|
Post by Vene on Jan 15, 2010 15:50:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Lady Renae on Jan 15, 2010 15:52:14 GMT -5
20% is not "average". That's the outside of the bell curve.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Jan 15, 2010 19:32:15 GMT -5
And the 90% who don't know what radiation is? And knowing the earth revolves around the sun is elementary school science, that's taught when you're taught how to add.
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jan 15, 2010 20:01:57 GMT -5
How is it exactly that people who didn't grow up with it wouldn't know the blood transfusion thing is garbage and a half? DV, what exactly is the anti-transfusion pitch? I only know about it because of the whole sacred blood issue. I never got details on this one from my JW friend in high school, and since she wasn't allowed to have contact with me outside of school, I don't have her around anymore. Makes me sad actually... she was kind of cool. Well, nowadays JWs don't know it "exactly", because the policy has been revised beyond a concise explanation to avoid more legal trouble. A. Sapien is welcome to chime in, but the first things they cover are the scriptures that involve not eating/ingesting blood; they link that to your eventuality after death, as in, would you rather live for a few more decades on earth knowing your spot in everlasting Paradise just got screwed or would you rather leave this earth knowing you were going to be healthy and live forever. Then they follow it up with "science," which has gotten a lot harder since medical practices have gotten better. JWs used to bring up how unsafe the blood supply was, and at one point when transfusions were just getting started, that was actually a reasonably decent point. Think about how freaked out people get over worrying that a flu shot will have a negative reaction, and then imagine getting to tell people that a blood transfusion could give you AIDS or something else. Then, they would follow through by saying that in some cases there are other treatments that are more effective, like some of the examples you can find here. They used to quote physicians who would point out the problems of blood transfusions as evidence that not only was it the theological right thing to do but the physically better thing to do as well. And honestly, blood transfusions aren't without their problems. So, they weren't so much lying about science as they were exaggerating the problems that come with transfusions; and most people don't know much better to really refute that. And of course it always comes back ultimately to "God says no" anyway. Now, their policy is that they can take a "fraction" of the blood that's offered. Basically all the parts of blood except for a few components. It's so confusing to the average JW that most of them can't even explain it themselves. My mom says "I can have a teensyweensyittybitty bit of it. You know, a fraction." Me reminding her that 99/100ths is a fraction too didn't go over too well. The transfusion issue is a very sad thing. I lost a friend when I was 14 to cancer; she wouldn't take a transfusion. My mother lost a very close friend when I was a little girl -- she had given birth, there was internal bleeding, and because she wouldn't take a transfusion, a two day old infant lost his mother. She didn't even get to hold him. They put his picture up against the plasticky thing she was in. There were articles in the magazine they put out constantly about brave little kids who wouldn't take transfusions. They were considered martyrs. Some of them died. Some of the ones who recovered in spite of the odds were considered "helped by Jehovah." Some went to court to demand they be emancipated when the doctors took the parents to court to overrule the choice to not transfuse. When they were emancipated, they chose death rather than life. It's a sad policy.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Jan 15, 2010 20:05:03 GMT -5
Technically, 100/100 is a fraction as well.
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jan 15, 2010 20:08:22 GMT -5
Right. I told her that she was going to have to appoint somebody else to be her medical power of attorney, because I couldn't comprehend what she wanted done. I told her point blank if I was put in that position, I was authorizing it. She stared at me for a minute and then said "OK." And gave me medical POA anyway. So either she secretly wants transfusions or she thinks it's just one more thing to blame on me anyway. LOL.
