Posts by JanH

It's not often 30C in Bergen, so me and a bunch of friends went to the beach, sunbathed, bbq'd, bathed, sprayed each other with waterguns and had a great time. Oh, and I got sunburnt. Big surprise.

I had a short visit to the gym right now (can't be lazing all day). Hit the town in a few hours! Not sure what will happen; two different club has specials tonite so we'll find out what we'll decide. At any rate, I'm sure it will be cool.

- Jan

44

what kind of addict are you?

by Incense_and_Peppermints in

jw
friends

you are addicted to life!

you are outgoing and content with yourself.

you make friends easily and have high goals to aim for.

JanH

Life, it said.

In real life, I'm addicted to ciggies, the net and pretty women. Not necessarily in that order!

- Jan

64

WHICH MEETING WAS THE MOST BORING?

by minimus in

jw
friends

the more meetings you go to the more drivel you hear.

elder's meetings were terrible because all you ever did was gossip about how everyone wasn't doing this or that.

meetings for field service sucked.....enough said on that.

JanH

No doubt the Watchtower study. It was so boring I volunteered to read.

- Jan

37

Why do WOMEN remain Believers???

by JT in

jw
friends

http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/women.html .

the following is merely my opinion on the issue and while some may disagree and that is their right im sure that there are those who will fully understand what i am talking about- (aint it nice to be able to disagree and not be called wicked smile).

since leaving wt and looking back i have been often wondered and it has.

JanH

Sirona,

I do not think that equality of sexes came before patriarchy, but I do think that there is some evidence for religions existing which elevated women to an equal, or higher status than men. Religions which had Goddesses aswell as Gods. I know you will ask for references, but I'm at work and I'd have to check my books at home.

Polytheistic religions typically had goddesses as well as gods, yes. That is very widely known. But I have to date never heard of any ancient religion that elevated women to the same or higher status as men.

It is not even unusual that religions had a goddess as the supreme deity (e.g. Hellenistic mystery cults: Demeter and partly Isis). But just like England having a queen did not make it a place where women had close to equal rights, these religions were also dominated by men, and the societies in which they existed did not at all believe in gender equalty.

I recall that one of these books states that there have been significantly more Goddess images discovered than God images. A suggestion is made that since very primitive peoples were not aware that the man had a role in procreation, women were elevated to a higher status than men.

Yes, I am aware of this cute little idea. Even Mircea Eliade seemed to believe it. The whole idea is of course unsupported by any evidence, and I am astonished that intelligent people actually ever believed it. That any culture of human beings ever failed to see the connection between sex and childbirth is ludicruous.It does not take great analytic power to make the right connections from simply observing human sexuality. How exactly the baby leaves the female body would also be a huge hint for even the most 'primitive' mind.

You are right that Neo-Pagan faiths overemphasise the idea that ancient peoples believed in sexual equality. In Neo-Paganism, the woman is equal and sometimes is elevated above the man. I believe that Neo-Paganism grew in the latter part of the last century for this very reason.

Yes, it is a religion growing out of feminism. But their claim that this is a recreation of some ancient European religion which was even remotely similar is just pure nonsense. The feminist scholars who propagated this idea definately let their personal convictions overrun the actual evidence. Neolithic and Bronze Age Celtral European religions were mysogynist and violent, not unlike what came later. They placed no more emphasis on the "mother goddess" than Hellenistic mystery cults. These societies were also dominated by males, prominently in the role as warrior.

Personally, I don't mind what history says. I know that a Goddess figure has existed throughout most of human history and I enjoy being part of a religion that treats us as equal.

Sure, you can believe what you want. People have always done that, in face of evidence.

I found an interesting summary of the criticism of "feminist anthropology" here: http://www.geocities.com/wicca_hoax/godcrit.html

- Jan

32

why do people think jesus died on a cross?

by watermelon in

i have always wonderd why so many people think jesus died on a cross.

ive been brought up to beleive that he died on a stake.

where did it come from about the cross?

JanH

People think that Jesus died on a cross because crucifiction -- execution on a stake with a crossbeam -- was the way Romans executed people. That it was a cross is well documented through historical evidence. The WTS denied that Jesus died on a cross for political reasons: to distance themselves from the rest of Christianity. There has never been any serious suggestion by any half-credible historian that the instrument used for execution by Romans is anything but a cross.

- Jan

9

Blood Part 05 - Quack science and blood

by JanH in

jw
friends

quack science and the risks of blood transfusions.

the watchtower society has not been content with giving "biblical" reasons for prohibiting blood transfusions.

articles and publications dealing with this question are just as concerned with emphasizing the dangers of blood transfusions and the advantages of some alternatives to blood transfusions.

JanH

Patio,

Will that be in a later article?

It is in the series yes. I have to do some reediting to post the web pages on this board, but I will post them all to give a little food in between the fluff here

WT,

Great post JanH, I really enjoyed reading it. But how can you be so smart and party as hard as you do, I know you have killed a lot of brain cells? lol

LOL. Well, firstly, I wrote most of it quite some time ago.

Secondly, well I think heavy drinking is good for the intellect. You know when predators attack a flock of animals, they take the weakest individual. So, this makes the flock as a whole stronger and fitter. It's the same with how alcohol affects the brain cells

- Jan

9

Blood Part 05 - Quack science and blood

by JanH in

jw
friends

quack science and the risks of blood transfusions.

the watchtower society has not been content with giving "biblical" reasons for prohibiting blood transfusions.

articles and publications dealing with this question are just as concerned with emphasizing the dangers of blood transfusions and the advantages of some alternatives to blood transfusions.

JanH

Thanks zenpunk

The following chapters mostly deal with the "Biblical" arguments, pretty much in depth, and then it returns to a longer dissection of the JW Blood brochure to investigate JW propaganda techniques.

