Jehovah's Witness dies after refusing blood transfusion

When the Watchtower Editorial staff drops their ban on blood it will be a sad day for all the Witnesses who were taught that it was a divine law of God, pretty much like when they dropped the ban on Transplants.

It turned out that the ban on Transplants wasn't a God authored law, but merely the viewpoint of the Watchtower Editorial.

Because of the history of the Watchtower peoples insistence on no-blood transfusions the medical and legal community thinking and ways are changing in favor of not administering blood even if they do not carry a blood card which puts followers at risk who are not willing to sacrifice to the blood god.

How ironic when the trend within the instituton is gradually shifting away from no-blood doctrine but the medical and legal professionals are bending towards no-blood for these people because of legal liability.

Looks like the blood god that they have render sacred service to and many sacrifices is going to get it’s take one way or the other.

QUOTE:“…if a doctor learnt that a patient was a Jehovah's Witness, but had no evidence of a refusal to accept blood transfusions, he or she should avoid administering blood for as long as possible.

Legal experts have suggested doctors could even be sued if they give a blood transfusion to a Jehovah's Witness who has not been able to give express permission

Look at the bias in this article and the accompanying comments.

Two Witnesses were in a car accident. Both obeyed Jehovah's law on blood. One died. The other didn't.

But the headline completely ignores the fact that one of the brothers did not die.

Could it be that the cause of death was not refusal of blood but a CAR CRASH THAT LEFT THIS VICTIM WITH MORE SEVERE INJURIES THAN THE OTHER VICTIM?

How stupid and prejudiced can people be? Only Satan could blind people in such a way.

Thanks to Jehovah, we can see the truth. He has lifted the veil of prejudice and deceit from our eyes.

Could it be that one was not as seriously injured as the other? Does that play a roll in this as well? Could it be that ones body responded differently to how it held its own in this? We know that people are exposed to things everyday of their lives, some people get sick, some people do not. These people were the same way, ones body responded differently than the others did. It has nothing to do with a law on blood. Jehovah loves all people EE, not just JW's. He would want anyone to live regardless of blood taken or not.

How long before the Watchtower Society publishes an AWAKE! article that makes a martyr out of the JW who died and commends him for being faithful to an ever changing doctrine of men?

jhnsn d-s wrote:

Because of the history of the Watchtower peoples insistence on no-blood transfusions the medical and legal community thinking and ways are changing in favor of not administering blood even if they do not carry a blood card which puts followers at risk who are not willing to sacrifice to the blood god.
How ironic when the trend within the instituton is gradually shifting away from no-blood doctrine but the medical and legal professionals are bending towards no-blood for these people because of legal liability.
Looks like the blood god that they have render sacred service to and many sacrifices is going to get it’s take one way or the other.
QUOTE:“…if a doctor learnt that a patient was a Jehovah's Witness, but had no evidence of a refusal to accept blood transfusions, he or she should avoid administering blood for as long as possible.
Legal experts have suggested doctors could even be sued if they give a blood transfusion to a Jehovah's Witness who has not been able to give express permission

maybe this article will shock some of you. www.digitaljournal.com/article/287219 . is the military heading in the wrong direction too?

reporter wrote:

<quoted text> maybe this article will shock some of you. www.digitaljournal.com/article/287219 . is the military heading in the wrong direction too?

I didn't see where they said it was because of their religious beliefs, did you?

CT

Christian Trucker wrote:

<quoted text>I didn't see where they said it was because of their religious beliefs, did you?
CT

It didn't mention religion at all. Like the GB, he reads into the article what is not there.
The reason is because of the constant shortage of blood, and I imagine the JW's make it worse because they use so many pints to get the fractions without replacing it.
BTW Red cells, white cells and platelet are fractions of blood also. When will the JW's learn something?

Christian Trucker wrote:

<quoted text>I didn't see where they said it was because of their religious beliefs, did you?
CT

no, just about bloodless surgery, even in the "field". keep on truckin.

