how come jehoavh witness are willing to let there own children die instead of allowing a blood transfusion that would surely keep them alive isnt that the same as murder do u think god would approve of letting children die when a simple procedure would save them
2007-05-20 07:33:39 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
we are not willing to let our children die .doctors today admit that gross mistakes have been made with blood transfusions.did you know that blood can be rejected by the body,not to mention the countless diseases that can be transmitted through blood eg hepititis a,b,c, hiv to name a few.NO we will allow our kids to have safe proceedures that do not include blood.we have pioneered advancements in bloodless surgery at the cost of millions of dollars.this is safer than a blood transfusion and i know of people who have had bloodless surgery and have left hospital weeks before their peers having the same operation.
2007-05-20 08:12:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
wrong, you must be totally ignorant of the fact that as a result of JW's firm stand regarding blood transfusions, medical science was pushed forwards by leaps and bounds regarding the safer and less expensive bloodless surgery and blood substitutes which also are cheaper.
And guess what? You will never die from a blood substitute.
Only an ignorant person would risk killing their child by allowing a blood transfusion.
If not from donor/recipient rejection(that's right, even if the blood type matches, as a result of individual DNA thousands die as a result of rejection, just like an organ rejection), there is the many forms of hepatitas (the types keep growing), AIDS, and many other blood born pathogens.
The truth is, only a fool would ever except a blood transfusion.
I am not a JW, but I already have my own legal document expressing my acute desire to not allow a blood transfusion no matter what the backwards thinking blood pushers claim.
Anyone that allows the medical community to foist a blood transfusion on their children should be arrested for child neglect and child endangerment.
2007-05-20 07:37:08 · answer #2 · answered by Tim 47 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
I think alot of people just hear this one or two sentences that you are stating, there are many other options available now that are safer alternatives to receiving a blood transfusion. There are MANY people, who are not JW's who are interested in bloodless surgeries.
‘When there is severe blood loss, the greatest need is to restore the fluid volume. No doubt you realize that our blood is actually over 50 percent water; then there are the red and white cells, and so forth. When much blood is lost, the body itself pours large reserves of blood cells into the system and speeds up production of new ones. But fluid volume is needed. Plasma volume expanders that contain no blood can be used to fill that need, and we accept these.’ (2) ‘Plasma volume expanders have been used on thousands of persons, with excellent results.’
As parents we would do everything possible to safeguard our child’s welfare. But we also have enough faith to do what God commands. Also if the situation is that serious, can the doctor guarantee that the patient will not die if he is given blood?
Giving blood isn't always that "simple", and I from recent personal experience from a recent surgery researched different doctors, many who would not perfrom surgery at all if they could not use blood and some who said the procedure could not be done at all without blood, Yet, we were able to find a Bloodless Surgery center and a confident surgeon who was able to do the surgery with hardly any blood loss at all and incorported the volume and RBC increasers prior to surgery.
Wouldn't that be what you wanted for yourself or your kids, a surgeon who is confident enough to do a surgery with as minimal blood loss as possible while still being a confident and skilled surgeon to do the procedure without blood?
check out this article and short video from our website:
http://www.watchtower.org/e/vcnb/article_01.htm
2007-05-20 07:53:50 · answer #3 · answered by Ginger 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
There is not sin in blood, there is sin only in our actions, in our thoughts, in our spirit. I believe however that it would be better to keep the blood line in the family.
Blood rituals are bad, the same as lying is bad.
There is also a word from God which more or less says "a leaf would not fall without God's will".
There was a time when Jesus apostles escaped persecution, was it because of lack of faith? or was it because it was not their time.
God put it in their mind to survive. He also put in their mind to accept death to glorify Jesus.
So those who live by the law will be judged by the law, and those who live by faith they will be judged by faith.
Jesus performed miracles on the Sabbath because he knows the father, that he is love, so why would he let a man sick on the Sabbath? He also cried for Lazarus I believe. So if you have the true Jesus in your heart you should know what to accept, and he will also put in your heart what to do.
As for the JWs, if they never accept blood in their whole life, but they die saying they are Jehovah's witnesses or "by meaning" (giving testimony of God) when man's glory is to give testimony of Jesus, and Jesus glory is to give testimony of God....then How come they are saved if it is said in Revelations that the saved are those who hold the testimony of Jesus. And if Jesus did not give specific date for the end of things, How come give dates becoming themselves false prophets.?
2007-05-20 11:35:37 · answer #4 · answered by Davinci22 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To add to justintimes's bit about bloodless surgeries, and blood substitues, it is also within the power of a Dr to get a court order to over rule the parents if the childs life is in danger!
Just to clarify though, I do not agree with refusing transfusions. Not only have there been medical advances in the areas of blood subs. etc there have also been advances in the screening and cleansing of blood products which have made them alot safer! Most (not all) blood born diseases now have cures where as blood loss without intervention doesn't!!
2007-05-20 08:19:04 · answer #5 · answered by :~Debbz~: 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Considering that God ordered the murder of children repeatedly in the Bible, I am pretty sure he does not mind, especially when there is Biblical rational for it.
The Bible says that blood is the carrier of the life force - perhaps meaning the soul. To transfer blood from one person to another is to transfer one person's life to another. Obviously that is a great sin against God, who gave each person his own life.
It is not Man's job to play God and decide who will live and who will die. Every time a doctor puts a patient on life support, he defies the will of God.
Besides, when you die, you go to Heavan. Why wait?
2007-05-20 07:39:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 5⤋
Dont they have alternatives?
PS....you might want to run a spell check
2007-05-20 08:02:49 · answer #7 · answered by pink.jazzz 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
All religion is kookie
2007-05-20 08:04:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yawn!!!!!
2007-05-20 10:05:08 · answer #9 · answered by pooped_over 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