Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
As soon as blood is drained from an animal, the respect has been shown to God, and then a person can eat the meat even though it may contain a small amount of blood. [77] Jehovah's Witnesses' view of meat and blood is different from that of kosher Jewish adherents, who go to great lengths to remove minor traces of blood. [111] [112]
Jehovah's Witnesses view of meat and blood is therefore different from the Jewish view that goes to great lengths to remove even minor traces of blood. [122] [123] According to lawyer Kerry Louderback-Wood, a former Jehovah's Witness, [124] the Watch Tower Society misrepresents the scope of allowed fractions.
Jehovah's Witnesses officially reject transfusions of whole allogeneic blood and some of its fractionated components. Jehovah's Witnesses are taught that the Bible prohibits the consumption, storage and transfusion of blood , based on their understanding of scriptures such as Leviticus 17:10, 11: "I will certainly set my face against the one ...
As a result, Jehovah's Witnesses now have the right to make a personal decision regarding the use of all blood fractions including the "mother of all fractions" hemoglobin, the single largest blood component after water." Reference: article, "Watchtower Blood Policy Changes Again." by AJWRB (Jehovah's Witnesses for Reform on Blood)
Jehovah's Witnesses typically refuse blood transfusions, which they consider a violation of God's law based on their interpretation of Acts 15:28, 29 and other scriptures. [280] [281] This prohibition has existed since 1945. [90] They also do not eat blood-based foods, such as blood sausage. [282]
Since Jehovah’s Witnesses are not allowed to accept external blood products, their view on organ donation is complicated by the medical procedure itself. [8] Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that organ donation with no transfusion of blood is an individual decision. [2] [10]
Katherine Jackson, a devout Jehovah’s Witness, raised all 10 of her children in the Jehovah’s Witness faith, and while some of them strayed as they reached adulthood, Michael remained committed.
In all, Jehovah's Witnesses brought 23 separate First Amendment actions before the U.S. Supreme Court between 1938 and 1946. [36] [37] Supreme Court Justice Harlan Fiske Stone once quipped, "I think the Jehovah's Witnesses ought to have an endowment in view of the aid which they give in solving the legal problems of civil liberties." [38]