• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Parents on their way to prison for not providing medical care for child.

RedhorseWoman

Active Member
Do you get the impression that there are certain people posting on this thread who have their fingers firmly in their ears, whistling Dixie? That is their choice of course.

I guess some people just don't want to be told what to do by anyone....and yet Jehovah has always had his people directed by men he had chosen for the position. Those who didn't like it and complained, sure ended up wishing they hadn't. :oops:

No wonder Jesus said that these last days would be like the days of Noah. It's going to take something visual to get their attention, but by then it will be too late. It wasn't Noah who closed the door of the ark....nor was it he who decided who perished in the flood.

I wonder why those who leave don't obey Jesus and go out to preach about Gods kingdom? Why don't they form themselves into the one true religion if they are so sure that our GB are not the "faithful and discreet slave"? If they have all the answers, then perhaps they can point that slave out to us so that we can eat at his table too? :shrug:

I don't understand.....? They must know who he is, surely?

Perhaps we should mention that on sites like this, we address questions for the sake of interested ones who may benefit from the information. It's not like we enjoy talking to disgruntled people. :rolleyes:

The problem is that Jehovah did not choose those men who now reside in upstate New York. They appointed themselves, and you just accept what they tell you even when it is wrong, or dangerous, or both.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Heartbreaking article. Do you believe that if life saving medical care is available, a parent has the right to withhold it due to religious beliefs? If so, where do you draw the line? What procedures would you deny your child due to your religion? My thoughts are that if an adult wants to not receive medical care, that's their choice. However when a child is involved I believe that the state has a duty to step in and save that child. Please read and give your thoughts.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/a-religious-oregon-couple-didn’t-believe-in-medical-care-after-newborn’s-death-they’re-headed-to-prison/ar-AAzPFXD?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=AARDHP
I do not know the details of this case but just yesterday I was talking to a coworker whose wife had a baby two months ago. He was born two months premature at 4 lbs. It was touch and go for a while but he survived and he is completely healthy, but only because he was born in the hospital and received the necessary medical care...

If these parents knew the woman was about to deliver a baby prematurely they were morally responsible to go to a hospital. There is NO excuse for not doing so, and certainly religious beliefs cannot be used as an excuse. This is appalling to say the least.

We have a cat who is critically ill with kidney disease, and my husband and I considered it our moral responsibility to take him to the vet to do whatever was necessary to save his life. He spent three days at the vet getting IV fluids and other medications were given. He is still tottering in the edge but he is better and he at least has a chance of living a little longer.

We have no children but I cannot even imagine not giving that child every chance it deserves to live. What that couple did is unconscionable and unforgivable. It just demonstrates the danger of religion and the delusions that can result. Sure, the government has the right and a duty to step in! :eek:
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
The problem is that Jehovah did not choose those men who now reside in upstate New York.

How would you know that? Are you anointed? How do the "chosen ones" know that they are chosen? Do they need your approval first perhaps? Are they doing the job Jesus told them to do? Did they need to be perfect in order to accomplish that monumental task? Do you see any other united global brotherhood carrying out the command to preach the kingdom message in all the earth? (Matthew 24:14; Matthew 28:19-20) I don't.

When was the last time you obeyed Jesus in that commission? Who are your Christian brothers? With whom do you meet regularly as Paul encouraged? (Hebrews 10:24-25)

Once you learn the truth, you can't "unlearn" it. All you can do is live in a way that contradicts it.

You seem so quick to condemn others for what they aren't doing......but what about you?
Who is your "faithful and discreet slave"? He was going to be active right up to the end, which is looming ever closer. Is he guiding you in these last days?

What is being "fed" to you? And by whom? Or is your food bar self service?

Are you really a Christian if you fail to obey Jesus in all his commands? Can you do it alone? So many think they can.....but it has no biblical precedent. In order to preach in all the world, this brotherhood has to be found in all the world....and they have to be united as one body. (1 Corinthians 1:10)

They appointed themselves, and you just accept what they tell you even when it is wrong, or dangerous, or both.