Christian Trucker wrote:

<quoted text>I didn't see where they said it was because of their religious beliefs, did you?
CT

i could be wrong, but i dont remember the medics asking you what religion you were while you are laying in the mud, bleeding to death, do you?

dee lightful wrote:

<quoted text> It didn't mention religion at all. Like the GB, he reads into the article what is not there.
The reason is because of the constant shortage of blood, and I imagine the JW's make it worse because they use so many pints to get the fractions without replacing it.
BTW Red cells, white cells and platelet are fractions of blood also. When will the JW's learn something?

where did I say anything about religion in the article? why dont you read what I said first, before "mouthin off"? prov 18: 13. ps dont "IMAGINE" why the military is looking into this, why dont you ask them, nure "dee"?

eagleeye wrote:

Look at the bias in this article and the accompanying comments.
Two Witnesses were in a car accident. Both obeyed Jehovah's law on blood. One died. The other didn't.
But the headline completely ignores the fact that one of the brothers did not die.
Could it be that the cause of death was not refusal of blood but a CAR CRASH THAT LEFT THIS VICTIM WITH MORE SEVERE INJURIES THAN THE OTHER VICTIM?
How stupid and prejudiced can people be? Only Satan could blind people in such a way.
Thanks to Jehovah, we can see the truth. He has lifted the veil of prejudice and deceit from our eyes.

.you know that if their were not so much written by the WTS. on Blood ..it wouldn't be thrown into the news in that manner.. It not prejudice EE. it's news.. Your WTS. builds a new hall or has an assembly or farts sideways, their press people write up a press release.. Well..that begets them getting written up when they die from refusing blood.. kill some one. become pedophiles . etc.. You can toot your own horn and expect to not have you closet exposed down the road.. It is sad that the person died.. but they fullfilled God's law.. Doesn't always save their life.

reporter wrote:

<quoted text> maybe this article will shock some of you. www.digitaljournal.com/article/287219 . is the military heading in the wrong direction too?

From POST #2

It's irrelavant to the subject since Watchtower people reject Blood because of their Doctrine teachings and not for health or availability.

QUOTE: "...Bloodless medicine appeals to many doctors because it carries low risk of post-operative infection when compared with procedures requiring transfusions. It can also be useful during times of war or natural disasters when blood supplies are low or unavailable."

jhnsn d-s wrote:

<quoted text>
From POST #2
It's irrelavant to the subject since Watchtower people reject Blood because of their Doctrine teachings and not for health or availability.
QUOTE: "...Bloodless medicine appeals to many doctors because it carries low risk of post-operative infection when compared with procedures requiring transfusions. It can also be useful during times of war or natural disasters when blood supplies are low or unavailable."

what is irrelivant about "LOW RISK" surgery. if your life depended on it, would you prefer "HIGH RISK" surgery. i hope you aint a surgeon!!

.
.
QUOTE: "...'we feel that blood is a very special category of substance. The Bible repeatedly enjoins people not to take blood into their bodies...'"


In short, since animal blood wasn't to be eaten translates into no human blood transfusions just as unclean animals...were not to be eaten translates into no intravenious feeding?
Leviticus 11:47

Elavating animal and human blood to a level that it dosen't deserve actually devalues the blood of God's Son making it of "common or ordinary value" because according the the Watchtower Doctrine all blood is sacred and holy. Hebrews 10:29
.
.

QUOTE: "...'we feel that blood is a very special category of substance. The Bible repeatedly enjoins people not to take blood into their bodies...'"

The Bible repeatedly enjoins people not to take the blood of slaughtered animals into their body by eating it as food. It doesn't address using human blood as God designed it to function, namely, flowing through a human circulatory system sustaining life. This is an honorable use of blood.

reporter wrote:

<quoted text> maybe this article will shock some of you. www.digitaljournal.com/article/287219 . is the military heading in the wrong direction too?

The military is experimneting with it as they do with all kinds of things weapons, clothing... including their people. One of the benefits of the military getting involved is that they can do generational studies on peoples who recieve Bloodless medicne since, "The risks and benefits of bloodless methods -- compared to traditional medicine -- have not been well studied." The immdiate and short term benefits appear to be the draw.

I am not informed in the least on the subject but what I have heard is mainly from religious threads related to the Watchtower people which is very optimistic on the use but just a cusory search in the subject will reveal both sides of the matter.

New products and methodes that benefit peoples, and is affordable to poor people is somthing most peoples like to hear about.
.
.

Teleologist wrote:

QUOTE: "...'we feel that blood is a very special category of substance. The Bible repeatedly enjoins people not to take blood into their bodies...'"
The Bible repeatedly enjoins people not to take the blood of slaughtered animals into their body by eating it as food. It doesn't address using human blood as God designed it to function, namely, flowing through a human circulatory system sustaining life. This is an honorable use of blood.

good thing he didnt tell us to eat people,too!!

st stretch wrote:

<quoted text> i could be wrong, but i dont remember the medics asking you what religion you were while you are laying in the mud, bleeding to death, do you?

Why would they? I never heard of a wounded soldier objecting to receiving blood.

It you don't need blood then why would anyone need to take it but should the occasion arise you should able to receive it.
Blood will always be used for hemorrhagic disorders and of course Fractions.