Jehoavh Witness's Idiocy

[MarcusAurelius]

Yes, (as a medical layperson) a saline infusion will work, because it beefs up the blood pressure so the important bits in the blood get to the important bits of the body, what is your point?

 

My point is this , if it worked for my wife why wouldn't it have worked for this woman.What was so bad about this woman's circumstance that she had to die because of supposedly not taking blood ?

 

And what do you mean 'it beefs up the blood pressure' ? Saline is a volume expander I was told by the consultant

 

There are many variables e.g. not everyone has the same amount of blood, not everyone is of the same build, people lose blood at different rates/places, body temperature is a factor, alcohol can be a factor, shock can set in differently for people etc. etc. etc.

 

I know I'm fighting a losin battle here but it just makes me wonder really , as our organization works hand in hand with some of the top surgeons in the UK pioneering bloodless surgery even in heart surgery and yet this poor woman dies

 

I suppose its because in most peoples eyes to die for your country is heroic and yet as this thread has proved to die for God is pathetic in most peoples opinions.It was her choice and her husband supported her in that.

 

Can someone tell me why its so noble to die for your country yet to die for God is shameful ?

[Gladys]

I can't answer this but can you answer this , why should this woman die from a lack of blood when my wife lost 3 pints of blood and within minutes ( approx 5 minutes ) of the Saline being administered her blood count was normal again.Why should it work for my wife and yet not for this woman ? Saline works in a very simple way , it literally expands your blood to the required level working in harmony with the bodies natural defences.

 

Secondly, (and I won't be able to argue this one convincingly for obvious reasons) if your objection is religious: You have to question where this diktat originates - different times, different knowledge - and then after thinking about it surely your thoughts would be that despite the archaic scriptures, God has allowed this knowledge to save lives for a purpose, and that purpose is known only to Him, it is a gift so why reject it?

 

Well, perhaps it is to do with the reward in heaven.......

 

But we all know what that can lead to.

 

I am not religious by anyone's standards, but if I have to fall in with a religious credo it would be Christian Aid's motto from some years back ' We Believe in Life Before Death'. So true on so many levels, and not a bad sentiment for believers and non-believers alike.

 

You say God has allowed this knowledge for a purpose ? That presupposes that God is in control of the world and everything that is currently going on in it, so you think God wants the world this way , with paedophilia , warfare , hunger , poverty , sickness , crime even death ?

 

Plus if you believe in God as I do then you must have heard that he has an opponent who wants to discourage as many people as possible from getting to know who that God really is , certainly not some vindictive , hateful God who takes people away in their prime.So many things go on in the world today in God's name and yet NONE of them are in God's name

 

You say the scriptures are archaic yet I doubt you have ever even looked into them.What reward in heaven might this be ? I don't want to go to Heaven I want to be here with my wife and kids

 

I suppose its a bad thing because this woman chose not to have blood and has paid for it with her life , she was obedient to God upto death and everyone says thats a bad thing , yet when a man gives up his life for his country he is hailed as a hero.

 

Who decided that she was obedient to God unto death? Perhaps God said she should mother her children and nurture them until adulthood and then decide to leave this mortal coil. With one act of denial she has betrayed that promise. I find the beliefs of anyone who puts an abstract beyond the real, like your children, worrying in the extreme.

[Declan]

Jess Yates (father of Paula, kind of speaks volumes)

 

I thought that Hughie Greene was Paula's dad?

 

Anyway, I'm not really sure what the rights and wrongs of this are. If this lass knew the risks and decided against a transfusion, is it right for the doctors to intervene? Do the libertarians on the forum think that had the doctors gone against her wishes that would have smacked of the Nanny State?

[ans]

I can't answer this but can you answer this , why should this woman die from a lack of blood when my wife lost 3 pints of blood and within minutes ( approx 5 minutes ) of the Saline being administered her blood count was normal again.Why should it work for my wife and yet not for this woman ?

 

Because they're different people, different conditions, different situations. Comparing them without any medical knowledge, which you freely admit you don't possess, is worthless.

