Jehoavh Witness's Idiocy

[bluemonday]

Theology - don't you just love it. All it does is result in huge pain and suffering, pogroms, genocides and the death of an innocent young woman giving birth to twins

Agreed 100%. All that's wrong with a twisted, self serving, warped ideology neatly summed up in one sentence. A sort of a half arsed version of the Borg.

[Albert Tatlock]

I would imagine that the kids would be brainwashed into looking at their mummy (who they never had the chance to love and grow up with) as some sort of "heroic" martyr for the deluded faith that they will have rammed down their throats for the rest of their lives.

When it comes to JW kids (e.g. the children of JWs) requiring treatment - I would draw a line there - and doctors in the UK correctly have the right to step in on these cases and force the JW parents to legally accept what the doctors would deem as 'life-saving treatment'.

 

There have been a few cases in the past around the world where JW parents have held back treatment. If you want to kill yourself not accepting blood at 18 or older, that's up to you...but no one in my book has the civil right to effectively kill someone else because of their own beliefs. Equally any NOK holding back treatment, where the individual concerned has not signed a request to hold back treatment should be done for manslaughter IMO, or better still overruled by doctors.

[We Like The Moon]

I would imagine that the kids would be brainwashed into looking at their mummy (who they never had the chance to love and grow up with) as some sort of "heroic" martyr for the deluded faith that they will have rammed down their throats for the rest of their lives.

When it comes to JW kids (e.g. the children of JWs) requiring treatment - I would draw a line there - and doctors in the UK correctly have the right to step in on these cases and force the JW parents to legally accept what the doctors would deem as 'life-saving treatment'.

 

There have been a few cases in the past around the world where JW parents have held back treatment. If you want to kill yourself not accepting blood at 18 or older, that's up to you...but no one in my book has the civil right to effectively kill someone else because of their own beliefs. Equally any NOK holding back treatment, where the individual concerned has not signed a request to hold back treatment should be done for manslaughter IMO, or better still overruled by doctors.

I whole heartedly agree with you - anyone who allows their child to die when they have the full knowledge that medical intervention will allow them to live are equal to murderers.

[Declan]

isn't it a basic Christian belief about the last supper and the consumption of the "body" & "blood" of Christ?

 

No. It's one of the points of contention between the various sects. See here.

 

also after a quick google , oh dear it seems that the jobbo's didn't like the bible so they re-"translated" it for their own purposes....

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies...rld_Translation

 

Well i suppose that's fairly normal behaviour for an American founded cult (david koresh anyone?).

 

It's fairly normal for all Christian denominations.

[Floyd]

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.

 

I note this bit wasn't answered...

Ans's post in responce to ya man allowing his children to make their own choices when they come of age.... Let's pray they don't require a blood transfusion before then and if they do, saline works.

[MarcusAurelius]

I am not posting in this thread any more because it would serve no purpose , I thoroughly sympathize with Lonan3 and his experiences and can tell him that is in no way what I would want to happen but apart from that , you all obviously have formed your opinions and nothing I can say or do will ever change that

[Albert Tatlock]

A sort of a half arsed version of the Borg.

 

I am not posting in this thread any more because it would serve no purpose , I thoroughly sympathize with Lonan3 and his experiences and can tell him that is in no way what I would want to happen but apart from that , you all obviously have formed your opinions and nothing I can say or do will ever change that

Resistance would be futile.

[Chinahand]

I am not posting in this thread any more because it would serve no purpose , I thoroughly sympathize with Lonan3 and his experiences and can tell him that is in no way what I would want to happen but apart from that , you all obviously have formed your opinions and nothing I can say or do will ever change that

 

A lot of questions have been asked - there may have been anger and hostility in those questions - the issues involve trying to justify the death of a young woman or a child, so I'd expect to be pushed back on if I tried to justify having those opinions.

 

Saying you aren't going to answer these questions because you think the people asking them won't change their minds is all well and good - but only one person in 100 posts rather than reads these forums maybe some of those people are more sympathetic, plus I can understand you not wanting to be drawn into name calling etc, but answering some pretty simple questions - why wouldn't you want to do that?