Who told you that?
I have never had a 'bum steer' from them yet and I have been a Witness for over 45 years. Nothing they have taught was wrong because they gave us the right amount of "food at the proper time". (Matthew 24:45) What we were given worked very effectively to sift out the ones with insincere motives and to give hope to the faithful who are all still here, continuing to serve, as they have always done, waiting patiently on Jehovah to do what he promised in his own time and way.

There is nothing dangerous about our GB......the 'danger' is in actively opposing Christ's "brothers" which is apparently something people like yourself have no compunction about doing. But that's OK because this is a time for separation. By our own choices, we put ourselves in one camp or the other. There are only two options.

Jesus used the days of Noah to make a comparison for our time, for a good reason. There is only one 'ark' and those 'on board' are the obedient ones who don't make excuses, find fault, or want to change the rules to suit themselves.
We know that those outside the ark did not fare well. They didn't know how wrong they were until it was too late.

The ark didn't have a lifeboat for last minute changes of mind you know.
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
Dude? o_O Correct me if I am wrong...but you are from the older generation like me. Age should bring some maturity and at least a sound knowledge base in the subject you are debating. That, along with the propensity to continue to learn and to corrrect former ways of thinking if you see evidence for correction.....IMO, you appear to be scared to learn anything that disagrees with your former thinking or current opinion.

It wasn't just a YouTube video. It was put up on the Australian Government website regarding the dangers of blood transfusions and the warnings are coming from experts in this field of medicine. You didn't watch it, did you? Too scared. Too bigoted? Too proud to learn something you don't want to know? That is your choice, but it is ignorant in the extreme to reject knowledge that is substantiated by people who deal with these issues on a daily basis and continue to add to their own knowledge base through ongoing experience. They understand the dangers that you apparently discount out of hand. Why? Do you claim to know better than them? Do the words "morbidity" and "mortality" fall on deaf ears?

If you have no desire to learn anything that might cause you to change your mind, then please understand that those who have bothered to watch the video will now be seeing your view for what it is....completely ignorant. Any credibility you may have thought you had, is gone.....you have shot yourself in the foot. "Sorry about that Chief". :p



It is no surprise. It fits perfectly with the tone of all your posts. I'm surprised you madecthe correction actually. :rolleyes:
My gender alters nothing in this issue.
Deeje, he said he was "too lazy" to even use Google Translate, so that's on him.
 

RedhorseWoman

Active Member
How would you know that? Are you anointed? How do the "chosen ones" know that they are chosen? Do they need your approval first perhaps? Are they doing the job Jesus told them to do? Did they need to be perfect in order to accomplish that monumental task? Do you see any other united global brotherhood carrying out the command to preach the kingdom message in all the earth? (Matthew 24:14; Matthew 28:19-20) I don't.

When was the last time you obeyed Jesus in that commission? Who are your Christian brothers? With whom do you meet regularly as Paul encouraged? (Hebrews 10:24-25)

Once you learn the truth, you can't "unlearn" it. All you can do is live in a way that contradicts it.

You seem so quick to condemn others for what they aren't doing......but what about you?
Who is your "faithful and discreet slave"? He was going to be active right up to the end, which is looming ever closer. Is he guiding you in these last days?

What is being "fed" to you? And by whom? Or is your food bar self service?

Are you really a Christian if you fail to obey Jesus in all his commands? Can you do it alone? So many think they can.....but it has no biblical precedent. In order to preach in all the world, this brotherhood has to be found in all the world....and they have to be united as one body. (1 Corinthians 1:10)



Who told you that?
I have never had a 'bum steer' from them yet and I have been a Witness for over 45 years. Nothing they have taught was wrong because they gave us the right amount of "food at the proper time". (Matthew 24:45) What we were given worked very effectively to sift out the ones with insincere motives and to give hope to the faithful who are all still here, continuing to serve, as they have always done, waiting patiently on Jehovah to do what he promised in his own time and way.

There is nothing dangerous about our GB......the 'danger' is in actively opposing Christ's "brothers" which is apparently something people like yourself have no compunction about doing. But that's OK because this is a time for separation. By our own choices, we put ourselves in one camp or the other. There are only two options.

