by Oroborus21 103 Replies latest watchtower scandals

  • Gerard
    “Medically related statements regarding Blood made by Witnesses is part of the indoctrination, the teaching of the doctrine regarding blood, from the outset. It is inseparably religious.”

    This is a nice opinion, Eduardo. But that’s all it is; your opinion

    Actually it is more than an opinion. It is a well established fact regarding the JWs doctrine. The whole planet knows it.

    The WT's Blood brochure does look secular, but tell me who were the recipients intended?: The general public or its religious followers?

  • toreador

    Marvin wrote:

    Eduardo, do you believe the WTS is immune from legal culpability were it to misrepresent an author? Or, do you believe that author has cause of action based on misrepresentation? Do you believe freedom of religion is a license to misrepresent the work of other individuals or organizations?

    I believe one would have to show intentional misrepresentation to be held liable. The fact that they have cost human lives "should" make them culpable but I am no lawyer.

    Someone who is a lawyer should chime in here.



    Toreador...there have been several attorney's that posted here...guess you missed it.

    I haven't seen any of the posters from the Washington/Seattle area post regarding the hospital there that is famous for NOT using blood. I saw a documentary on it a while back and it was pretty plain that a number of drs. agree with bloodless surgery. It seems to be pretty famous in that part of the country...I wonder what effect that would have in court? Any comments?


  • hawkaw

    1) Would somebody who is a moderator please fix Page 1 of this thread so people can read it?

    2) I resent the swipes taken by Eduardo at both Kerry and Barb. It was disgusting how you would try to flavour your intial comments with shots at Kerry's publisher, her background and Barb's notice. I for one think this is a big time event that a lot of people put a lot of effort into including medical doctors and legal counsel who peer reviewed the work before it was published. For you to go after Kerry and Barb the way you did in this thread in your initial post was disgusting.

    3) Everyone in Canada has the right to a fundemental belief in religion and conscience. But, the belief has to be a honest belief and it must be in good faith.

    4) The Essay provides an excellent legal start to bring out what is corrupt with the WTS's so-called blood therapy ban. And it is all out there in the public eye and yes the media is taking notice. The Essay provides a legal theory that may work in certain circumstances. It not only takes apart the references relied upon by the WTS in a phamplet but also goes after other aspects of the doctrine that are corrupt.

    5) Each case that comes forward will have to be indivudally reviewed on its merrits. You might think on the face we have a case of belief where no court can go. But, the article gives some good thought that someone in a position of authority for the Corporation knowingly or should ought to have known that they were publishing misleading statements (or in some cases not publishing or reporting any statements on recent changes to the doctrine that caused someone harm) to the Flock in an attempt to support the corporation's ever-changing blood therapy doctrine.

    6) FWIW, I stand by Barb Anderson and thank her for her hard work in bringing this out.

Share this