[Spartacus]

Right, now it appears that Mr Koresh has left the building, I'd like to chip in.

 

I suffered a haemorrhage when I was 8 years old after some twunt botched the removal of my tonsils.

Two things saved my life. 1) my mother popping her head round my bedroom door (the incident happened 5 days after the op) 2) A blood transfusion. Without which I wouldn't be here, reading this. End of.

 

I too new someone who lost a parent through this faith in this manner. I hope the childrens classmates understand the meaning of the word "martyr"..

 

Do JW's take holidays at Christmas etc? I made the mistake of saying "Bah humbug" a few years ago in work. Fine, they replied, you won't need the time off then! Cue silly Santa hat.

[Gladys]

Well, after all the posts about saline and denying children correct medical treatment, the final analysis is that for not accepting a simple procedure, the children will have no mother. What kind of faith finds that acceptable?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Still waiting for an answer on my question

 

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

 

I think that depreciates the meaning of hero somewhat. I don't think they are heroes for dying for their COUNTRY. I think it saddening and very wrong that people have died and continue to die in the name of their COUNTRY.

I do think you have a good point but I see it in a slightly different way. You say that JWs are against war so they do value life, whereas the greater society thinks it is quite fine that people die for their country. I do agree with you that the fact that dying and killing for one's country in Iraq is often the result of patriotic feeling, which is nothing more than a belief system. I see it as senseless to lose a lives in the name of one's nation as it is to lose lives because of religion belief.

 

The scriptures ( thats what Jehovahs Witnesses base their beliefs on ) says very clearly in Acts 15 that we are to abstain from blood.Its very clear and unambiguous.To say they didnt use blood like that back 2000 years ago is wrong , because Roman Physicians use to prescribe blood as a remedy for virtually everything.

 

If you argue that scripture is all-important then it matters not how blood was prescribed 2000 years: blood is blood. Your right there is no ambiguity.

 

I think I agree with Albert Tatlock in that I think anyone who can make an informed, reasoned decision can do whatever they like. If they are below that age then the decision should be taken by their parents or guardian. However, I think that religion is bad so I do NOT think the wishes of parents or family should be respected if they are based upon religious beliefs.

[P.K.]

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

I think that depreciates the meaning of hero somewhat. I don't think they are heroes for dying for their COUNTRY. I think it saddening and very wrong that people have died and continue to die in the name of their COUNTRY.

I do think you have a good point but I see it in a slightly different way. You say that JWs are against war so they do value life, whereas the greater society thinks it is quite fine that people die for their country. I do agree with you that the fact that dying and killing for one's country in Iraq is often the result of patriotic feeling, which is nothing more than a belief system. I see it as senseless to lose a lives in the name of one's nation as it is to lose lives because of religion belief.

Dear me, just what planet are some of you living on?

 

In this world there are lots of good people. Unfortunately there are also lots of bad people. It's a sad fact of life that the last resort to prevent the bad over-running the good is to kill them. Now lots of folks, including the totally twisted and deluded JW's, abhor such actions. Fair enough as war is a nasty, dirty, miserable business. Therefore you should all be very grateful, JW's included, that there are those who are prepared to do your killing for you, perhaps even losing their own life in the process. But it's not done for their COUNTRY (ouch!), it's done for you.

 

The scriptures ( thats what Jehovahs Witnesses base their beliefs on ) says very clearly in Acts 15 that we are to abstain from blood.Its very clear and unambiguous.To say they didnt use blood like that back 2000 years ago is wrong , because Roman Physicians use to prescribe blood as a remedy for virtually everything.

If you argue that scripture is all-important then it matters not how blood was prescribed 2000 years: blood is blood. Your right there is no ambiguity.

I think I agree with Albert Tatlock in that I think anyone who can make an informed, reasoned decision can do whatever they like. If they are below that age then the decision should be taken by their parents or guardian. However, I think that religion is bad so I do NOT think the wishes of parents or family should be respected if they are based upon religious beliefs.