Jesus used the days of Noah to make a comparison for our time, for a good reason. There is only one 'ark' and those 'on board' are the obedient ones who don't make excuses, find fault, or want to change the rules to suit themselves.
We know that those outside the ark did not fare well. They didn't know how wrong they were until it was too late.

The ark didn't have a lifeboat for last minute changes of mind you know.

One simple question...how do you know for a fact that the current GB WERE appointed by Jehovah? Give us the verified proof.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Let me address this first....

One simple question...how do you know for a fact that the current GB WERE appointed by Jehovah? Give us the verified proof.

The "verified proof" is coming, just like it did in Noah's day. Are you willing to wait?

Do you have verified proof that they aren't appointed by Jehovah when they have accomplished what no other global brotherhood has done?.....who else is preaching the kingdom message as one united body in all the world? Christendom has no idea what the kingdom is, and strangely none of them have ever knocked on my door to tell me anything about the Bible. Did Jesus sit in a building and wait for the sheep to come to him? NO! He sent his disciples out to search for them. (Matthew 10:11-15)

This counsel is, of course, excellent. Too bad that JWs don't follow it. Some examples:

"Husbands, love your wives as the Christ loved the congregation"...but, if you are a wife beater and abuser, don't worry because the elders will counsel her to be more submissive to you.

Total hogwash. No one has to submit to physical abuse. Elders give scriptural counsel from the Bible but ultimately, it is up to the one being abused to take whatever action they consider necessary. The Bible allows for separation on serious grounds. But unlike the world, we do not throw marriages away on flimsy grounds because divorce is something Jehovah hates. (Malachi 2:16) The majority of families are not as you describe.
Are there those who pretend to be Christians but show another face behind closed doors? Of course there are, but Jehovah knows who they are, just as he knows who the apostates are. He will deal with them. (Hebrews 10:26-31)

"Wives should deeply respect their husbands" no matter what their husbands do to them and they should always submit to anything their husband wants. They are, after all, female and of little consequence in the JW organization.

More hogwash. It is headship, not dictatorship. Females are an important part of our organization. They carry out the bulk of the preaching work....and participate in building projects right alongside their brothers.
Are they in competition with men?....NO! because we see no need to compete with them. They have their assigned role and so do we. I haven't come across anyone but a disgruntled rebel who has a problem with that arrangement.

"Let children be obedient to the parents" and if those children should ever dare to question the authority of the JW organization or state that the JW religion simply isn't right for them, kick those children to the curb, throw them out of the house, and make sure you shun them until they crawl back to the JW religion and "repent" for the sin of thinking for themselves and making a choice about how they want to live their lives.

More hogwash. Read the parable of the prodigal son. That is how we treat our children.
Twisted half truths are worse than outright lies...people like you like to play on this. The net is full of those pathetic sob stories....and you obviously believe them. If you need justification to stay away, gratefully Jehovah will give you all you need.

"Love your brothers" if they happen to be in the right clique. Otherwise, it's okay to shunt them to the side and ignore them...they don't count.

:facepalm: Does it stop?

Disfellowshipping is the Bible's recommendation on how to handle outright rebellion and total disregard for Jehovah's laws. (1 Corinthians 5:9-13)

I have a granddaughter who has returned from a life similar to the prodigal son. She started seeing the faults in people and used it as an excuse to leave. She got in with the wrong crowd and lived a very immoral life, but after 5 years, with a new baby, no money, nowhere to live and no one who really cared about her, she asked to come home. Her parents welcomed her back and so did Jehovah. She was reinstated in the congregation and happy to leave her old, miserable life behind. Just last month she was married to a lovely brother who not only adores her but loves her little boy like his own. Ask her how wonderful life is outside the truth....?

Your attitude is peppered with a very vindictive spirit. We don't want you or need people like you to cause trouble and dissension in our family. We enjoy a peaceful spirit because Jehovah weeds out those who don't fit his criteria.

"Love your enemies" but make sure that you despise and hate any people who make the mistake of leaving the JW organization. They are "apostates" and you should never express love for them.