|
|
|
Post by A. Sapien on Jan 15, 2010 20:11:15 GMT -5
How is it exactly that people who didn't grow up with it wouldn't know the blood transfusion thing is garbage and a half? DV, what exactly is the anti-transfusion pitch? I only know about it because of the whole sacred blood issue. I never got details on this one from my JW friend in high school, and since she wasn't allowed to have contact with me outside of school, I don't have her around anymore. Makes me sad actually... she was kind of cool. Well, nowadays JWs don't know it "exactly", because the policy has been revised beyond a concise explanation to avoid more legal trouble. A. Sapien is welcome to chime in, but the first things they cover are the scriptures that involve not eating/ingesting blood; they link that to your eventuality after death, as in, would you rather live for a few more decades on earth knowing your spot in everlasting Paradise just got screwed or would you rather leave this earth knowing you were going to be healthy and live forever. Then they follow it up with "science," which has gotten a lot harder since medical practices have gotten better. JWs used to bring up how unsafe the blood supply was, and at one point when transfusions were just getting started, that was actually a reasonably decent point. Think about how freaked out people get over worrying that a flu shot will have a negative reaction, and then imagine getting to tell people that a blood transfusion could give you AIDS or something else. Then, they would follow through by saying that in some cases there are other treatments that are more effective, like some of the examples you can find here. They used to quote physicians who would point out the problems of blood transfusions as evidence that not only was it the theological right thing to do but the physically better thing to do as well. And honestly, blood transfusions aren't without their problems. So, they weren't so much lying about science as they were exaggerating the problems that come with transfusions; and most people don't know much better to really refute that. And of course it always comes back ultimately to "God says no" anyway. Now, their policy is that they can take a "fraction" of the blood that's offered. Basically all the parts of blood except for a few components. It's so confusing to the average JW that most of them can't even explain it themselves. My mom says "I can have a teensyweensyittybitty bit of it. You know, a fraction." Me reminding her that 99/100ths is a fraction too didn't go over too well. The transfusion issue is a very sad thing. I lost a friend when I was 14 to cancer; she wouldn't take a transfusion. My mother lost a very close friend when I was a little girl -- she had given birth, there was internal bleeding, and because she wouldn't take a transfusion, a two day old infant lost his mother. She didn't even get to hold him. They put his picture up against the plasticky thing she was in. There were articles in the magazine they put out constantly about brave little kids who wouldn't take transfusions. They were considered martyrs. Some of them died. Some of the ones who recovered in spite of the odds were considered "helped by Jehovah." Some went to court to demand they be emancipated when the doctors took the parents to court to overrule the choice to not transfuse. When they were emancipated, they chose death rather than life. It's a sad policy. I'm not up to date with the blood issue unfortunately. I know a lot of it is left to the person's conscience, or was when I was in, for example the fractions or blood based products. The whole thing's rather vague by this point, whole blood transfusions are a no-no, and some specific treatments may still be as well, but for most anything else it's a 'use your conscience' issue.
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jan 15, 2010 20:46:39 GMT -5
Yeah. You know the Society has stepped in legal shit when they pull the "let your conscience be your guide" business. Incidentally, that's now the official policy on voting. Used to be neutrality or die. Now it's up to your conscience.
|
|
|
Post by RavynousHunter on Jan 15, 2010 20:47:45 GMT -5
I used to not vote for religious reasons...now I don't vote due to laziness.
|
|
|
Post by A. Sapien on Jan 15, 2010 20:55:58 GMT -5
Yeah. You know the Society has stepped in legal shit when they pull the "let your conscience be your guide" business. Incidentally, that's now the official policy on voting. Used to be neutrality or die. Now it's up to your conscience. Ah, didn't know they'd changed it for voting. That's... rather disconcerting actually.
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jan 18, 2010 21:16:07 GMT -5
^^ They have, but it's with the usual covert wording. I remember flipping through the article (been a few years, but not more than 5), and the examples they were giving were all 3rd world countries and some claptrap about how it might help local congregations get started/be recognized/etc. There was no prohibition against US/Western voting, but it was certainly never mentioned. The article ended by the usual referral to following one's conscience.
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jan 18, 2010 21:19:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Amaranth on Jan 19, 2010 0:25:23 GMT -5
You know I saw once in a little pamphlet that a hospital employee left about that discussed their policies regarding different religions. One little gem was that they think that Witnesses can only eat kosher food. That's Jews, moron.Since it was on the treatment of them, I assume it wasn't wrong because it itself was spreading information. I mean, I don't think you'd know for sure, but was it just ignorant? Not, like, Malicious? I'm just curious, because I've definitely seen a lot of well meaning, but stupid, information spread around. I wonder how much of it comes out of the hate that's spread. Being raised ina quasi-Catholic family, I never quite got the hatred for Catholics, myself, but came across a lot really misinformed people, whether out of malice or out of stupidity. Granted, Catholics and JWs/Mormons aren't quite on the same scale, but it's weird to be aware of it. Also, regarding your post on batteries...You can't top the Copper Top, dammit!
|
|
|
Post by RavynousHunter on Jan 19, 2010 6:41:21 GMT -5
Oh no, I know it wasn't being malicious, but you'd think the morons would take an hour to ask any Witness they could find about such things. Its just...lazy. The bad kind of lazy.
|
|
|
Post by Amaranth on Jan 19, 2010 20:28:49 GMT -5
Lazy or just plain ignorant.
|
|