Posted by Nicodemus [Nicodemus] on April 08, 1999 at 08:58:40 {vxsc0.TBNkmL9KjZpLewbTrVtUivFs}:
In Reply to: Watching NICODEMUS Struggle posted by practicus on April 08, 1999 at 03:56:41:
Practicus,
I'll only make one observation, in reply;
I don't argue with you that Jehovah's Witnesses have accomplished much good in our 20th century. I don't feel I need to say more, I've already said it in previous posts. As I have stated, that is why I continue to serve as one of Jehovah's Witnesses.
However, I would not want to be a member of the Society's Public Relations department right now, trying to defend the brothers against the "cult" charges in Europe, and other similar situations. There is simply too much in our own literature that argues against the very positions we are trying to take. Until this gets cleaned up, it will be a very difficult road.
If you want an example of this, all you need to do is read and article in the Journal of Medical Ethics by Osamu Muramoto. We, of course, argue that acceptance vs. non-acceptance of blood is a personal choice. And, that doctors err when they try to override the choice of an individual.
Dr. Muramoto does not argue in disagreement of that point. However, using our own literature, he builds a pretty convincing case that, for a JW, this is in fact not a truly individual choice, that the JW is subject to intense psychological manipulation, dire warnings against "independent reasoning," and the like. In essence, the core of his argument is that; for it to be a truly individual choice, an individual would have to listen to all sides of the argument, then make a truly non-coerced decision, without any fear of repercussions.
A brother by the name of David Malyon wrote a rebuttal piece. It was a beautiful piece of writing, reviewing the faithful record of Jehovah's Witnesses in Nazi Germany, reiterating the rights of the individual, etc. However, he was not able to successfully and directly counter the specific allegations of Doctor Muramoto. He could not deny the direct quotes from our own literature.
This is the dilemma that honest thinkers face.
Nicodemus