Thinking

The reason I endured all that is that this was being multiplied all over the Earth by Brothers everywhere and I could not cave in on this issue.
…. but I look at the price I paid, and it bankrupted me.

I am happy the Brotherhood, and my sons, are now free of this tyranny.
It would have helped,  had there been an apology for all the ruined lives.
There was not.

Do you think it would have benefited the victim and lawyer back then, as it does now?
This is also a guess by former members who have argued it over the internet. How many governments allow you personally to see their internal documentation? Now be honest!
So, if a brother violates his sister, it's incest and not "child sexual abuse." It seems stranger coming from you to think that way. It also seems you are making an inference to age and marriage to justify the act of rape.
Since the complete story is not mentioned in scripture aside from the act itself, how would you know what process was taken aside from Amnon's outcome by Absalom?
This personal observation can apply to anyone, not just spiritual leaders. It has too broad of an implication for any meaningful dialogue.

Being the oldest should mean more wisdom and respect wouldn’t it…🤭

Ha..your older than me…

Being the oldest should mean more wisdom and respect wouldn’t it…🤭

First she gets perceived condescension from MM, and now you are going to give her a superiority complex.

Nominally, he was. I didn’t get the impression his heart was in it. The mom certainly was and I was there as much to support her as her son. Sometimes people just like an ally, regardless of how things go down.

Adding to Thinkings list, of which each item is different, so that I think that would have answered your question, is just plain ‘ol human error. Anyone who has ever worked in healthcare (my wife is a retired nurse) knows there is plenty of it. 
In my area, hospitals laid off nurses who would not accepted the Covid shot. This led to collapse of the hospital system, as there were a lot of them, not easily or affordably replaced, so largely not replaced, making the remaining staff take up the slack over which they protested and went on strike. Do you think this worked to increase the safety of transfusion protocol?
Just recently local hospitals were found to be in severe violation of a law that they must not be understaffed. It’s a LAW—how could that have not fixed the problem? It’s as though administrators say, ‘If our nurses quit, the very stones will take care of you!’
Everything is collapsing. And whereas JW’s stand on war, tobacco, alcohol and drug abuse, and compliance with safety laws, place them BY FAR among the safest religions out there, you keep flailing a on a number so relatively tiny that neither Thinking nor myself can think of an example we personally know of. And neither of us are youngsters, especially Thinking.
In a revolving population of several million you are going to find countless examples of anything. But there is such a thing as focusing on the trees so minutely as to not see the forest.

The assumption about the garden is once again incorrect. The tree of knowledge served as a condition for obedience, rather than being a sacred object. The entire garden was sacred, a dwelling place for perfect beings until it was corrupted by Satan. Consequently, God removed not only the tree but the entire garden from humanity.

I was thinking mushrooms.

It's because I believe that if a non-Jewish person could eat an unbled animal that died naturally, then they could also trap or hunt or net an animal (mammal/fish/bird/etc) and eat it unbled. But even if it were only animals that died naturally, which might have been ideal, then it was still OK for people of the nations to eat unbled animals. Narrowing it down to distinguish which kinds were OK doesn't change that overall fact.
With the Jews, they had Moses read in their synagogues week after week so they would know the Mosaic Law. Did all the nations have Noah (Gen 6-9) read to them every week, so they would know the Noahide Law?
(Acts 15:20, 21) . . .but to write them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from what is strangled, and from blood. 21  For from ancient times Moses has had those who preach him in city after city, because he is read aloud in the synagogues on every sabbath.”
 
Also, the lines can get blurred. If I create a grazing path for bison at a precarious edge of a cliff, is it NATURAL that one might slip and fall to its death now and then? If a dog is trained to bring back a duck that I didn't quite kill when I hit it with a slingshot, but the dog kills it by holding it by the neck, did it die naturally? What if the dog brings me one that it caught on its own? What about the chipmunk the cat brought to my doorstep that dies after several hours of torture by the cat? If I take an animal from the mouth of a lion that just killed it by chasing away the lion, did it die naturally? 
I don't know the taboo you mean, but the above could just as well mean that Noah could NOT eat carrion. He could not eat an animal found dead of natural causes. And he couldn't eat an animal that still had blood (or breath) flowing in it. So he could only eat meat he purposely killed. He just couldn't eat it with the blood.
Blood made it taboo, and therefore blood WAS considered a sacred substance by decree of God himself. 

No..by Christ's Law.
What you are doing here is clouding the blood issue in tangled webs and murky water with the fog of words so as to mislead.
Your arguments don’t make sense Miles….its and emotional issue in modern days times but it’s not all that hard to work out.

Oh my goodness…..it is a fear of all parents and surgeons and all medical people put such fear into such parents…what a calamity….i hope the recovery spiritually as I know they won’t ever recover from her death,
But Jehovah shows great love and mercy such one's just as he did to Peter..I sincerely hope the elders dealt with them in as Jesus would have…what a sad sad story.

I’m sad to hear this.

You are not listening…..because you don’t like what I am saying .
We are under Christ law….we therefore abstain from blood…..what is it you want me to say?

No..by Christ's Law.
What you are doing here is clouding the blood issue in tangled webs and murky water with the fog of words so as to mislead.
Your arguments don’t make sense Miles….its and emotional issue in modern days times but it’s not all that hard to work out.

