Children have basic human rights, why does the US ignore this right in regards to JW's Blood Doctrine?

by sabastious 26 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • sabastious
    sabastious

    I can't physically or sexually abuse my child, at least legally.

    Why?

    Because my country, and others alike, have adopted a code of ethics surrounding children.

    ...they have BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS...

    These rights transcend the family unit and it's jurisdiction.

    That being said, how do JWs hide behind "freedom of religion" when sentencing their children to suicide?

    Why can't I start a religion that says it's ok to murder people? And then hide behind my creed when accused of an atrocity?

    The JW Blood Doctrine is CHILD NEGLECT.

    Where is our goverment? Why aren't they taking the reigns in this regard.

    Our children are dying.

    -Sab

  • leavingwt
    leavingwt

    Thankfully, the State usually steps in and does the right thing, despite the JW parents. If not for this, we'd read of many more deaths.

  • Open mind
    Open mind

    For the most part, JW children in the US have blood given to them via court order unless they are deemed (by a judge) to be old enough to make their own decision.

    Are you talking about those who are mid-to-late teens and baptized?

    om

  • sabastious
    sabastious
    Thankfully, the State usually steps in and does the right thing, despite the JW parents. If not for this, we'd read of many more deaths.

    This happens often?

    -Sab

  • sabastious
    sabastious
    For the most part, JW children in the US have blood given to them via court order unless they are deemed (by a judge) to be old enough to make their own decision.

    I didn't know this even happened.

    Can I get a reference for the frequencies of this occurrence?

    -Sab

  • Billen76
    Billen76

    My teacher in socialology was once employed in the local "Social office for childcare" department. (in Denmark. Lack the correct english description)

    He told me it was a rutine, to temporarily relieve the jw-parents of the child custody, and put the child under under guardianship of the local social-office, whenever a minor with jw-parents was to have an operation. He had done it many times personally.

  • Gayle
    Gayle

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/medical/171297/1/Urgent-Anyone-in-WA-state-remember-Dennis-Lindberg

    This case was wrenching, heart breaking about Dennis Lindberg, JW 14 yrs old in Washington. It got lots of publicity. Enter his name on "Search" above for more threads.

  • cameo-d
    cameo-d

    It is my opinion that the main reason State does not intefere with the politics of the church is because you have pledged your allegiance to the organization as your superior governing authority. One sovereign does not intefere with the subjects of another sovereign.

    The sovereignty of the organization goes back to the catholic church.

    JUDICIAL POWER OF THE CHURCH

    In instituting the Church as a perfect society, distinct from the civil power and entirely independent of it, Christ gave her legislative, judicial, and executive power to be exercised over her members without any interference on the part of civil society. It does not fall within our scope to prove that the Church is a perfect society, consequently endowed with the above-mentioned power. If one admits the Divine institution of the Church, and the authenticity and authority of the Gospels, he must acknowledge that Christ so constituted His Church as to enable her rulers to make laws and regulations for the faithful conducive to the attainment of eternal happiness.

    It is evident, therefore, that Christ in conferring legislative power upon the Church also gave judicial and coercive power. In proof of this we have, besides theological arguments, the practice of the Church which explicitly claimed such power, as well in the beginning (2 Corinthians 10:8; 13:2 sqq., etc.) as during the subsequent centuries of her existence; and, moreover, made frequent use of it. Suffice it to recall the institution of canonical penances, the constitutions and laws of so many pontiffs and councils, containing not only positive enactments, but also sanctions to be incurred ipso facto by the rebellious and obstinate, or to be inflicted upon them at the discretion of ecclesiastical superiors. Now the infliction of punishment certainly presupposes evidence of the crime, since, according to the natural law, no one should be condemned until his guilt has been established. Hence the Church, in making use of her powers of legislation and coercion, must have also exercised judicial power. It is, moreover, historically evident that the Church often exercised these powers either through the Roman pontiff alone, by the agency of his delegates, or through councils, individual bishops, or other judges, ordinary or delegated.

    -----------------

    oh, and the scriptures about not taking your brother to court?.....

    This was in accordance with the grave admonition of St. Paul (1 Corinthians 6:1), who urged the faithful not to appear as litigants before the civil courts. Though in such cases the bishops often assumed the rĂ´le of friendly arbiters rather than strict judges, we should not infer that they never conducted a strict trial.

    i.e. the Church is wont to warn and punish, is a Divinely appointed censor, whose weighty decisions are accepted as rendered in the presence of God. Many similar utterances from the Fathers and the councils could easily be cited. It was, of course, impossible for the ecclesiastical magistrates (the bishops) to make use at that time of the legal solemnities introduced at a later period. Though rather summary, the judicial proceedings of the primitive episcopal tribunals were trials in the strict sense of the word.

    When the Christians obtained control of the civil power of Rome, the reasons that moved St. Paul to persuade or command the faithful to avoid the civil tribunals were, of course, no longer pertinent. Gradually the Church allowed the faithful to submit their differences either to ecclesiastical or to civil tribunals. From the beginning of the new era the bishops shared with the secular magistrates the power of settling the disputes of the faithful.

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04447a.htm

    ---------------------

    perhaps you can see more clearly that WT as well as all other cults and religions have an origin in Rome.

  • sabastious
    sabastious

    Cameo, that's all well and good, but then why can't I hide behind my sovereign church if I want to murder?

    -Sab

  • CuriousButterfly
    CuriousButterfly

    If I understand correctly the state of Massachusetts is tough on this issue and have taken kids away from their families if they chose not to allow their children blood. One couple went to court and stated their religious beliefs but said if the state is going to make their kids take blood they would not step in and stop them.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit