Why I detest the JW

[savagewind]

Maybe the JW at the door did not actually say "your son would have been better off dead" but they believe that it is better off to be dead in this system of things awaiting a resurrection to the perfect life than it is to sin against a Bible statute. Some people might hear them and translate it as it is better to be dead.

 

[Deeje]

@oldbadger thank you again for being the voice of reason and not hatred based on the distorted one-sided story of the OP.

There is no way that we would force our views on others with regard to our own personal decision to "abstain from blood" (Acts 15:28-29) It is a Biblical command to us, not something to be in two minds about. Blood is sacred to God and medically not all its cracked up to be.

If the parents were told by doctors that their child would die without blood, then that is what they believed. We have countless members of our brotherhood who have been told the same thing, yet none of them died. Any who did, doctors would tell you that a transfusion would not likely have saved them anyway.

Blood transfusions are not as "safe" or "life saving" as they were once thought to be, and the proliferation of hospitals dedicated to bloodless medicine are springing up all over the world. Why? Because patients who refused to have blood actually recovered more quickly than those who had transfusions in the same medical circumstances. They were out of hospital faster and had way less complications as well. This sparked interest in the hospital administrators because of the huge cost of transfusion medicine. Extended hospital time and the resulting complications that often come after the event were not seen in patients who refused blood.

We do have transfusions, but not blood. We accept saline plasma volume expanders which keep the volume up in the veins and arteries so that they do not collapse. The bone marrow makes up red cells very rapidly. The use of EPO speeds up the process.

Take away the bigotry and the emotional hype and actually listen to the other side of this story and you will see what actually happened. The Witnesses may have said that 'they' would rather die than have a transfusion forced on them or their children...but we would never say that to anyone else.

Prejudice always seems to make people see what they want to see, and hear what they want to hear..... isn't that what happened to Jesus?

 

[Profound Realization]

The JW [***staff edit***] is a very nasty one and has caused a lot of unnecessary suffering by forbidding blood transfusions. Our adopted Down's Syndrome son, of Greek-Cypriot origin, was 16 months old when he needed a blood transfusion to save his life, as he has blood condition, which is rare here in the UK. A couple of days after he had the transfusion two JWs turned up on our doorstep. Normally I would say, 'No thank you', as I shut the door, but that day I challenged them. I told them our lovely boy would be dead if he hadn't the transfusion, they said he would have been better off dead rather than having blood from a donor! As you can imagine my response was less than polite as I chased them off our property!

Our son is now 32, and whilst he is quite severe learning difficulties he is the most wonderful person you could wish to meet, and loved by everyone who knows him. My husband, myself, our birth daughters and grandchildren are thrilled to have him in our lives.

Blaming the JW’s for unnecessary suffering is a poor, unnecessary judgement in my opinion. If anyone suffers unnecessarily, it is solely on the individuals, who were not forced by any means to not have a blood transfusion.

Also, it is by faith that anyone would have to believe your words that “they said he would have been better off as dead.” This isn’t to say that you’re lying or exaggerating. And even if a few have said this, lumping them all into this category as nasty is also unnecessary.

With that being said, I am genuinely joyous to hear that the child is doing well and is a joy to others.

 

[Jainarayan]

I, for one, do not know it that is a joke or a real story that is funny.

A bit of both.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

If anyone suffers unnecessarily, it is solely on the individuals, who were not forced by any means to not have a blood transfusion.

They are FORCED, by threat of being disfellowshipped, being shunned by family and friends, and losing fellowship with their god. If a witness receives a blood transfusion, their life as they knew it, would be over.

 

[Oeste]

There is no way that we would force our views on others with regard to our own personal decision to "abstain from blood" (Acts 15:28-29)

Of course you can force your views on others! Isn’t that how coercion works? If the victim expects to talk to his parents, his sister, or friends in the future, then yes, they need to refuse the blood transfusion. If you are a teen you can be cast out of your home for receiving a transfusion and if you are a child, you have no choice at all unless a Court intervenes.

If the parents were told by doctors that their child would die without blood, then that is what they believed. We have countless members of our brotherhood who have been told the same thing, yet none of them died.

So the May 1994 Awake! magazine cover was "fake news" ? You may want to explain that one to the Watchtower.

Apparently these kids were convinced by their parents who were convinced by the WT that God prefers sacrifice over mercy.

Blood transfusions are not as "safe" or "life saving" as they were once thought to be,

Blood supplies are even safer now than they were before because we screen for a lot more diseased than we did before. Also, they are a lot more life-saving, as patients with hemophilia, cancer, liver and cancer disease live longer more productive lives.

and the proliferation of hospitals dedicated to bloodless medicine are springing up all over the world.

Which lead us to a major complaint regarding the WT. The first modern hospitals were Christian institutions built to care for the sick, infirm, or the traveler. You would think the WT would take the lead building bloodless hospitals all over the place, but to my knowledge they’ve never built a single institution. Stranger still, Witnesses who won't walk into a YMCA apparently don't give a second thought about getting free care from Christian based hospitals.

Why? Because patients who refused to have blood actually recovered more quickly than those who had transfusions in the same medical circumstances. They were out of hospital faster and had way less complications as well. This sparked interest in the hospital administrators because of the huge cost of transfusion medicine. Extended hospital time and the resulting complications that often come after the event were not seen in patients who refused blood.

Unfortunately the kids on the May '94 cover aren't around so that we could explain this to them.

We do have transfusions, but not blood. We accept saline plasma volume expanders which keep the volume up in the veins and arteries so that they do not collapse. The bone marrow makes up red cells very rapidly. The use of EPO speeds up the process.

This is great news and a lifeline if you’re a Jehovah Witness living in North America or Europe, but if you’re a mom or dad living in a third world country any "bloodless" hospital might as well be on the moon.

The Witnesses may have said that 'they' would rather die than have a transfusion forced on them or their children...but we would never say that to anyone else.

Or they may have just said it is better to die than have a blood transfusion…without referring to themselves at all.

Prejudice always seems to make people see what they want to see, and hear what they want to hear..... isn't that what happened to Jesus?

I'm not aware of Jesus accepting, refusing, or denying a blood transfusion.

However I do see the WT's blood doctrine as extremely prejudicial to hemophiliacs and those living in third world countries.

 

[Deeje]

They are FORCED, by threat of being disfellowshipped, being shunned by family and friends, and losing fellowship with their god. If a witness receives a blood transfusion, their life as they knew it, would be over.

The things you post are a joke djhw.....as if you are an expert on JW's because someone studied with you.
I am so pleased he decided to stop wasting his time.

No genuine Witness of Jehovah who respects God's commands will accept a blood transfusion because consuming blood is against God's law. Unless you have another definition of the word "abstain" (Acts 15:28-29) The delivery system is not the issue because patients can be fed intravenously, so transfusing to us, is the same as eating it.

Blood transfusions are not as safe as people have been led to believe. It has been acknowledged by many clinicians as a harmful procedure these days, carrying more risk of morbidity and death than any other procedure in medicine.

According to this Australian source......

"...the field of transfusion medicine is changing. Instead of being viewed as an inert recharging of fluid, we are now coming to appreciate that a blood transfusion is essentially a liquid organ transplant, says National Blood Authority chair Leigh McJames; and like any other organ transplant, it has its risks.

"There is one group that have inadvertently served as a sort of test case for non-transfusions."

Jehovah's Witnesses are known for their opposition to blood transfusions, which is based on edicts from both the Old and New Testaments. As a result, doctors treating Jehovah's Witnesses have had to take a more cautious approach to their surgical treatment, with surprising results.

"It turned out the patients did better – they were doing better because of the better standard of care," Isbister says....
They were being prepared better for surgery, [doctors] were fixing up anaemias before surgery, the surgeons weren't letting people bleed and it changed surgical technique, particularly in cardiac surgery."

Why experts are rethinking blood transfusions - Health & Wellbeing

For Media | National Blood Authority

You can have it by the gallon if you wish. But stop posting lies about us. You know nothing about us apart from what you have gleaned from our opposers. Get your nose out of the gutter and realise that you will receive the same judgment as you judge others. Your prejudice is clouding your judgment.

 

[oldbadger]

We used to get JW knocking about once a month, usually at meal times. They were politely asked to go.

