the system was tried for a few years.
Edited to add:
Remember when the word came down that the CO was not "just another elder"?
What I remember vividly was hearing that he WAS just another elder. Many of us were delighted at this revelation. By the time that change was reversed, I was already licking my wounds, inflicted by fellow elders, and ducking for cover, so it is not prominent in my memory.
i'm interested in hearing if any of you have been made to leave the wts or been discipline (sp!!
) as a result of blood transfusion.. there are lots of posts on blood that im trawling through .....but im in such a hurry as this is part of a question ive been asked by an interested party ....i fear i may miss what im looking for so would greatly appreciate your help on this .. would really appreaciate anyone who can say if this has happened to them.and briefly how.
I avoided JW discipline for receiving life-saving blood transplants by posting guards at my hospital door. The guards kept Hospital Liaison Committee members and other JW tattle-tails out of my room during the administration of blood products.
I would not be alive today and in "good-standing as a JW" were it not for keeping the snoops away. Unlike "worldly" hospital staff, private and employee JWs alike reveal confidential matters to others (read elders). Their conduct is despicable.
in 1955 it was claimed:"in light of the fulfillment of bible prophecy it is becoming clear that the war of armageddon is nearing its breaking out point.that same year newsweek reported:"last week n.h.knorr told the witnesses in convention to its highly audible delight that armageddon would come 'soon'.
its terrible upheaval,he assured his audience,' will take place in my time.i anticipate seeing it.. watch tower president knorr died on june 8,1977.. do you know of any other statements without specific dates that have been made.i have more, but i'll wait for yours.
check out the official jw-media site and find their 'official' response to the accusations of child abuse within its organisation.. they simply feature this quote:.
"people didn't have the body of knowledge 18 or 20 years ago to say that this is something that will harm your child emotionally, if you don't address it.
parents didn't know the seriousness ... and the long-term effects.".
"?the very close margin from death to disecting parts out of people being a very slim margin?"
Remember, your statement is true in many "eastern" parts of the world, not the United States where brain death is the factor determining death.
"?of course hospitals were more sympathetic to recipients than to the actual donor."
Not true. Often, the two (donor and recipient) are not in the same hospital; and often not even in the same city or same state. Even if the two are in the same hospital, your statement is a false indictment of the doctors and others involved. Transplant surgeons, as a whole, are among the most ethical persons I know.
"BTW , if hospitals don't determine the legality of death then who does?"
Physicians do; they are usually independent business men and women, not employees of the hospital.
"Of course nothing will change my opinion of the whole thing."
Why are we having this discussion?
"I know for certain that I would never be a recipient either .Just to ensure there is no hypocritical stance"
Easy for many to say when not faced with terminal illness that could be corrected with a solid organ transplant. I do not know if you are terminally ill, but primary care physicians tell me that patients faced with death are usually very open to the miracles that modern medicine can offer.
