Jehovah's Witnesses Banned In Moscow

[Blessed75]

I'm with ya', hon - but let's keep in mind that the Constitutional right to free speech is an exclusively American thing, and doesn't apply to Russia. They don't abide by our laws and rights. Our Constitution doesn't apply to other countries.

I know, I just think this whole issue is a violation of human rights and it makes me sick. Thanks Groundhog.......and btw, PLEASE change your sig. It makes me sad everytime I read it!

 

[Marissa]

What exactly do you mean, 'where do we draw the line?' I'm assuming 'we' is Australia, or perhaps America? We're talking about Russia... a free, democratic nation. Did you read the Russian courts reasons behind its ruling? The courts have the welfare of the Russian people in mind. This is how their democracy works. It is not for you or I to criticize or malign them for it. If the people do not support this, they are free to vote for politicians that would support their ideas. Obviously Russia isn't trying to make it just an Orthodox-only country or else they wouldn't allow for the Catholics, the Buddhist, Judaism, Baptist missionaries, etc. Their decision obviously isn't based on religious suppression, but from what they perceive as a threat to society. Frankly, I agree with them.

How about just decent people as a whole? I realise that Russia has the right to make whatever decisions it sees fit, but that doesn't mean exercising that right in this manner is the right and good thing to do. There are christians in this thread who approve of banning of JW's in Russia. It's a fair assumption that they'd also support it in their own country if it was possible.

By that alone we'd be talking about Australia, New Zealand and the USA at least.

Where do you draw the line James?

Also, I'm in that lot you referred to as 'hypocrites.' Please tell me what contradictory words I wrote that justify such a label. I was just getting to like ya so I hope you weren't really calling me a hypocrite.

Do you have no problem with countries that have banned christainity and have no freedom of religion? If you don't, then I will take back my comment in regards to you. It's certainly not a stance I would have expected you to hold.

Don't take it too personally. I'm just as likely to call myself a hypocrit when the word fits me so it's not much of an insult coming from me. We're all hypocrits on occasion. That's not so bad. What's really annoying is deciding which opinion is in the wrong.

 

[HisEagle]

.......and btw, PLEASE change your sig. It makes me sad everytime I read it!

Little by little, dear - I'm working on it.

 

[jameseb]

How about just decent people as a whole? I realise that Russia has the right to make whatever decisions it sees fit, but that doesn't mean exercising that right in this manner is the right and good thing to do. There are christians in this thread who approve of banning of JW's in Russia. It's a fair assumption that they'd also support it in their own country if it was possible.

Quite so. As JW's do not believe in such life-saving procedures such as blood transfusions, organ transplant I think they are a danger to their children. Suppose parents that are JW's have a child (lets say a child that doesn't believe in JW) who is very ill and in need of a kidney transplant, or a blood transfusion. They parents wouldn't allow for it, and the poor child is left with no choice in the matter as the parents have legal sanction over the child. That's how I see it, and apparently, so does the Russian courts.

Where do you draw the line James?

As I mentioned above, I draw the line when it has the potential to endanger someone who might not even accpet the practices of JW's.

Do you have no problem with countries that have banned christainity and have no freedom of religion? If you don't, then I will take back my comment in regards to you. It's certainly not a stance I would have expected you to hold.

Marissa, that's hardly a fair comparisson. Russa doesn't 'ban Christianity' nor does it lack in 'freedom of religion.' I know you might also be referring to places such as Saudi Arabia, but the outlawing of one sect in a religion because of its potential to harm people is not the same as banning an entire religion or not allowing freedom of religion. Would you be suggesting that a country is out of line if bans a religion that believes in child sacrifice? I know that's a bit extreme, but my point is whenever the religion has the potential to harm another in its practices, yes, I have problems with it.

Don't take it too personally. I'm just as likely to call myself a hypocrit when the word fits me so it's not much of an insult coming from me. We're all hypocrits on occasion. That's not so bad. What's really annoying is deciding which opinion is in the wrong.

Nah, not taking it too personally...that's why the smilies. I just thought it might have been a bit harsh for most eyes that read it, but then, hey..... I'm one to talk as I will go off on a rant from Hades if something irks me.

 

[lared]

Quite so. As JW's do not believe in such life-saving procedures such as blood transfusions, organ transplant I think they are a danger to their children.

You are misrepresenting J.W.'s as your statement is not true.
J.W.'s indeed will accept an organ transplant for themselves or for their children.
It is only blood transfusions that they reject, and they do so on scriptural grounds.