Listen to you.....you are the reason why people are disfellowshipped. You have an acidic view of everything and everyone connected to us. It corrupts your vision and justifies your own conduct...all the best with that attitude.

"Become...tenderly compassionate, freely forgiving" as long as it doesn't involve a former member, in which case you should make up lies about them in order to pretend that they are disgusting immoral people so that you can feel justified in hating them. And, of course, if you should learn of any "sin" committed by any JW member, make sure you immediately run to the elders and report them.

Etc., etc., etc.

Your comments are just plain sad. How on earth can you spread such lies?

I will no longer address your vitriol. You will be on ignore from today.
 

Gallowglass

Member
I have no problems with the parents looking at charges of medical neglect. My concern would be the line and the kind of precedent it puts in place. If a seventeen-year-old has their own religious beliefs, and is opposed to a treatment, is the government going to be able to override their wishes because twelve months is such a huge difference? Does that seventeen-year-old lose that bodily autonomy?
We don’t allow parents to force minors into getting abortions, could the state force a minor to get a porcine heart valve?
 

RedhorseWoman

Active Member
Let me address this first....



The "verified proof" is coming, just like it did in Noah's day. Are you willing to wait?

LOL The JW religion has been around for over a hundred years, with all of its various leaders and groups of leaders declaring that they are the only "channel used by God" and they are the Faithful and Discreet Slave spoken of in scriptures. All of these men have appointed themselves without any proof other than what they declare, and you have the temerity to suggest that we need to wait for proof that is coming? In the meantime, however, you and the rest of the JWs are being compelled to obey everything these unverified representatives of God spew out on a regular basis.

Do you have verified proof that they aren't appointed by Jehovah when they have accomplished what no other global brotherhood has done?.....who else is preaching the kingdom message as one united body in all the world? Christendom has no idea what the kingdom is, and strangely none of them have ever knocked on my door to tell me anything about the Bible. Did Jesus sit in a building and wait for the sheep to come to him? NO! He sent his disciples out to search for them. (Matthew 10:11-15)

I don't know if you're aware of this, but long before the JW religion came on the scene, other Christian religions were busy preaching the Kingdom message. If they hadn't done the job, the JWs would not exist today. Do you ever think about what you're saying?



Total hogwash. No one has to submit to physical abuse. Elders give scriptural counsel from the Bible but ultimately, it is up to the one being abused to take whatever action they consider necessary. The Bible allows for separation on serious grounds. But unlike the world, we do not throw marriages away on flimsy grounds because divorce is something Jehovah hates. (Malachi 2:16) The majority of families are not as you describe.

Oh, yes, isn't it nice that the JW elders allow a battered woman to seek a separation (as, of course, a last resort.) Here are a few testimonies from actual battered women stating what kind of actual advice they received from the elders:

Babs Mason on December 13, 2013 at 10:50 pm said:


Thank you for doing this as both my daughter and I were victims of domestic violence when we were married to a witness. My daughter was told to go back to her abuser or be disfelllowshippewd and she took her life. No one told me what was going on until after she was dead. Then 4 years after that I lost everything I owned and had to flee 4,000 miles to protect my life and the elders did nothing to help me but they supported him while I was in a shelter for domestic violence for 6 weeks. My health was ruined and I was dying from the stress. Feb of this year I left the borg but my life will be forever altered.

Regina Booth on June 6, 2016 at 4:50 pm said:


I’m so sorry! They did the same thing to me and my children. My husband was not a JW and I was. My husband lit one of our children’s crotch on fire with his cigarette lighter(just burned through his clothes and down to his pubic hair and we smothered it out)for fun, after years of abuse. Our child drank bleach to try and kill himself. The elders supported our abuser. Told me to be more loving and supportive. When I filled for divorce, they asked me to leave the congregation as they wished to support our abuser( a non JW). The end of my marriage marked the start of a additional 2 year nightmare in the congregation.

http://aawa.co/blog/exposing-the-watchtowers-flawed-domestic-violence-policy/

There's lots more information out there along with testimonies about the fine advice doled out by uneducated, idiot elders.