You missed the ENTIRE point George 88!
It’s NOT about travel!
It’s about the JW leadership pledging allegiance to the Constitution of the United States for their Passport, while the Brothers and Sisters in Malawi are being tortured and killed by the thousands for obeying not making a similar political statement. to get THEIR “passport”.
To not get raped, tortured and KILLED.
https://jwfacts.com/watchtower/malawi-mexico-oath-allegiance.php
This link has the COMPLETE STORY, and I found it to be fair, true, and accurate.  I was paying attention.
 

——————————————————-
It’s not about David respecting the blood of his enemies, or any animals slaughtered for food, or our respecting the blood.
It’s not REALLY about real blood. 
God does not collect it into some big celestial swimming pool and swim in it.
He considers all blood his personal property to teach us respect for the fact that He is the source of all life, but knows we cannot eat sunlight, so licenses the management of life to us.
That’s why animals have no restrictions on blood. BECAUSE they are not being included in the Ransom. 
The Mosaic law is not in force now, but the underlying principles still are.
That’s what “Abstain from blood” means.
 

Oxford Dictionary……ABSTAIN 
1, Restrain oneself from doing or enjoying something 
2, Formally decline to vote either for or against a proposal 
3, To Refrain from something 
 
I cannot make it any clearer….

To me, a distinction without a necessary distinction. Dead of natural cause could include a cow, sheep, horse, goat, or snake that had been strangled around the neck by a lion that ran off or was chased off before eating it.
Genesis 9 is also open to interpretation:
(Gen: 9:3,4) Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything. 4 “But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it.
Technically, it doesn't say anything about bleeding an animal before eating it. Although that's a common-sense way to interpret it, especially in light of the Mosaic Law. One odd, but possible interpretation is this: You may now eat anything that lives and moves, but just don't eat it while it is still living and moving. You must kill it first. (or, even more technically: It must have died first.)
Some of the rabbis interpreted this to mean that you couldn't strangle off a portion of meat to eat it while keeping the poor animal alive. If you had a goat giving good milk, or raising a baby goat (kid), you couldn't strangle off a leg just because you were starving. You had to kill the whole goat. You couldn't have your cake and eat it too. 
By the way, I knew a Witness who killed their chickens by strangling them: wringing their neck until the neck twisted off. 

My apology. What I wrote was not intended as condescension. I do appreciate and respect your responses. You are honest.

The way the question is presented lacks a definitive tone, which could benefit from a reality check. Could you clarify if you are referring to medical conditions such as heart attacks, hypertension, etc., or are you alluding to blood transfusion when mentioning the "primary medical issue leading to mortality related to blood"?

For me the issue is still a bit too complex:
I would agree with the Watchtower publication quoted earlier that we are not under the Mosaic Law and that, as far as blood is concerned, we are being held to a LOWER standard than what the Mosaic Law stated concerning blood. The primary basis for the Acts 15 stance on blood was not the Mosaic Law, but the decree that Jehovah gave to Noah regarding eating animal blood and bloodguilt. By that LOWER standard after Noah, a non-Jewish person could eat an animal that was not bled. According the Mosaic Law, a Jewish person could still make money off an unbled animal and would have no qualms of conscience about selling it to a gentile living in their midst, for them to make any use they wanted of that unbled animal, including eating it. 
But then there is the question about whether we are really held to that same lower standard that the gentile had. When the congregation and the elders at Jerusalem wanted to solve the problem of gentiles and Jews coming together as Christians, they agreed with the elders' statement that gentiles should "abstain from blood, things strangled, from things sacrificed to idols, and from fornication." Some commentators have said that this was a necessary solution until the Jewish Christians realized they no longer needed to follow the Mosaic Law which was still keeping them separate, not even eating at the same table as gentiles.
That temporary nature would seem to fit Paul's statements in Galatians and in 1 Corinthians about it being OK to eat things sacrificed to idols, and OK to eat anything set before them by a gentile (which could apparently even include unbled meat, of from a strangled animal). That would mean that Paul might have thought Christians were still held to the LOWER standard of people under Jehovah's decree to Noah (with respect to blood and things sacrificed to idols). In Galatians, Paul dealt with the matter of Jews eating at the same table with gentiles. But Paul still argued against those who thought their liberty and freedom under Christianity could include fornication. But for those other things, Paul said it only held for the times when Jews around them were still "weak." 
Of course, this isn't the only way to interpret why Paul said Christians could eat anything a gentile set on the plate in front of them making no question about it. 

…. consider the time from the beginning of the first hemoglobin molecule metabolizing sugar and oxygen to Moses as preschool and kindergarten, but as soon as humanity learned to “do basic math”, figuratively speaking, bathe more or less regularly, and not poop in the middle of the tent it was time for God to introduce them to a new concept (for them) now that they had centuries of experience as a frame of reference to integrate with….
Now it was time for some more abstract concepts …. about life and death … about responsibilities to God …. about respect for God in a violent and crude world, and to teach the Jews basic background information about how in the future the blood of one man was so valuable that God would accept such a simple thing to rescue the entire human race that respected that blood.
Sorta like once you have the 12x12=144 table down pat …. going on to Algebra I.