Acts 15:28,29
28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper. Good health to YOU!"

 

[jameseb]

You are misrepresenting J.W.'s as your statement is not true.
J.W.'s indeed will accept an organ transplant for themselves or for their children.
It is only blood transfusions that they reject, and they do so on scriptural grounds.

Acts 15:28,29
28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper. Good health to YOU!"

Ah, thank you. I didn't think they believed in transplants either. I wasn't trying to misrepresent JW's though, just an honest mistake. However, I find their opinion based on that piece of scripture highly subjective... is that the only text they use as justification for not allowing blood transfusions? I don't understand why they would allow for organ transplants, but not blood. I'll have to do some research on this.

Anyway, thank you for the correction.

 

[Oblio]

You are misrepresenting J.W.'s as your statement is not true.
J.W.'s indeed will accept an organ transplant for themselves or for their children.
It is only blood transfusions that they reject, and they do so on scriptural grounds.

Acts 15:28,29
28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper. Good health to YOU!"

I'll take your word for it (until someone finds contrary evidence) that transplants are allowed. The JW eisegesis of Act 15 is flawed however. The verse speaks plainly that we are to abstain from pagan worship practices, NOT lifesaving medical practice. Why on earth would the Apostle place blood transfusions among pagan sacrificial practices ??

 

[lared]

A study of the Scriptures will reveal Jehovah God's viewpoint on blood. How sacred it is to him.

This mandate applies not only to Christians today but it also applied to the ancient Israelites, and even as far back as Noah.

 

[tulc]

Wouldn't it be hard to have a transplant with out a transfusion?
tulc(drinking coffee, thinking hard!)

 

[jameseb]

Wouldn't it be hard to have a transplant with out a transfusion?
tulc(drinking coffee, thinking hard!)

D'uh........why didn't that occur to me...

I think I need some of what you're drinking.............

 

[Oblio]

Oh, we know very well how sacred Blood is. And we also know the forshadowing that occured in the OT, and how His most precious Blood is now given to us for the remission of sins and life everlasting. This is why we are commanded by Christ Himself to drink His Blood in order to have Life within us. The verse you specified has nothing to do with transfusions.

 

[paxvobiscum]

I love having Jehovah's Witnesses come to the door. There are *so* many pranks you can play...

Interesting prank they played on me. Noticing them in the neighbourhood one Saturday morning (seems thats when they are out and about all the time) I put up a sign on my door "No Religious Soliciting". Then I heard a knock at my door...what's this I exclaimed, "can't you read" I said to the women. Just then I noticed the white cane, there at the foot of the stairs the other women with her was chuckling.

 

[lared]

Oh, we know very well how sacred Blood is. And we also know the forshadowing that occured in the OT, and how His most precious Blood is now given to us for the remission of sins and life everlasting. This is why we are commanded by Christ Himself to drink His Blood in order to have Life within us. The verse you specified has nothing to do with transfusions.

True, blood transfusions were not a common practice when it was written.

But it is quite clear, that we are to abstain from blood.

Are you familiar with similiar commands on blood found through the Bible?

What is your interpretation of the verse?

 

[lared]

Wouldn't it be hard to have a transplant with out a transfusion?
tulc(drinking coffee, thinking hard!)

Not at all. Contact any progressive medical institution.

 

[tulc]

Not at all. Contact any progressive medical institution.

Would a blood substitute be OK to use?
tulc(a little unclear)

 

[Wilfred of Ivanhoe]

Does that go for the catholic church as well? It was the official policy of Rome for many years that Jews were to blame for the Lords death. Much anti-semitism from christians has sprung from that.

By the way, other than muslims, most who hate jews hate all religious folk.

Did Rome fail to mention that God pre-ordained that Jesus would be crucified? Why should they hate a whole people over that?

 

[Lillithspeak]

Ban all religion and be done with it.

 

[lared]

Would a blood substitute be OK to use?
tulc(a little unclear)

Yes, by all means. And many knowledgeable people who are not Witnesses request that these be administered.

Besides being a mandate by God, remember also that blood can be host to infections such as HIV or hepatitis C.

Blood not only nourishes a body with food and oxygen but also removes waste. Thus, the blood one accepts, contains another person's waste.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Blood not only nourishes a body with food and oxygen but also removes waste. Thus, the blood one accepts, contains another person's waste.

So does air, yet there's no Biblical mandate against breathing.

 

[Neosoulchild]

I agree. Now we just need to ban the Christians, and we'll be well on our way!

Jehovah witnesses are also christians.......