Are there those who pretend to be Christians but show another face behind closed doors? Of course there are, but Jehovah knows who they are, just as he knows who the apostates are. He will deal with them. (Hebrews 10:26-31)

Those who pretend to be Christians. I think many JWs should be very, very afraid.



More hogwash. It is headship, not dictatorship. Females are an important part of our organization. They carry out the bulk of the preaching work....and participate in building projects right alongside their brothers.
Are they in competition with men?....NO! because we see no need to compete with them. They have their assigned role and so do we. I haven't come across anyone but a disgruntled rebel who has a problem with that arrangement.

Yep, females carry out the bulk of the preaching work. Females are also allowed to clean the toilets in the Kingdom Halls. But an intelligent female cannot hold any position of authority in the Watchtower organization, and she must submit to a male who is far inferior to her in many ways. In fact, if there is a pre-pubescent, baptized male in attendance at, say, a meeting to go out in field service, the adult females in the group must allow this child to lead them.

As I stated, females don't count for much. Are they the workhorses in the organization? Yes. The Watchtower Society uses them to push literature, but their value ends there.



More hogwash. Read the parable of the prodigal son. That is how we treat our children.
Twisted half truths are worse than outright lies...people like you like to play on this. The net is full of those pathetic sob stories....and you obviously believe them. If you need justification to stay away, gratefully Jehovah will give you all you need.

Oh, really? Again, testimonies from actual people who were thrown out of their parents' home simply because they decided they no longer wanted to be a JW or because they disagreed with certain teachings are all over the place.

In fact, when I posted for a time on Beliefnet, there was a young woman there who was one of the hosts, and she and I became friendly. She confided in me that she had expressed doubts about some of the JW teachings and her elder father threw her out of the house. She was 19 and had no idea of how to make it on her own. A short while after she had been expelled from the family home, her younger sister was also thrown out. I believe she was around 17 or 18 at the time.

I tried my best to give these two emotional support and we kept in contact for a number of years. In fact, she and her sister started a photography business and flew out to my home to do the photography for my daughter's wedding.

She had contacted her parents several times, and they told her in no uncertain terms that she and her sister were not welcome in their home unless they recanted their formerly expressed doubts and went back to the JW religion.

THAT is the reality for many JW teenagers.



Your attitude is peppered with a very vindictive spirit. We don't want you or need people like you to cause trouble and dissension in our family. We enjoy a peaceful spirit because Jehovah weeds out those who don't fit his criteria.

Vindictive? Is that how you describe being blunt about telling the truth? I do understand that truth about your organization is anathema to you, but others have the right to know that the sugar-coated homilies blithely posted by JWs are quite far from the truth. Reality is vastly different from what you describe, and people don't find out about the reality of this high-control religion until they have been hooked and it is too late. I hope to help prevent that.



Listen to you.....you are the reason why people are disfellowshipped. You have an acidic view of everything and everyone connected to us. It corrupts your vision and justifies your own conduct...all the best with that attitude.

Surprise! I'm not disfellowshipped, nor am I disassociated. I was inactive for a time, but fervently desired to return. When I and my husband finally did make the decision to go back to "the truth" I had been away for a long enough time that the scales had fallen from my eyes, and all of the things that had bothered me previously, but that I had tried to ignore now became impossible to ignore. I clearly saw the hypocrisy, the lies, and the lack of love. That was when I walked away for good.



Your comments are just plain sad. How on earth can you spread such lies?

That's the thing, though. I don't spread lies. You, however, spread both lies and half-truths. I just fill things out so that people can see the whole truth.


I will no longer address your vitriol. You will be on ignore from today.

Typical JW response. You get caught spreading falsehoods, so you run away.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
I have no problems with the parents looking at charges of medical neglect. My concern would be the line and the kind of precedent it puts in place. If a seventeen-year-old has their own religious beliefs, and is opposed to a treatment, is the government going to be able to override their wishes because twelve months is such a huge difference? Does that seventeen-year-old lose that bodily autonomy?
We don’t allow parents to force minors into getting abortions, could the state force a minor to get a porcine heart valve?

The question is not one of autonomy for one’s own medical care, but the denial of care for those whom we are responsible for.
 

