May 22, 1994 Awake! cover... where Botchtower advertises kids who perished because they "Put God First" by refusing blood. So by my count, there are at least 26 children's photos on this cover. This is one sick organization!
just curious. How about blood?
by never a jw 24 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Crazyguy
Just like thier organ trasplant ideas that went on for nearly 13 years, how many died for that too. We are told not to go beyond scripture, and they do it any way.
-
Pterist
@neverajw
This might interest you...Comment on JW.Net ...8 years ago .......all eager to avoid responsibility for this doctrine ....
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/77990/1/Are-They-Eager-To-Avoid-Dead-Kids
Interesting:'Doctors should make transfusion dilemma decisions'
online.ie
2004-08-06 11:20:02+01Doctors can go against parents wishes to grant life-saving blood transfusions to children, it was claimed today.
Mr O'Farrell said: "When it comes to the crunch a doctor has the right, if he feels the child is going to die, under common law to administer blood. All he needs is to have a colleague okay it. Why pre-empt the whole thing by getting a court order?"
The High Court yesterday told surgeons at Our Lady's Hospital for Sick Children in Dublin's Crumlin they could carry out a blood transfusion on a five-month-old baby girl.
Mr O'Farrell said he was not familiar with the specifics of the five-month-old girl's case but that there was an alternative way of doing things."When it comes to the crunch a doctor has the right, if he feels the child is going to die, under common law to administer blood. All he needs is to have a colleague okay it. Why pre-empt the whole thing by getting a court order?"
It almost sounds as though they are trying to set things up so that they have two pigeons to sue and set up precedents under Irish Common Law. He's baiting a trap.... Love, Scully -
Scully
Well, I was one of the lucky ones. I was informed that I came very close to bleeding to death after childbirth, because I was led to believe that the WTS's doctrine was correct.
I was unconscious for several hours afterward, had a hemoglobin level that was barely compatible with life, had IV fluids pumped into me for a couple of days and needed an extended stay in hospital.
The severe blood loss impacted our lives afterward too - despite hourly feedings, my body wouldn't make enough milk to breastfeed my newborn. I had to stop trying after a few weeks, because I wasn't recuperating due to lack of sleep, and my newborn wasn't gaining weight.
In the years that followed, there have been numerous statistical studies on the subject, one of which was published in a medical journal where it was reported that JW women have a 65-fold risk of death during childbirth for lack of blood transfusion. That is not statistically insignificant, as the WTS would have JWs believe. (See: http://pubmedcentralcanada.ca/pmcc/articles/PMC3496240/)
I have said this before and I will say it again here: If it were JW men whose lives were on the line due to obstetrical haemorrhage, this doctrine would never have materialized. The WTS has, time and time again, proved its disdain for the lives of women and children by compelling women to put their lives at risk at one of the most vulnerable times in a woman's life.
-
never a jw
Thanks Heaven,
I have seen the magazine cover. It's sickening to flaunt it as a badge of honor.
Thanks Pterist.
I hope more and more other countries take away the rights of irresponsible religious zealots. In economical and social issues I am a libertarian, but when it comes to children's well being and protection I am a tyrant.
Scully,
I am glad you made it. You are right, men have created laws and religions always to the detriment of women. I happen to be a man, but I am on your side. Men are pigs. I know it because I....was one....I think.