U.S. Army Policy Letter Regarding Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood


Viewed 6331 times

    Bangalore posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 08:42:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 1411 of 2726
    Joined 3/9/2009

    U.S. Army Policy Letter Regarding Jehovah's Witnesses And Blood.


    Bangalore posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 08:43:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 1412 of 2726
    Joined 3/9/2009


    Aussie Oz posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 08:51:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 2515 of 3751
    Joined 11/12/2009

    Very interesting...

    basically saying that they will not honour the JWs stand and if they are military family thay will be shipped off elsewhere.

    In otherwords, ''you aint gunna die on our watch'' so bugger off!

    Thats my take on it...


    ~Question With Boldness~ posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 13:59:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 2 of 29
    Joined 11/28/2011

    Army Wife here,

    How in the world did you ever get hold of an Army Memorandum? lol

    And the biggest question, what is a "dedicated witness of Jehovah" doing in the military in the first place?

    F lisaBObeesa posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 14:43:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 1828 of 2427
    Joined 5/8/2001
    And the biggest question, what is a "dedicated witness of Jehovah" doing in the military in the first place?

    My dad was in the military when he converted to the JWs. He eventually got himself discharged as a conscienctious objector.

    I'm not sure if he got baptised while he was still in the military, but he was certainly a true believer while still in the military. If the situation had come up, the blood thing would have been an issue for him.

    sabastious posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 14:52:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 6071 of 9399
    Joined 2/3/2010

    The US Army will never let a solider die needlessly. They completely ignore the Witnesses belief on blood when the soldier's life is at stake. Admirable!


    sabastious posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 14:54:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 6072 of 9399
    Joined 2/3/2010
    And the biggest question, what is a "dedicated witness of Jehovah" doing in the military in the first place?

    Welcome to the forum QWB. The answer to your question is in the OP let me quote it:

    It is not uncommon, however, for current military members to become converts of the religion

    ^ Once a convert, the Witnesses are going to tell the solider that he has to leave the service asap and to refuse a blood transfusion say something should happen in the meantime.


    sabastious posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 14:57:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 6073 of 9399
    Joined 2/3/2010
    In otherwords, ''you aint gunna die on our watch'' so bugger off!

    Can you imagine the media frenzy? "US Soldier Dies After Refusal of Blood Transfusion." The public would regard that as insult to injury and there might be an outrage.


    inbyathread posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 15:16:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 688 of 692
    Joined 1/17/2005

    OK Folks. It's been awhile since I posted last but this Title peaked my curiosity. Thanks Bangalore. Unless the body of elders or the societies stance has changed which I doubt, any soldier, their status being active duty, inactive reserve, reserve, national guard, down to the exception of retired, CANNOT be a 'dedicated servant of jehovah' as symbolized by their water immersion (baptism). I was an active duty member (****) and could not get baptised until after my discharge.

    The Army Memo is very correct in where an active duty member falls in regards to his or her medical care. The needs of the government comes first to the needs of the member. The government needs healthy, fully capable soldiers ready to serve all missions. When the members beliefs interfere with the mission, then action needs to take place. The Medical Board is there to look at the physical injury and determine whether it is temporary or permanent in which case the member could be discharged under several conditions. The Medical Board can also be convened to determine the mental status of the member. The member can be discharged as a consciencious objector, or held and punitive measures can be given up to and including brig time in which case the member will feel righteous because the elders would have informed him that this punishment is due to his staying loyal to Jehovah.

    The elders have been trained themselves to say only enough to create the thought in the members mind that he/she makes the final decision. Never will the member be able to say that the elders told him or her to defy orders from their superior officers.

    truth_b_known posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 15:34:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 55 of 368
    Joined 11/2/2011

    When you are a member of the U.S. military you are legally property of the United State government. I have been told by persons who have served that they have seen or have been personally disciplined for destruction of government property for getting a sunburn. If the military is going to put fuel in their tanks and bullets in their guns they will put blood in their injured troops.

    Band on the Run posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 18:45:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 3237 of 9876
    Joined 12/18/2010

    I am more confused than ever. From my exposure, I would think the once converted, one would have to leave the military immediately -- even if meant sitting in a military prison. The same principles should apply as applied to members being drafted. My uncle spent time in Danbury Federal Prison. One of the reasons money was so tight in the family was that no male members served in the military. Veterans' preference is a strong force in the market. Altho I was raised that it was bad, I feel there should be even stronger veterans' preference.

    I feel sorry for an md in a combat area having to know and then apply this memo.

    Interesting find. So what does the Society actually teach today? If there are two strands of belief, anyone who goes to prison for the neutrality doctrine is a fool.

    I've also read that early Christians both served in the Roman Army and refused to serve during the same time period. Local beliefs seemed to determine the outcome. So it wasn't clear to the earliest generations.

    edmond dantes posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 19:13:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 726 of 1071
    Joined 3/7/2007

    The German army during WW2 had some fanatical nazis soldiers refusing blood transfusions on the grounds that their pure Aryan blood might be tainted if they accepted blood . They were also similar to the Witnesses in that they thought they were the master race.

    inbyathread posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 19:19:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 689 of 692
    Joined 1/17/2005

    BotR Conversion is a subjective term. A military member can be a religious convert in his own mind by believing the tenents of his new faith. JW History shows that true Jehovah's Witnesses are part of the FDS, the heavenly kingdom recepients only. The rest of them are ASSOCIATES and fellow believers. The military membe is viewed as a close associate and suitable for kingdom blessings provided he continues his path to leave the world's military organization. The military member is just not listed as an "Unbaptised publisher" but can be verbally listed as an "approved associate". Such a fine line.

    We have posters here who are still attending JW meetings but still state that they don't believe anymore. Are they not converts to the world? Sure. It's a fine line on either side of the fence.

    M undercover posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 19:27:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 12595 of 13147
    Joined 9/25/2002


    What Would Hawkeye Pierce Do?

    F troubled mind posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 21:47:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 2977 of 3443
    Joined 11/17/2005

    When I was born in 1961 my Dad was active Marine Corps ,and my Mom was JW . We lived on base ,and I was born in a Naval hospital . My Mom had to have a c-section , and told everyone she did not want a blood transfusion . Yet when she was coming out of surgery the Doctor told my Dad she needed one ,and they gave it to her against her wishes . She was pissed about that her whole life !

    Band on the Run posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 23:22:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 3245 of 9876
    Joined 12/18/2010

    I would assume that the military is giving wide discretion that civilian hospitals don't have. Just mention the word "military" or "foreign affairs" and the Supreme Court tends to stay away from the issue. The appearance of impropriety should be important to them. Military trained, real men must be a powerful asset for them b/c there as so few brothers with competency.

    F rebel8 posted Thu, 01 Dec 2011 23:41:00 GMT(12/1/2011)

    Post 8102 of 10123
    Joined 1/13/2005

    "All jw patients who are non-scheduled (such as deliveries) or acute surgical cases, and refuse to consent to a blood transfusion, will automatically be transferred to civilian care."

    I guess the U.S. Army is exempt from EMTALA.

    M smiddy posted Fri, 02 Dec 2011 01:37:00 GMT(12/2/2011)

    Post 693 of 4606
    Joined 3/30/2007


    That cracked me up. LOL


    M smiddy posted Fri, 02 Dec 2011 01:39:00 GMT(12/2/2011)

    Post 694 of 4606
    Joined 3/30/2007

    Then again he may just hand the case over to frank



      Confirm ...