Gallowglass

Member
The question is not one of autonomy for one’s own medical care, but the denial of care for those whom we are responsible for.

Yes, but it still raises questions. What and where is the line as far as the wishes of those we are responsible for. Would such a decision recognise the desires of a minor.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Yes, but it still raises questions. What and where is the line as far as the wishes of those we are responsible for. Would such a decision recognise the desires of a minor.

Great question! Kids are entitled to have a say in what is done to them.

Courts have held bedside hearings with the minor children of Jehovah's Witnesses regarding the refusal of blood transfusions and have upheld the child's right to decide for themselves what treatment is to be administered. If a minor child is deemed to have made a mature decision and can articulate their stance to the judge's satisfaction, no order will be made to take the matter out of the patient's, or parent's hands.

For example, a minor who has terminal leukemia, and a blood transfusion is suggested to give the child a bit more time....it will not really prolong life, but only result in more suffering, so the child might decide that they have had enough of hospitals and treatments....and death is seen as a way to end their suffering. We have no fear of death, so for us it is not as important to save the life as it is to prevent unnecessary suffering. We look forward to the Bible's promise of a resurrection, so 'sleeping in death' for a little while and waking up in paradise to be reunited with family and friends is seen as a good option.
 

Altfish

Veteran Member
I have no problems with the parents looking at charges of medical neglect. My concern would be the line and the kind of precedent it puts in place. If a seventeen-year-old has their own religious beliefs, and is opposed to a treatment, is the government going to be able to override their wishes because twelve months is such a huge difference? Does that seventeen-year-old lose that bodily autonomy?
We don’t allow parents to force minors into getting abortions, could the state force a minor to get a porcine heart valve?
Unfortunately a line has to be drawn somewhere and 18 it is. You can argue for 16, 17 or 21 but at the moment it is 18. That is what the law will consider.
 

Gallowglass

Member
Unfortunately a line has to be drawn somewhere and 18 it is. You can argue for 16, 17 or 21 but at the moment it is 18. That is what the law will consider.

I just don’t see why it has to be drawn by age, instead of maturely thought out decision. If a fifteen year old makes a decision understanding the consequences of their decision and can explain why they made that decision, it seems irrational to force medical treatment they don’t want on them. Especially since the law says that you cannot force a minor to have an abortion, even in their best interest. It seems slanted and abusive.
 

Altfish

Veteran Member
I just don’t see why it has to be drawn by age, instead of maturely thought out decision. If a fifteen year old makes a decision understanding the consequences of their decision and can explain why they made that decision, it seems irrational to force medical treatment they don’t want on them. Especially since the law says that you cannot force a minor to have an abortion, even in their best interest. It seems slanted and abusive.
I don't disagree to the thought but can you imagine a court case trying to measure maturity?
 

Gallowglass

Member
I don't disagree to the thought but can you imagine a court case trying to measure maturity?

They often do it when looking at whether a child’s opinion should be weighted in custody hearings, for culpability in criminal cases when trying as a juvenile vs an adult, in abuse cases to asses credibility. Why all these and not medical care?
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Yes, but it still raises questions. What and where is the line as far as the wishes of those we are responsible for. Would such a decision recognise the desires of a minor.

There is already legal precedent. Generally, a parent or guardian is responsible to make such decisions for a minor. The fact that in this case, the parent who was legally responsible for the child made a stupid decision based upon religious beliefs does not change that. In this case, I don't see how one could determine the "wishes" of a newborn infant. That is why the parent or guardian makes those decisions.
 

Gallowglass

Member
There is already legal precedent. Generally, a parent or guardian is responsible to make such decisions for a minor. The fact that in this case, the parent who was legally responsible for the child made a stupid decision based upon religious beliefs does not change that. In this case, I don't see how one could determine the "wishes" of a newborn infant. That is why the parent or guardian makes those decisions.

That’s why I wasn’t taking issue with newborn infants. There’s also precedent for listening to the minor over the parent on medical issues, like when a child raised to be a donor for her sister opposed donating, saying she wanted her own life.
 
Top