Originally posted by robbie carrobie I am asking you about your words, who are the they you are referring to in your comment? You have made the claim that your words are not about the video then you will tell us who are the 'they' that you refer to when you made this comment,
Are you suggesting [b]they are not using blood because they think blood is bad and carries the sexual urges, addictions and sins of the donor? - divesjeester[/b]
"They" are the Army of course.
Tell me, in your opinion is there any connection between Galveston75's opening post and your religion's beliefs about blood?
Originally posted by robbie carrobie So it was a comment made with regard to the video and the army. Are you now retracting your previous statement? this one here.
My comment has nothing to do with the video - Divesjeester
Here is my question to Galveston75. I'm now asking you the same question:
"Are you (Glaveston75 or you Robbie) suggesting they (the Army) are not using blood because they think blood is bad and carries the sexual urges, addictions and sins of the donor?"
This is your religious organisation's teaching about blood isn't it. But what is obvious is that the Army not using blood has absolutely nothing to do with your religions beliefs and is therefore irrelevant. As other posters have already pointed out.
Originally posted by divegeester Here is my question to Galveston75. I'm now asking you the same question:
[b]"Are you (Glaveston75 or you Robbie) suggesting they (the Army) are not using blood because they think blood is bad and carries the sexual urges, addictions and sins of the donor?"
This is your religious organisation's teaching about blood isn't it. But what is obvious ...[text shortened]... h your religions beliefs and is therefore irrelevant. As other posters have already pointed out.[/b]
Are you retracting your previous statement or are you not?
My comment has nothing to do with the video - Divesjeester
Originally posted by divegeester No. Where are you going with this. 🙂
Well we have to conflicting statements, one in which you said your comments were not about the content of the video and one where you stated that it was made with reference to the content of the video, specifically the army. So either you are lying or you don't know what you are saying. If there is a third possibility be sure to let me know although you seem strangely incapable of conveying anything that makes any rational sense to be honest. Perhaps if you refrained from trying to be FMF and simply be yourself you wouldn't get caught taking cheap shots at other peoples religion.
Originally posted by divegeester Galveston75 are you going to discuss this topic, or not?
If I was Galveston i would stay far away from you, you don't know what you are saying and cannot be expected to carry on ant type of rational discussion.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie Well we have to conflicting statements, one in which you said your comments were not about the content of the video and one where you stated that it was made with reference to the content of the video, specifically the army. So either you are lying or you don't know what you are saying. If there is a third possibility be sure to let me know althoug ...[text shortened]... FMF and simply be yourself you wouldn't get caught taking cheap shots at other peoples religion.
I think you are just avoiding the point which is that there is NOTHING in the video which supports your religious beliefs about blood. That is my contention.
I'm asking Galveston75 and you if you feel differently I.e. Do you think that despite the video not supporting your beliefs about blood that the Army are in fact not using blood in this case because they do support your belief that blood contains the sins, lusts, urges from the donor.
Avoiding the topic is just making you look like you are embarrassed about what you believe. Which of course you should be.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie If I was Galveston i would stay far away from you, you don't know what you are saying and cannot be expected to carry on ant type of rational discussion.
The material Galveston75 posted does not support his beliefs about blood. It is obvious from your behaviour that you know this. 🙂
Originally posted by robbie carrobie If I was Galveston i would stay far away from you, you don't know what you are saying and cannot be expected to carry on ant type of rational discussion.
Galveston has not been posting in here for months due to a massive bout of hissy-fit; I would have thought that during the lengthy sabatical he would have figured out that the Jehovah's Witness beliefs about blood are completely unsupportable and in fact outright dangerous. Not mention leading to human sacrifice in the name of your particular God.
Originally posted by FMF And so we have yet another topic that robbie carrobie doesn't want to discuss properly with anyone who might disagree with him.
Interestingly Robbie doesn't seem to want to support Galveston75 either.
Originally posted by galveston75 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAWhRqCjT9w
Bloodless hospital told to teach army doctors how to do bloodless surgery.
If your child was dying and the only thing that could save their life was a blood transfusion, would you permit it, or would you let them die in order to please your version of god?
Originally posted by galveston75 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAWhRqCjT9w
Bloodless hospital told to teach army doctors how to do bloodless surgery.
Hi Galveston,
Very interesting video, thank you. My thought is that any technology that can be used to make surgery safer for everyone is a good thing. I am always amazed at the great advancements in technology that come from our military. If our medical community can make this available nationwide I can only see this as a 'win, win' for most everyone. It would probably be very comforting for a person with your belief in blood transfusions to know that if a medical condition arose where surgery was needed there was a way to safely use and recycle your own blood. I know from personal experience with my son that without the transfusions he received he would not have survived surgery. This procedure would not have helped him as he had lost too much of his own blood. I realize that this isn't what the video is about but I wanted to add that in. Take care my friend.
Bloodless surgery wanted by the army......
31 Oct '15 23:21
Back to Top