English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

she be alive and with her babies today?

In Bulgaria, Witnesses can have Blood transfusions as a matter of personal chouce, without any reprocussions from the congregation..Not so in America.

2007-11-05 09:58:17 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

http://www.watchtower.cc/blood-in-bulgaria.htm

2007-11-05 10:25:38 · update #1

Jehovah's Witnesses: Bulgaria and Blood
By Jason Barker
The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has long forbidden blood transfusions for Jehovah’s Witnesses. The issue is so serious, in fact, that Witnesses believe a blood transfusion “may result in the immediate and very temporary prolongation of life, but at the cost of eternal life for a dedicated Christian” (Blood, Medicine, and the Law of God, p. 55; emphasis added).

2007-11-05 10:31:48 · update #2

In order to prevent their being administered blood transfusions while unconscious, each Witness is required to carry a card that states:
I direct that no blood transfusions be administered to me, even though others deem such necessary to preserve my life or health. I will accept non-blood expanders. This is in accord with my rights as a patient and my beliefs as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. I hereby release the doctors and hospital of any damages attributed to my refusal. This document is valid even if I am unconscious, and it is binding upon my heirs or legal representatives. (card on file)
The Watchtower Society forbids blood transfusions because the procedure allegedly constitutes eating blood, which is forbidden in the Bible in Genesis 9:4 and Acts 15:28–29. They contend that receiving blood intravenously constitutes eating, just as people can receive food intravenously (Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Question of Blood, p. 18).

2007-11-05 10:32:47 · update #3

4 answers

Yes, I believe the witnesses in Bulgaria have "newer light" that has not made it to the USA.

2007-11-06 05:26:49 · answer #1 · answered by WhatIf 4 · 0 1

I worked with a Jehovah's Witness and i sent her the link about this young mother who had died due to refusal of blood transfusion. She does not know this young girl but she's devastated as if this young mother is her friend or relative. After sending it to her, i walked over to her side of the building and i caught her reading the article and shedding some tears.

She showed me her NO BLOOD TRANSFUSION CARD.

Yes, i believe that the issue on blood transfusion is a personal choice. How you are to be treated is everyone's personal choice. Whether this young mother did it for her faith or not, it was her personal choice. She signed a document, a dual power of attorney and no one should be asked to have that modified. I'm not a JW but i refuse to have organ transfusion. That's how i want to be treated. I refuse to be put on machine if I was brain dead. That is my choice.

Death is a tragedy no matter how you look at it. This family obviously had moral principles and faith. They made their choice. We should all respect that. It should not be used against the beliefs of JW's or anyone for that matter.

I work in a hospital and we do surgeries every single day withouth the use of blood to Jehovah's Witnesses even to those we found it very critical to do so (without blood). Yet, other alternatives are being proven to be useful and life-saving because of the wishes of these JWs. Patients cure a lot faster and no chance of polluting the body! Even to those who are not JW, blood transfusion is truly the last option. With the technology available today in the medical field, it is more sad to know that doctors cannot operate or save a life without the use of blood. I applaude our doctors because they have come out victorous in bloodless surgeries.

2007-11-05 20:00:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Then they must be confused or not practicing their religion properly there.


*** Ok... some of you don't like my brief answer above, but that's ok. I don't like to argue about religion, but had to comment because the askers "facts" are missing & un-informed. Yes, she has the words on the card right, but where is our proof of Bulgaria's suppossed altered practice?

You do not need blood to survive. You have to be true to your beliefs & have faith in Jehovah. If you do not make it out alive from the hospital, at least you stayed true to your beliefs & your teachings. If you are a good Christian & a faithful servant of Jehovah, then he will provide for you after armegedon & you will have everlasting life in the new world.

When I was just a child, (about 1970) we had a sister that was pregnant, & had sudden complications. The doctors wanted to give her a blood transfusion, but she refused. They told her she WILL die without it. She answered "if it is my time to die, that is up to my lord."

The doctors confronted her husband, to get his authrozation. They were shocked when he refused & threatened to call the police on him. He told them, "you do that if you feel you must, but threatening me with the law will not get me to change my beliefs or to lose my faith in Jehovah. We both are praying, as well as our congregation, & we have faith."

Well...even without blood, she lived...the baby lived, everyone was so relieved & thankful. The doctors were amazed & dumbfounded. The baby was such a cutie. 1/2 black & 1/2 white. The proud parents filled with love for their miracle baby. I say miracle, not because I elude to it necessarily being a "Divine Intervention" but because a doctor said, I can't believe she made it through. It's a mircale we didn't lose them both!"

2007-11-05 18:02:09 · answer #3 · answered by Kiki 2 · 1 2

That's quite a statement coming from a person whose avatar is wearing a clown nose.
May I know your sources please?
Statement is one thing, back-up is another.

2007-11-05 18:02:25 · answer #4 · answered by Uncle Thesis 7 · 7 0

fedest.com, questions and answers