[MarcusAurelius]

Who decided that she was obedient to God unto death?

 

(Revelation 2:9-10) . . .. 10 Do not be afraid of the things you are about to suffer. Look! The Devil will keep on throwing some of YOU into prison that YOU may be fully put to the test, and that YOU may have tribulation ten days. Prove yourself faithful even to death, and I will give you the crown of life. . .

 

God did

 

Perhaps God said she should mother her children and nurture them until adulthood and then decide to leave this mortal coil. With one act of denial she has betrayed that promise. I find the beliefs of anyone who puts an abstract beyond the real, like your children, worrying in the extreme.

 

You may find it worrying , what I find more worrying is that you are willing to accept the world for what it is and perhaps bring up your kids in the hellhole that the world is today without giving them any hope of something better.I certainly don't want to martyr myself or my kids.So don't tell me what priorities I have in life because you don't have a clue

[Albert Tatlock]

Anyway, I'm not really sure what the rights and wrongs of this are. If this lass knew the risks and decided against a transfusion, is it right for the doctors to intervene? Do the libertarians on the forum think that had the doctors gone against her wishes that would have smacked of the Nanny State?

No it's not right for doctors to intervene - it's their choice - even if other people know it is a f***wit choice. Attempts at education and changing opinions is fine, but if people have made their minds up - then IMO it's up to them.

[MarcusAurelius]

Still waiting for an answer on my question

 

Why is it heroic for a man to die in Iraq in service of his country

 

http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/n...0421/hero.shtml

 

And yet this woman who made a choice who dies faithful to God is a bad thing ?

[Mission]

If you put it like that, I guess they both knew what they signed up for, so in the eyes of those that knew them, they're both hero's.

[Declan]

Anyway, I'm not really sure what the rights and wrongs of this are. If this lass knew the risks and decided against a transfusion, is it right for the doctors to intervene? Do the libertarians on the forum think that had the doctors gone against her wishes that would have smacked of the Nanny State?

No it's not right for doctors to intervene - it's their choice - even if other people know it is a f***wit choice. Attempts at education and changing opinions is fine, but if people have made their minds up - then IMO it's up to them.

 

 

Yeah, I think you might be right. Don't really like it but, once you intervene in circumstances like this, you are starting down a dodgy path.

[Albert Tatlock]

Still waiting for an answer on my question

 

Why is it heroic for a man to die in Iraq in service of his country

 

http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/n...0421/hero.shtml

 

And yet this woman who made a choice who dies faithful to God is a bad thing ?

Hero's are relative. There are British 'heroes' who have died serving their country, and there are Arab 'heroes' who have died as suicide bombers whilst killing them (but both aren't heroes to the British people for example). Heroes are martyrs or people who make a sacrifice or do a courageous thing for a group and are only heroes within that group.

 

I don't see this woman as a hero because I don't belong to her group, in fact I see her as a selfish, deluded individual - programmed no doubt by two other selfish, deluded people - her parents - in much the same way I view fundamentalist islamic terrorists.

 

In other words, I always admire people (my heroes) as those who stand up for their rights and are willing to die for their beliefs - but only when I see a rationale behind those beliefs. Religion is not a rationale in my book, it is a delusion - so in my book she and her family are simply idiots - but at the same time as a liberal I believe they have the right to be idiots if they so wish. I consider the real heroes here to be the doctors, nurses and system that allowed her to die because it was her wish - even though in reality the decision was actually made for her by her parents and/or others years ago, when they suckered the poor girl into the religion in the first place.

[MarcusAurelius]

In other words, I always admire people (my heroes) as those who stand up for their rights and are willing to die for their beliefs - but only when I see a rationale behind those beliefs.

 

In other words your heroes are the ones that justify your beliefs because it suits you.What your saying is that my rationale is superior to yours , I'm superior to you , my thoughts are higher than yours , etc.. In other words your just a proud , haughty , self righteous man.

 

As for your attempts to try to understand the so-called brain washing or programming of her by her parents etc.. You have never been involved with Jehovahs Witnesses and if you had you would know that nobody is forced to do anything , we certainly don't baptise at a young age , only someone who is fully aware of the stand they are making and the consequences involved can become one of Jehovahs Witnesses.

