Quotes from the 12/15/15 Study Edition (page 2)

dozy

I find the use of the third person in the Watchtower quite bizarre sometimes . The expression " some of their branch offices " referring to JWs ( actually , referring to the society , as individual JWs don't close branches ) just feels weird.

sd-7

12/15/12 WT p. 15:

"In a variation that some term 'embryo adoption,' the embryos placed in a wife's womb involve neither her eggs nor her husband's sperm. In yet another variation, a married couple's eggs and sperm are fertilized outside the womb by IVF. The resulting embryos are then implanted in the womb of a surrogate, a woman who carries the baby and delivers it for them.

"Those reproductive procedures are unacceptable to God's servants out of respect for his direction: 'You must not give your emission as semen to the wife of your associate to become unclean by it.' (Lev. 18:20, 29; Prov. 6:29) When fertilization involving eggs or sperm (or both) from someone not within the marital union occurs, this amounts to what the Bible terms porneia, sexual immorality. Those procedures are a gross misuse of the sexual organs."

--Wow. This scripture is part of the Law of Moses, for one. For two, fornication is about the ACT of having sex with someone, not a medical procedure in which someone else's eggs or sperm are implanted into someone, with no sexual act involved. So now a judicial committee gets formed after somebody agrees to carry your baby for you because you can't have one? Can you imagine the elders handling something like this? I'm assuming it's happened before, but I'm confused as to how someone can get DF'd for fornication WITHOUT HAVING SEX WITH SOMEONE, WITHOUT EVEN TOUCHING THEM PHYSICALLY AT ALL. This is truly baffling.

I'm assuming this rule has been out there, but it's kind of new to me. I'll have to research it one of these days. Holy crap.

--sd-7

sd-7

I really don't get it. Where do they get off giving these kinds of instructions to people? A couple that can't conceive is going to be punished for using a surrogate, just the same as if they had committed adultery? Talk about invasion of privacy and all that is decent! Okay. Once again, I am so frakkin' glad to be out of this cult.

--sd-7