Yeah...... they keep records, you know, of when each household has tea, dinner, etc, and deliberately call when you have a plate of food in front of you. This is a winner for them and their conversion rates. Duh, I don't think.

After a while of this harassment ...........

Oh you poor thing! You should have demanded that they bring alka-***er tablets with them each time.

The same tactic failed ................ "unsolicited callers will be reported to the police".

Where I live the Police would eventually give you a warning, about wasting police time.

(they always attack in pairs)

Wow! Which country do you live in? The JWs actually attack folks at their front doors?

A quick finger point and the question " do you have a problem reading?"

Hmmmm..... all you had to do was put up a sign which read, Sarcastic, Contentious, Aggressive, person at this address.

i picked up the phone and politely asked for their names to give to the police.

Oh dear, our police would mark your prop as a time wasting ummmm, you know. Honestly.

scuttling back past the sign trailing mumbled apologies.

How do they do that?....... scuttle?
Do you see how polite JWs are, even when harrassed on folks' doorsteps?

Just before i left the uk they had developed a new and extremely under hand tactic. On opening the door to their knock they said. "Can we give you this booklet about health?" The magazine sized document looked like a National Health Service publication,the same corporate colouring and layout. After taking the magazine and them departing i glanced at the front cover. 5 part articles on healthy heart, nutrition etc with continued on page x at the bottom of the column.

Open the front cover to realise that's exactly what it was. The inside cover was unprinted, plain paper, the whole cover carefully fit to hide the watchtower tucked inside.

That did it for me, what sort of faith has to use deception to promote their belief?

Oh my Goodness! What wickedness! Dreadful!
But of clourse, I don't think it happened quite like that, hmmmm?

 

[oldbadger]

Yeah, the witnesses god finally changed his mind and let them have blood fractions and made it a matter of conscience! Guess he discovered how many of his true worshipers were dying.

Actually...... nope.
More children have died or become seriously ill through having blood-transfusions, actually.

You didn't know that, did you?

They boffs reckon that only 1 in either 7 or 12 blood transfusions is beneficial, and plasma etc is used much more often now.

 

[oldbadger]

They are FORCED, by threat of being disfellowshipped, being shunned by family and friends, and losing fellowship with their god. If a witness receives a blood transfusion, their life as they knew it, would be over.

I'll bet that you lay in bed at night, worrying about JWs and these problems.

What Creed, Church or Denomination do you belong to, by the way? You've knocked another Creed, so why not let us put yours under the spotlight.

 

[oldbadger]

View attachment 19627​

Apparently these kids were convinced by their parents who were convinced by the WT that God prefers sacrifice over mercy.

Did they die?
Please may we see the editorial about these children?
I wouldn't ask but your agenda is so distorted that I absolutely would need to know their names, and the outcome of their illnresses, and if they dies, what was the cause of death.

Do you have any idea about how many children die each day because of taking drugs and medications left lying around in their homes?
Do you have any idea about how many children die each day due to Impure Water? Or Starvation? Or beatings?

You see? This stuff about JWs can be seen as hate fueled hypocrisy, really.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

....."I'm a Jehovah's Witness, do you have a moment for Jesus Christ?"

You must have not heard correctly. We wouldn't even say that.

If that's what they said, it must have been another religion, like Baptist, maybe?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Blood transfusions are not as safe as people have been led to believe. It has been acknowledged by many clinicians as a harmful procedure these days, carrying more risk of morbidity and death than any other procedure in medicine.

That is just a straight-up lie, Deeje. Blood transfusions have a 0.0008% mortality rate, and a 0.0004% chance of infection. By comparison, JWs die at a 1% higher rate than non-JWs due to complications from bloodless surgery.

Are transfusions overrated? Surgical outcome of Jehovah's Witnesses. - PubMed - NCBI

Keep your beliefs, but deliberately spreading lies is unacceptable.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Actually...... nope.
More children have died or become seriously ill through having blood-transfusions, actually.

You didn't know that, did you?

You do realize that this is blatantly dishonest, considering the overall mortality and infection rates for blood transfusions? Fact is, statistically, blood transfusions decrease overall mortality rates, and children (or adults) who reject blood transfusions have a higher rate of death than those who accept them.

