She's on a roll...............!
Journal of Church and State: WT NO-BLOOD EXPOSE'
Hey Sis!! You following me?? Gonna report me to the edlers??
Worse.....I'm gonna tell Aunt Geraldine on ya'!
Jehovah's Witnesses revile the Red Cross
Danny Haszard's testimony-In 1991 the Rockland Massachusetts Kingdom Hall of ...
The Red Cross was denounced by the Jehovah's Witnesses elder conducting the
Jehovah's Witnesses revile the Red Cross
Added: (Sun Sep 11 2005) -Watchtower reviles the Red Cross their nemesis-Humanitarian Red Cross is everywhere saving lives,the Jehovah Witness have $200 billion in world wide assets.Where is their charity?
Danny Haszard's testimony-In 1991 the Rockland Massachusetts Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses was 'studying' the newly released "blood booklet" an indoctrination publication by the Watchtower society.I was in the audience as a member of the congregation.
What i heard with my own ears:
The Red Cross was denounced by the Jehovah's Witnesses elder conducting the service as a "wealthy racket who get the blood for free and then sell it for $500.00 a pint" he went on to elaborate- "that if the Red Cross was to file a financial statement that they would be among the fortune 500 companies they are so rich".
I left the cult in early 1992 and immediately turned against the JW's as part of my defiant deprogramming protocol i qualified and became a 'preferred' blood donor at Children's' Hospital in Boston Massachusetts.
[Jehovah's Witnesses consider blood donation a capital offense against God!]
I would not donate anything including my blood to the RC as i still held contempt for them as a 'greedy racket'.
My blood donation at Children's was used for small children with leukemia who were receiving bone marrow transplants.
One session i was laying on the gurney and joked with the nurse if she thought my blood was safe?(I knew it was largely due to my 'boring' lifestyle as a lifetime JW and no risk history)
She replied,"I would trust your blood in my own child"- I got teary eyed....
Year 2001-I have moved to Bangor Maine from Boston and decided to give the Red Cross a blood donation.First,i must square the facts about their 'profiteering'.
I had just read a story in the Bangor Daily News newspaper on the RC having hard times and only getting paid $120.00 for a pint of blood from local Bangor hospitals.
I made an appointment with the local RC director and demanded a financial accounting from them before i gave a drop of my blood.
What i learned, THE REAL DEAL:The RC at that time 2001 did in fact get only $120.00 for a pint of blood,of which at least half of this cost is spent by the RC themselves on rigorous laboratory testing.
The local director when on to say that "they have been broke for years and live hand to mouth and only 60 days from being evicted from their building for non payment of their rent."
Yes the humanitarian Red Cross is everywhere saving lives,the Watchtower on the other hand has $200 billion in world wide assets.Where is their charity?It doesn't exist!
What is amazing is that despite my rejecting the Watchtower cult, my brainwashing indoctrination was so embedded after 40 years that still NINE YEARS post-exit they controlled some of my beliefs.
[footnote:If your insurance statement shows a $500.00 charge for a pint of blood this is the hospital's billing NOT the Red Cross]
Watchtower Whistleblower: Danny Haszard Bangor Maine
Jehovah's Witnesses are the 'perfect storm' of deception-in a word they are the cult of Innuendo
MOUSE OVER and CLICK ABOVE IMAGE for a LINK that will make you THINK
My aunt used to work for Univ. of Miami's law school. We checked up on this journal. It IS one of a few handful of journals that dedicates itself to religious law. In addition to getting past the JCS's editors, it takes two (2) additional peer reviewers to be considered for publication. These two peer reviewers are experts in their field of religion. An article like this, being from a student, may have had to go through an additional third peer review. As this paper is partly about medical facts, it was probably also reviewed by a medical professor. If Kerry published this paper this December...it had to have been submitted this past Summer for final review...which means that the peer reviews had to have happened while Kerry was still in law school (she graduated in 2005). This meant that she could have worked underneath some professors who would have also reviewed her work. The JCS usually only takes articles from esteemed professors or lawyers who are well respected in their field. So, for Kerry to have gotten her paper published while a student is a FEAT! Also, the JCS does not pay its authors anything for their submissions.
I have a feeling there is legal merit to Kerry's article. The JCS would have put her through the ringer to get this published.
As for potential of lawsuits...well courts change. One hundred years ago, my aunt said, you could not sue a land owner when a kid died in one's pool. Now, high fences are everywhere. Kerry may be "young" and "fresh out of law school," but she appears to have won some of the heavy legal minds out there.
Have you ever published anything?
Another thing my aunt said concerning her 20+ years working at the Univ. of Miami's law school...
She said that when a author has a personal relationship with the article..."academia" requires that the author come clean & tell that he/she is biased. This is probably why Kerry disclosed that her mother died. Did her mother's death "color" her view? Perhaps, but it still found legal merit by the JCS - who has published articles for the Society's lawyer "Wah" as well.
Lets send copies of the actual article to Personal Injury Lawyers everywhere. I can just see the commercials now.
Oh puleeze ... the Society can wiggle out of this with both hands tied behind their backs. This will do nothing, obsolutely nothing! Glad I didn't hold my breathe!
“I have a feeling there is legal merit to Kerry's article.”
I do not disagree with that opinion, but I must ask whether some disclosure should accompany your statement.
My opinion is that Kerry’s article should be judged based on the evidence it provides, and in view of any future attempts at refutation. So far as I know Kerry has not appealed to her own authority as though her opinion (trained or untrained) is a factor for consideration. If true—and I am confident in my view—it would be absurd for anyone to minimize her article by suggesting her newness as a member of the BAR somehow takes away from what she writes. The article either stands or falls on its merits, which is the evidence it provides and not its authorship.
People at the Journal were convinced that it was worth publishing ....
So, it's more than just a gift horse.