In anyone missed it, part 04 is here: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=33450&page=1&site=3

- Jan.

48

Does Ray Franz owe us an apology?

by sleepy in

jw
friends

(not, ray franz owes us an apology) .

(ok lets add this on)do those who are or were governing body members have a greater amount of responsability than witnesses in general?at what point do we stop being victims and become instigaters?

this may have been discussed before but i'm not sure.so sorry if it has.

JanH

Personally, I think actions speak louder than words.

However, on Freeminds, you can see a video of Ray Franz saying "I am ashamed of what I took part in". See http://www.freeminds.org/video/video.htm

- Jan

9

Blood Part 05 - Quack science and blood

by JanH in

jw
friends

quack science and the risks of blood transfusions.

the watchtower society has not been content with giving "biblical" reasons for prohibiting blood transfusions.

articles and publications dealing with this question are just as concerned with emphasizing the dangers of blood transfusions and the advantages of some alternatives to blood transfusions.

JanH

Quack science and the risks of blood transfusions

THE WATCHTOWER SOCIETY HAS NOT been content with giving "Biblical" reasons for prohibiting blood transfusions. Articles and publications dealing with this question are just as concerned with emphasizing the dangers of blood transfusions and the advantages of some alternatives to blood transfusions. Playing to the JW community, the Watchtower and Awake! magazines are filled with horror stories and snide remarks emphasizing the danger. Most JWs, when dealing with the issue, will say much about Hepatitis and AIDS and the horrible dangers of blood transfusions. Despite having no expertise in medicine they will also insist that there are always alternatives to blood transfusions. This is because of the heavy propaganda from the WTS:

"It is not surprising that transfusing such a complex substance might, as one surgeon put it, "confuse" the body's immune system. In fact, a blood transfusion can suppress immunity for as long as a year. To some, this is the most threatening aspect of transfusions.

Then there are infectious diseases as well. They have exotic names, such as Chagas disease and cytomegalovirus. Effects range from fever and chills to death. Dr. Joseph Feldschuh of the Cornell University of Medicine says that there is 1 chance in 10 of getting some sort of infection from a transfusion. It is like playing Russian roulette with a ten-chamber revolver. Recent studies have also shown that blood transfusions during cancer surgery may actually increase the risk of recurrence of the cancer.

No wonder a television news program claimed that a blood transfusion could be the biggest obstacle to recovery from surgery. Hepatitis infects hundreds of thousands and kills many more transfusion recipients than AIDS does, but it gets little of the publicity. No one knows the extent of the deaths, but economist Ross Eckert says that it may be the equivalent of a DC-10 airliner full of people crashing every month." (Awake! Oct. 22, 1990, p. 9)

Those who have read this document so far will be aware of the fact that the WTS has used similar -- and stronger -- arguments against vaccination programmes and organ transplants, not to mention medical science in general. While there are negative side effects of vaccinations, informed persons agree that on the whole they have been of tremendous benefit to humanity. Even though some individuals have died, vaccinations have saved millions of lives. One would be hard pressed to find anyone -- JW or not -- who would not agree that vaccinations have been a good thing.

We will later return to these exaggerated horror stories about blood transfusions. For now let it suffice to point to the similarities between the threats used against those who accepted vaccinations, organ transplants and now blood transfusions.

The WTS has not been content just to exaggerate real threats. In line with claims about alleged personality changes as a result of vaccinations and organ transplants, it appealed to the same sort of quack scientists:

"Criminals in jail are given the opportunity to donate their blood. For example, the New York Times of April 6, 1961, reported: "Inmates of Sing Sing Prison at Ossining will give blood to the Red Cross today." A commendable act? Perhaps not as beneficial to their fellow men as the community is led to believe. . . . in his book Who Is Your Doctor and Why? Doctor Alonzo Jay Shadman says: "The blood in any person is in reality the person himself. It contains all the peculiarities of the individual from whence it comes. This includes hereditary taints, disease susceptibilities, poisons due to personal living, eating and drinking habits. . . . The poisons that produce the impulse to commit suicide, murder, or steal are in the blood." And Dr. Amrico Valrio, Brazilian doctor and surgeon for over forty years, agrees. "Moral insanity, sexual perversions, repression, inferiority complexes, petty crimes -- these often follow in the wake of blood transfusion," he says. Yet it is acknowledged in the public press that organizations whose blood supply is considered reliable obtain blood for transfusion from criminals who are known to have such characteristics." (The Watchtower, Sept. 15, 1961, p. 564)

So according to the WTS a blood transfusion can give you a criminal's personality! We ask what is the more astonishing: that the WTS actually taught this nonsense or that it was able to dig up "experts" who agreed with them? We know for certain that this quackery was believed by many JWs well into the 1980s, and probably still is.

It is interesting to note how much in recent years the WTS has changed its general ideas about science, and medical science in particular. While it once considered the medical profession to be demon-possessed, it is now more likely to print articles in Awake! magazine about the wonders of surgery and medicine, and it often warns against certain alternative treatments that are not backed by scientific evidence.

Considering that the JW community has historically been hostile to medical professionals (and this hostility has of course been fed by the controversies related to the blood prohibition!) and positive to "alternative medicine," (some of those "experts" quoted to support the anti-vaccination stand were homeopaths) it will be interesting to see how quickly this reversal will change the attitude of the rank and file.

Despite the fact that the WTS has gone to great lengths to minimize damage to the JW community by allowing more and more blood components to be used in treatment, the blood prohibition is a major cause of the strained relationship between Jehovahs Witnesses and medical professionals, and is a major reason the JWs are considered a dangerous religious group.

Also, despite all JW arguments about "alternatives," their blood ban kills.

Next Section: Blood and the Bible