 

I have my own children and I am bringing them up as I see fit , but at the end of the day when they reach an age where they can decide for themselves what they want to do and they decide its not for them , then no matter how much upset I may feel about it , its their choice , but I will tell you this , that whether they become Jehovah's Witnesses or not I will love them unconditionally and unreservedly with everything that I am and everything that I have

[ans]

You wont authorise the use of blood tranfusion for them before the age of 16 though, right? Even if they're going to die without it. That's proper parenting that is, you must be so proud. Well done.

 

Oh, and the difference between soldiers and JW? One side is fighting to live, the other is choosing to die. Fortunately it's a form of natural selection.

[feelslikeitshould]

I have my own children and I am bringing them up as I see fit , but at the end of the day when they reach an age where they can decide for themselves what they want to do and they decide its not for them , then no matter how much upset I may feel about it , its their choice , but I will tell you this , that whether they become Jehovah's Witnesses or not I will love them unconditionally and unreservedly with everything that I am and everything that I have

 

This interests me most. Earlier, you said that it was every witness parents fear that something would happen to their child and they'd require consent for blood or what have you. Would a child, who has only been exposed to the witness beliefs and way of life, be able to make a reasoned and informed decision about it being the way they wanted to live? No, they think it's the only way there is and even then it's their parents that do not give the consent for a transfusion and potentially, the child dies.

 

I would hope a young child would be given the transfusion if it was a matter of life and death, no matter what the parents religious beliefs. Who says this religion is more 'right' than any other? It's a belief system, which is fair enough, but sacrificing the life of your child because what happens after they die is apparently more important than life?

[Albert Tatlock]

In other words, I always admire people (my heroes) as those who stand up for their rights and are willing to die for their beliefs - but only when I see a rationale behind those beliefs.

 

In other words your heroes are the ones that justify your beliefs because it suits you.What your saying is that my rationale is superior to yours , I'm superior to you , my thoughts are higher than yours , etc.. In other words your just a proud , haughty , self righteous man.

You are taking my original post re: heroes/groups out of context. Based on your logic, I should therefore view islamic fundamentalist terrorists that blow themselves up killing British soldiers as heroes too. I don't, for the simple reason I don't believe in their rationale, just as I don't believe in the rationale of JWs.

As for your attempts to try to understand the so-called brain washing or programming of her by her parents etc.. You have never been involved with Jehovahs Witnesses and if you had you would know that nobody is forced to do anything , we certainly don't baptise at a young age , only someone who is fully aware of the stand they are making and the consequences involved can become one of Jehovahs Witnesses.

I remember as a child one of them targetting my mother, and spending time with us reading stories to us and giving us copies of 'the watch tower'. I'm just glad she eventually saw sense - I needed around 8 pints of blood in an operation/transfusion following a motorcycle accident when I was 18.

I have my own children and I am bringing them up as I see fit , but at the end of the day when they reach an age where they can decide for themselves what they want to do and they decide its not for them , then no matter how much upset I may feel about it , its their choice , but I will tell you this , that whether they become Jehovah's Witnesses or not I will love them unconditionally and unreservedly with everything that I am and everything that I have

Every decent parent loves their children unconditionally and unreservedly with everything that they are and everything they have - you don't need to be a JW to do that. Your phrase 'whether they become JWs or not' actually says paragraphs about you - to a child, such statements represent pressure, and are effectively threats about crossing a line in your life.

[bluemonday]

Far as I'm concerned anyone can believe whatever they want as long as it does no harm to others

BUT

If they try and ram it down my neck, then I'm not likely to respond in "a positive manner"

 

Till God - if he exists - and I personally don't have conclusive proof one way or another, pops up in front of me and tells me his/her/its manifesto, I'll retain an element of distrust in books - of whatever belief written by whoever and interpreted as to their meaning by whoever.

 

As for kids, they should be free to chose whatever path they want without pressure.

 

edit to add

as long as it does no harm to others