The difference now, which the JW's blissfully (sorry) ignore is that it's a straightforward procedure that WILL save a life. It's no longer based on some mumbo-jumbo might/might not work bollocks. And THAT'S the difference that the JW's go out of their way to ignore because if they don't their belief system starts to crumble. Just as a lot of religious crap does in the face of modern science. I think any JW who refuses a blood transfusion that would save their life is clearly not of sound mind and therefore unable to make any decision whatsoever. So they should be over-ruled by those who understand the science and saved despite themselves i.e. refusing a blood transfusion just shouldn't be an option!

 

Incidentally I was trained to administer a saline drip - up the back passage! It saved lives but I'm glad I didn't have to do it....

[We Like The Moon]

I'm sure the husband will get plenty of support from the congregation/family, who no doubt will applaud her martyrdom. The kids will probably grow up with an attempted brainwashing into believing their mother was some sort of saint for dying for the JW cause. All the while, supressing their natural feeling of mourning that they needlessly lost their birthright: a mother.

 

To me it's more like a suicide she chose to die and she chose to die as an act of obedience rather than faith – this choice to die for her “religion” was more appealing than the life of an apostate –being disfellowshipped and the "shame" that she probably beleived this would bring.

 

But hey - he'll be remarried to a Sister within 2 years (more likely 1). She will take care of the kids, be in subjection and pop out another kid or two.

 

The kids will continue to grow up brainwashed and thinking their mother died for Jehovah and that they will see her in the New System.

 

Paradise.

 

WHATEVER

[Gin Span]

Just a bunch of freakshows if you ask me.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Dear me, just what planet are some of you living on?

 

In this world there are lots of good people. Unfortunately there are also lots of bad people. It's a sad fact of life that the last resort to prevent the bad over-running the good is to kill them. Now lots of folks, including the totally twisted and deluded JW's, abhor such actions. Fair enough as war is a nasty, dirty, miserable business. Therefore you should all be very grateful, JW's included, that there are those who are prepared to do your killing for you, perhaps even losing their own life in the process. But it's not done for their COUNTRY (ouch!), it's done for you.

 

No, I should definitely not be grateful. If people want to go and join the armed forces under the misguided impression that wherever they go and wherever they fight they will be doing so for some greater good and that it is somehow for my benefit then fair enough (although I do recognise that for many it is the best paid job they can find). But I should not be grateful for their service which in reality has nothing to do with good people killing bad people and, in fact, does not benefit me. Iraq is a wonderful example. It is simply about carrying out the wishes of the government, which is certainly not the same as some greater good. British forces in Iraq and Afghanistan are not the good guys, they should be sent back home.

Though I am not having a pop at those who are or were in the armed forces, I don't think they are bad people, as I said for a lot of people it is the best paid job they can get, millions were conscripted in the past, and ultimately it is the government where responsibility lies. They begin these wars, almost always wrongly.

 

In respect of them being heroes I think it wrong that they should be seen as heroes when are not genuinely fighting for any good. However, they I think their bravery and courage in being placed in terrifying and difficult situations does carry respect in my eyes but they are not my heroes for being there.

 

The difference now, which the JW's blissfully (sorry) ignore is that it's a straightforward procedure that WILL save a life. It's no longer based on some mumbo-jumbo might/might not work bollocks. And THAT'S the difference that the JW's go out of their way to ignore because if they don't their belief system starts to crumble. Just as a lot of religious crap does in the face of modern science. I think any JW who refuses a blood transfusion that would save their life is clearly not of sound mind and therefore unable to make any decision whatsoever. So they should be over-ruled by those who understand the science and saved despite themselves i.e. refusing a blood transfusion just shouldn't be an option!

 

But what is a "sound mind"? I am an atheist and think religious beliefs to be complete superstition but even if I think this how can anyone assess whether someone is of "sound mind" or not simply because they want to are willing to die, the simplicity of the procedure is not in question. Does this not parallel the arguments on euthanasia. Are these people of "sound mind" because they want to die? I tend to think their decision should be respected as to do otherwise would be an infringement on their freedoms.

 

But yes I would agree, it is shocking to think that such a religious belief has led this family to make a decision that resulted in these deaths. Crazy world.