Death RATE, understand? Because that's how you actually assess the safety of something. If ten million people have blood transfusions and ten of them die, and one-hundred people refuse transfusions and only one of them dies, which is the more dangerous option, do you think?

 

[oldbadger]

You do realize that this is blatantly dishonest, considering the overall mortality and infection rates for blood transfusions?

Blantantly wrong, or blatantly misleading?
Blatantly?

Fact is, statistically, blood transfusions decrease overall mortality rates, and children (or adults) who reject blood transfusions have a higher rate of death than those who accept them.

Stats! If you shoot with your keyboard then may I invite you to shoot some blatant stats? Thankyou.

Death RATE, understand? Because that's how you actually assess the safety of something. If ten million people have blood transfusions and ten of them die, and one-hundred people refuse transfusions and only one of them dies, which is the more dangerous option, do you think?

So how many JW infants have died in your country in the last ten years as a result of failing to receive blood?
Once we know that we can look at Death RATES, understand? And we can compare them with whatever other deat RATES might exist for your country such as Cot Death? Yeah..... let's have a look at that, and put all into perspective.

In the meantime, here's one IT report from hundreds about the need to be more careful about blood transfusions. Blood transfusions are great when they are needed, but where a religion doesn't believe in 'em it doesn't believe in 'em. It's not really that big a deal.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/blood_transfusions_still_overused_and_may_do_more_harm_than_good_in_some_patients

Blood Transfusions Still Overused and May Do More Harm Than Good in Some Patients
Johns Hopkins study shows wide variation in transfusion use in operating rooms Release Date: April 24, 2012 Citing the lack of clear guidelines for ordering
blood transfusions during surgery, Johns Hopkins researchers say a new study confirms there is still wide variation in the use of transfusions and frequent use of transfused blood in patients who don’t need it.

The resulting overuse of blood is problematic, the researchers say, because blood is a scarce and expensive resource and because recent studies have shown that surgical patients do no better, and may do worse, if given transfusions prematurely or unnecessarily. "Transfusion is not as safe as people think," says
Steven M. Frank, M.D., leader of the study described in the journal Anesthesiology.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Blantantly wrong, or blatantly misleading?

Blatantly dishonest. Trying to spin total number of deaths as being more significant in actual rate of death is dishonest.

Blatantly?

Yes. In the same way that saying "More people have died choking on leaves of lettuce than have ever died drinking a pint of mercury" is a blatant misrepresentation of the comparative dangers of eating lettuce and drinking mercury.

Stats! If you shoot with your keyboard then may I invite you to shoot some blatant stats? Thankyou.

https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodV...m/TransfusionDonationFatalities/ucm302847.htm
https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodV...m/TransfusionDonationFatalities/ucm346639.htm
https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodV...m/TransfusionDonationFatalities/ucm391574.htm
https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Biolo...m/TransfusionDonationFatalities/UCM459461.pdf
Are transfusions overrated? Surgical outcome of Jehovah's Witnesses. - PubMed - NCBI

So how many JW infants have died in your country in the last ten years as a result of failing to receive blood?

I've already provided links to a study that JWs die at a 1% higher rate than non-JWs, and that it is accounted for by use of bloodless surgeries. I find it curious that you're asking me for statistics for my claims when you made lots of claims earlier and didn't provide a single shred of evidence.

Once we know that we can look at Death RATES, understand? And we can compare them with whatever other deat RATES might exist for your country such as Cot Death? Yeah..... let's have a look at that, and put all into perspective.

Why? What do cot deaths have to do with death rates from transfusions compared with bloodless surgery?

In the meantime, here's one IT report from hundreds about the need to be more careful about blood transfusions. Blood transfusions are great when they are needed, but where a religion doesn't believe in 'em it doesn't believe in 'em. It's not really that big a deal.

Blood Transfusions Still Overused and May Do More Harm Than Good in Some Patients - 04/24/2012

Blood Transfusions Still Overused and May Do More Harm Than Good in Some Patients
Johns Hopkins study shows wide variation in transfusion use in operating rooms Release Date: April 24, 2012 Citing the lack of clear guidelines for ordering
blood transfusions during surgery, Johns Hopkins researchers say a new study confirms there is still wide variation in the use of transfusions and frequent use of transfused blood in patients who don’t need it.

