1. Boy dies of leukemia after refusing treatment for religious reasons

Comment #93503 by JJ2014 on December 3, 2007 at 9:52 am

The general public should be very cautious about jumping to conclusions as to the role that Judge John Meyer played in the Dennis Lindberg tragedy. In fact, the Lindberg tragedy may not have occurred as has been portrayed in the majority of news media reports. While the majority of media reports repeatedly focused on the same sketchy, isolated details, a couple of other news articles provided hints that seemed to indicate that there is more to this Lindberg story.
First, who actually petitioned Judge Meyer for guardianship of Dennis Lindberg? One news article seemed to indicate that the petitioner was an unnamed public official, rather than Children's Hospital's own Attorney. One news article seemed to indicate that Lindberg's "doctors" at Children's Hospital were supporting Dennis Lindberg's decision to refuse blood transfusions. One news article seemed to indicate that the "Ethicist" at Children's Hospital supported Dennis Lindberg's decision to refuse blood transfusions.

Second, if Lindberg's "doctors" actually testified at the court hearing that "with the transfusion, the boy had a 70 percent chance of surviving the next five years," then why did Lindberg die within only three hours of Meyer's decision? Why did some news articles report that Lindberg had probably already suffered brain damage at the time of Meyer's decision? Why did Lindberg's father change his mind about appealing Meyer's decision?

Children's Hospital should have filed a petition for guardianship as soon as it learned of Lindberg's status as a Jehovah's Witness, since chemotherapy makes transfusions necessary. The District Attorney and/or Coroner should investigate and report who filed for guardianship of Dennis Lindberg, and at what point in time.

It is possible that Judge Meyer received the guardianship petition only after it was too late for transfusions to save Lindberg's life. If so, such may have been intentional. If so, the public deserves to know the people responsible.

MAYBE SOME FOLKS NEED TO START CONTACTING THE LOCAL CORONER AND DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR ANSWERS!!!

2. Boy dies of leukemia after refusing treatment for religious reasons

Comment #92079 by JJ2014 on November 29, 2007 at 8:52 pm

Misinterpreting the Old Testament prohibition against eating animal blood as a routine food item, the WatchTower Society began teaching in 1945 that receiving a blood transfusion was "eating human blood". Jehovah's Witnesses believe that receiving an infusion of human blood into their body's circulatory system is scientifically the exact same thing as eating or ingesting blood into their body's digestive system. Paul Gilles recent comments during this tragedy in which he compared injecting alcohol into one's veins (give me a break) to drinking alcohol proves that JWs still believe what the WatchTower Society published back in 1951:

"A patient in the hospital maybe fed through the mouth, through the nose, or through the veins. When sugar solutions are given intravenously it is called intravenous feeding. So the hospital's own terminology recognizes as feeding the process of putting nutrition into one's system via the veins. Hence the attendant administering the transfusion is feeding the patient through the veins, and the patient receiving it is eating through his veins." -- The WATCHTOWER magazine, July 1, 1951.

Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to acknowledge that when human blood is transfused into their body's circulatory system that the transfused human blood remains to be human blood and continues to function as human blood. Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to acknowledge that if blood is eaten, then the ingested blood enters the body's digestive system, where the blood would be treated by the body exactly the same as it would treat a hotdog, a potato chip, or any other food item. Ingested blood would be completely digested and broken down into proteins, carbohydrates, fats, and waste; which are then either assimilated or excreted by the body.

The WatchTower Society uses scriptures which speak about the blood of slaughtered animals to teach Jehovah's Witnesses that blood is "sacred" because blood is the "symbol of life". Then, the WatchTower Society turns around and requires Jehovah's Witnesses to sacrifice their own "life" to maintain the alleged "sacredness" of a "symbol" of the very thing they are sacrificing -- their life. Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to acknowledge that the WatchTower doctrine on blood moronically places a higher value on the SYMBOL than it does on the THING SYMBOLIZED.

In fact, the Old Testament scriptures permitted the eating of unbled animal meat, which the Bible treats exactly the same as eating animal blood itself. In isolated occasions, when humans needed to eat unbled meat in order to sustain their own human life, the Mosaic Law permitted such, but then required the eaters to fulfill the requirements of being "unclean" for a few days. Thus, the Bible recognized that the sustaining of human life was more "sacred" than maintaining the sacredness of animal blood. To do otherwise would be doing exactly what the moronic WatchTower Society does. It would make the SYMBOL more SACRED than the THING SYMBOLIZED.

In fact, the WatchTower Society is leading Jehovah's Witnesses to disobey GOD and violate the Holy Scriptures in one of the most serious ways possible. Because humans were created in GOD's image, GOD considers human life sacred. A Jehovah's Witness who sacrifices their SACRED LIFE in order to maintain the sacredness of a SYMBOL of that SACRED LIFE varies little from those who profane life by committing suicide. Those Jehovah's Witness Elders who teach and police this moronic doctrine vary little from common accessories to murder. The Bible is fairly clear in how GOD views murder, and how He deals with Murderers.

This moronic twisting of scripture would be laughable if not for the fact that it has lead to the pointless deaths of numerous Jehovah's Witnesses in the past, and it will continue to lead to the pointless deaths of many more Jehovah's Witnesses in the future.


The following website summarizes over 315 U.S. court cases and lawsuits affecting children of Jehovah's Witness Parents, including 200+ cases where the JW Parents refused to consent to life-saving blood transfusions for their dying children:

DIVORCE, BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS, AND OTHER LEGAL ISSUES AFFECTING CHILDREN OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES

http://jwdivorces.bravehost.com