Wednesday, August 6, 2008

Jehovah's Witnesses: Bulgaria and Blood

On March 9, 1998, the European Commission of Human Rights accepted a settlement between the government of Bulgaria and the Christian Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses in which Bulgaria, in exchange for a significant concession from the Witnesses, agreed to recognize the Witnesses as an official religious organization.
The Bulgarian government, in order to reach an agreement, will now provide civilian service for conscientious objectors to military service (Information Note No. 148, <http://194.250.50.201/eng/E276INFO. 148.html>). The compromise made by the Society is far more noteworthy. The Society agreed, regarding blood transfusions, that “members should have free choice in the matter for themselves and their children, without any control or sanction on the part of the association” (Ibid.; emphases added).
A press release distributed in 1997 by the Commission clearly explains the understanding of the Commission and the Bulgarians of the Society’s stated position:
In respect of the refusal of blood transfusion, the applicant association [i.e., the Jehovah’s Witnesses] submits that there are no religious sanctions for a Jehovah’s Witness who chooses to accept blood transfusion and that, therefore, the fact that the religious doctrine of Jehovah’s Witnesses is against blood transfusion cannot amount to a threat to ‘public health’ (Press Communiqué Issued by the Secretary to the European Commission of Human Rights, Application No. 28626/95, <http://www.dhcommhr.coe.fr/eng/28626CP.E.html>; emphasis added).
This concession seems to be a remarkable reversal of Watchtower doctrine, raising the question: will Jehovah’s Witnesses now be allowed to receive blood transfusions, or was the Society disingenuous in its agreement?

11 comments:

frank said...

do you understand what you are reading?
I guess you so stubborn, you don't have any understanding.

Anonymous said...

ahh frank, thats a valid point!

kimmy jo said...

If that all took place in 1997-98 then there must be cases were blood has been used within the congregation. I wonder how these ones are REALLY dealt with.
Just shows the contradiction, very disgusting.
So if you are Bulgarian, the Gov. Body says (under direction from God, of course)that blood is OK? Weird. So then are Bulgarians special in God's org or WHAT?

fatcat said...

Frank .... what do u mean ?? please explain your comment

Anonymous said...

This has been interesting, my visit to Letters From the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses. You are not very happy people, you are mean spirited and so I won't be back. ;-)

Jehovah's Witnesses really don't care about all these hateful posts. We go door to door for a lot of different reasons, but meeting up with the likes of you folks is not one of them. Nothing is accomplished here. I will do my part and Jehovah will do His.

Knock, knock!

Who's there?

Are you H-B-H, (home but hiding)
that's OK with me.

frank said...

Defender where are you?
can you answer that one you might have access to the press Release. I am getting tired.

keng said...

poor Frank. Yes it is tiring trying to constantly defend that which cannot be defended. The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society is corrupt and your defenses will do nothing to change that fact.

kimmy jo said...

All the Witnesses trying to defend the Org are falling away like flies!
There are a certain kind of people that belong in those groups and that will never change.

frank said...

I just wanted to know who defender is
Jehovah witnesses don't say taking blood is ok in bulgaria, this is not what the information said, it simply said witnesses have the right to choose.
once again that proof you want to belief what you want to belief, you want to belief all the lies you hear about the witnesses without doing your own Research


Jehovah Witnesses don't force anyone to accept or refuse Blood Transfusion.

in 1998 there was a Seminar in SOFIA Bulgaria regarding ALTERNATIVE TO BLOOD TRANSFUSION

ONE Professor NAME Ivan Mladenov of Sofia commented that under the previous regime, ‘little or nothing was known about blood contamination and blood-borne viruses’ and that ‘questions on the part of patients were viewed as bad behavior that could lead to denial of medical care.’

BACK IN 1998 IN BULGARIA THE SEMINAR REFLECTS an increased awareness in Bulgaria of a patient’s right to self-determination and informed consent, as endorsed by the European Court of Human Rights.

Does Jehovah witnesses force his members not to accept Blood transfusion?
You have the right to choose not only in bulgaria but even here in USA. this is what the brochure on blood published by the witnesses said.
Read Chapt 17 if you have it.

from the book

In many places today, the patient has an inviolable right to decide what treatment he will accept. “The law of informed consent has been based on two premises: first, that a patient has the right to receive sufficient information to make an informed choice about the treatment recommended; and second, that the patient may choose to accept or to decline the physician’s recommendation. . . . Unless patients are viewed as having the right to say no, as well as yes, and even yes with conditions, much of the rationale for informed consent evaporates.”—Informed Consent—Legal Theory and Clinical Practice, 1987.

This guy and all the other ones like him are twisting the informations.
From
CESNUR Center for studies on New Religion:

According to an announcement dated March 20, 1998 the National Association of Jehovah's Witnesses of Bulgaria and the Republic of Bulgaria settled a case the Witnesses has started on September 21, 1995. The European Commission of Human Rights approved the settlement on March 9. By this settlement the government of Bulgaria undertakes to grant to the Witnesses "the public status of a recognised religion". The settlement also includes provisions for substitute civil service available to Witnesses who are conscientious objectors, and for freedom to choose medical treatment. "The settlement is good news -- commented Dr. Massimo Introvigne, mnaging director of CESNUR -- and may provide a model for other Eastern European countries. It comes after a number of European decisions against Greece for discriminating religious minorities including the Witnesses, the Roman Catholic Church, and Pentecostals".

do your own research.
There was nothing about Jehovah Witnesses will change Their Believes on Blood Transfusion, in the contrary Jehovah Witnesses have freedom of Religion Freedom to choose their own Medical Treatment.

Guess what I have some friends witnesses from Bulgaria.

what, what, what, are you still thinking of something else to say about this subject, give me a favor, go do your own research, and please don't go to the sites where the only thing you will hear is Jehovah witnesses are false prophets.
you will only get the wrong informations, let's say twisted informations.

frank said...

Some more useful information from a good source. It might learn something. Read Carefully.
This is from

CESNUR 2006 International Conference
July 13-16, 2006
San Diego State University, San Diego, California
Religion, Globalization, and Conflict: International Perspectives

The Human Rights of Excommunication

Some Anti-cult activists riddle the Jehovah’s Witness religion with accusations of Human Rights abuses.[ii] Amongst these alleged abuses is the practice of disfellowshipping. Disfellowshipping is Jehovah's Witnesses description of excommunication, and is practiced as a form of discipline pronounced by a special tribunal called a judicial committee[iii]. Disfellowshipping removes all privileges that a Jehovah’s Witness had as a member, and includes social boycotting.

Disfellowshipping alone is not a human rights abuse. The sentence of disfellowshipping is not a human rights abuse unless human rights principles or laws, as defined by international human rights declarations and treaties, are breached..........

The same Source Continue.

Disfellowshipping is not “torture cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment" as some anticult activist have claimed. The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT)[vii] defines what is meant by “torture cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment.” CAT defines torture and similar treatment as “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.”

When a judicial committee is initiated to investigate a member’s sin, there is no arrest or detaining, no one is brought before a tribunal to answer for their crimes. The member is invited to the judicial committee[viii]. The member can leave anytime he or she wants to.


I have more information for you on the Bulgaria Case
Pay attention you might learn something.

frank said...

time is precious I be back.
I be back later