*******?s for the reform minded

[ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ HOURGLASS2 ARCHIVES ]

Posted by Friend [Friend] on April 05, 1999 at 18:43:51 {6.uz.4vynMagf9NbHbU2OgnjR4Br/g}:

In Reply to: ******?s for the reform minded posted by AF on April 05, 1999 at 18:31:02:

AF

  • The Society instigated and has maintained the ban on blood transfusions.

    In the sense of legislating it, yes. In the form of unilaterally decide to ban it, no. Once the JW community was convinced that blood transfusions were wrong they sought to have them banned judicially. It is true though that the Society nurtured negativity towards blood transfusions.

  • The JW community didn't come up with either [blood transfusion banning or vaccination disapproval] harebrained ideas on its own.

    True, not on their own. But, that community did initially encourage and support the judicial banning of blood transfusions. I have no first hand knowledge regarding any disapproving notions towards vaccinations so I cannot comment on that.

  • Therefore they have to be forced into [reform].

    So, where do we disagree? The amount or type of force prehaps?

    Friend


    Follow Ups:

    [ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ HOURGLASS2 ARCHIVES ]
    Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

    1