The resulting overuse of blood is problematic, the researchers say, because blood is a scarce and expensive resource and because recent studies have shown that surgical patients do no better, and may do worse, if given transfusions prematurely or unnecessarily. "Transfusion is not as safe as people think," says
Steven M. Frank, M.D., leader of the study described in the journal Anesthesiology.

Blood transfusions being OVERUSED is a different matter entirely from whether or not blood transfusions are SAFE, and is entirely irrelevant to the question of whether refusing a blood transfusion is SAFER than accepting one. You're clearly confusing two issues and conflating them.

Transfusions are overused =/= Transfusions are unsafe.

Do you stand by Deeje's statement that blood transfusions carry "more risk of morbidity and death than any other procedure in medicine"?

 

[djhwoodwerks]

The things you post are a joke djhw.....as if you are an expert on JW's because someone studied with you.

Are you admitting that witnesses are not all of the same mind and believe all the same things Deeje?

No genuine Witness of Jehovah who respects God's commands will accept a blood transfusion because consuming blood is against God's law.

Yeah, I keep forgetting that only your elite 144,000 are under the New Covenant, the rank and file witness is still under the Old Covenant. The blood issue was under the old law, the law that Jesus finished, the law that Paul said Christians are no longer under. But, sad for you that only your elite are under grace, but you, you're still under the law!

Romans 6:15 (ESV Strong's) 15 What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!

Unless you have another definition of the word "abstain" (Acts 15:28-29)

Yet, Jesus Himself said,

Mark 7:18-19 (ESV Strong's) And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, 19 since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?”

 

[ChristineM]

Yeah...... they keep records, you know, of when each household has tea, dinner, etc, and deliberately call when you have a plate of food in front of you. This is a winner for them and their conversion rates. Duh, I don't think.


Oh you poor thing! You should have demanded that they bring alka-***er tablets with them each time.


Where I live the Police would eventually give you a warning, about wasting police time.


Wow! Which country do you live in? The JWs actually attack folks at their front doors?


Hmmmm..... all you had to do was put up a sign which read, Sarcastic, Contentious, Aggressive, person at this address.


Oh dear, our police would mark your prop as a time wasting ummmm, you know. Honestly.


How do they do that?....... scuttle?
Do you see how polite JWs are, even when harrassed on folks' doorsteps?


Oh my Goodness! What wickedness! Dreadful!
But of clourse, I don't think it happened quite like that, hmmmm?

Whether they keep records or not is besides the point, the time they usually tried to intrude was meal times.

Ahh the old put down, if you don't have anything valid to offer in contention then don't waste my time.

I don't actually give a toss where you live, the sign was explicit, non cold callers and they chose to ignore it. If you choose to ignore personal choice so you can spam your faith then that faith is not worth a fig.

Attacking does not necessarily require violence, you are doing a grand job of attacking me, hence my retaliation.

If that sign works bring it on, the message is don't force your faith on those who don't want it.

Interesting that you are clueless about the neighborhood watch scheme, what sort of ghetto do you live in?

The fact that are interfering in others lives unsolicited means they are not polite, if they were polite they would make an appointment.

You can think what you want, i do not lie. Perhaps a concept you are unaware of.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

I'll bet that you lay in bed at night, worrying about JWs and these problems.

Just as you lay in bed at night worrying about me worrying about the witnesses and these problems?

What Creed, Church or Denomination do you belong to, by the way?

I don't belong to a creed or denomination, I am part of the body of Christ and the teacher I mostly study with is Dr. Tony Evans

 

[djhwoodwerks]

I opened it to see a well dressed young man standing there who said "I'm a Jehovah's Witness, do you have a moment for Jesus Christ?"

You must have not heard correctly. We wouldn't even say that.

The cowboy is right, a witnesses would never ask if you have a moment for Jesus! They don't preach Jesus, they preach death and destruction for all who don't belong to their organization. They approach you with, 'so what do you think of the condition of the world today?' Or, 'did you know that one day, God is going to make everything good again?'