General Conference takes action to protect our Registered Trademark

[doug yowell]

All a woman needs to secure an abortion is a pair of physicians who agree that the pregnancy is in fact affecting the mental health of the woman.

Does anyone really think that this is ever done when a woman demands an abortion? Don't the guidelines make it clear that the final choice is always left up to the woman? What if the Dr. and she have a difference of opinion, will he demand a 2nd opinion? The guidelines are suggestions not mandates.Are Md.'s trained specialists in mental health science? Aren't Dr's.trained in the physical? If the abortion issue sometimes gets into some very complicated moral scenerios won't the moral perspective of the physician become a real factor in the final decision? A Dr. with no qualms about aborting an unborn child for no reason or any reason will give the woman different advice than one who opposes abortion except to save the mother's life?

[Dr. Shane]

A doctor is not going to perform an abortion that he believes is immoral. I had a Catholic urologist refuse to give me a vasectomy. What the patient believes doesn't matter. The patient can go find another doctor.

[doug yowell]

A doctor is not going to perform an abortion that he believes is immoral. I had a Catholic urologist refuse to give me a vasectomy. What the patient believes doesn't matter. The patient can go find another doctor.

That's absolutely right and that highlights the problem for SDA hospitals and trying to give suggestive guidelines for abortion policy. A Dr. that has no bones about elective abortion can perform the procedure in an SDA hospital and the patient won't need to go anywhere else.Like Castle Memorial Hospital.

[doug yowell]

Meanwhile, back at the registered trademark ranch, can anybody explain why the Reform Seventh-day Adventist church is not being sued for trademark violation?

[phkrause]

Meanwhile, back at the registered trademark ranch, can anybody explain why the Reform Seventh-day Adventist church is not being sued for trademark violation?

If I remember correctly, I believe they have been? I think Stan would know better.

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

Meanwhile, back at the registered trademark ranch, can anybody explain why the Reform Seventh-day Adventist church is not being sued for trademark violation?

If I remember correctly, I believe they have been? I think Stan would know better.

Oh Staaaan.......where are you?

[doug yowell]

Earth to Stan. Come in Stan. Over

[John317]

...can anybody explain why the reformed Seventh-day Adventist church is not being sued for trademark violation?

I am not sure if this is the reason but it is very probable that it's because the Reform church makes a clear distinction between themselves and the SDA church and also because the Reform have had their name for close to 100 years: the SDA Reform Movement.

[phkrause]

I am not sure if this is the reason but it is very probable that it's because the Reform church makes a clear distinction between themselves and the SDA church and also because the Reform have had their name for close to 100 years: the SDA Reform Movement.

I guess I was wrong.

[Overaged]

I am not sure if this is the reason but it is very probable that it's because the Reform church makes a clear distinction between themselves and the SDA church and also because the Reform have had their name for close to 100 years: the SDA Reform Movement.

I imagine that would be pretty close to the facts of the matter John317. There is some good info, including a small book one can get at the GC website.

[Dr. Shane]

A Dr. that has no bones about elective abortion can perform the procedure in an SDA hospital...

That is why the Abortion Guidelines should be added to the church manual. The local congregation should be in charge of disciplining such a doctor.

[Overaged]

That is something that would be a really good idea to impliment Shane

[Nic Samojluk]

Meanwhile, back at the registered trademark ranch, can anybody explain why the Reform Seventh-day Adventist church is not being sued for trademark violation?

Because they are not engaged in pro-life activities. They seem to be mainly concerned about avoiding killing enemies, and unborn babies do not fall in said category of human beings.

[Nic Samojluk]

That is why the Abortion Guidelines should be added to the church manual. The local congregation should be in charge of disciplining such a doctor.

Yes, and the local congregation should be in charge of disciplining pro-lifers who violate the trademark polices of the church instead of the GC lawyers.

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

Meanwhile, back at the registered trademark ranch, can anybody explain why the Reform Seventh-day Adventist church is not being sued for trademark violation?

Because they are not engaged in pro-life activities. They seem to be mainly concerned about avoiding killing enemies, and unborn babies do not fall in said category of human beings.

Not necessarily true. Why then did the GC go after Creation SDA?

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

A Dr. that has no bones about elective abortion can perform the procedure in an SDA hospital...

That is why the Abortion Guidelines should be added to the church manual. The local congregation should be in charge of disciplining such a doctor.

THat would take a major overhauling of all church policies not just an abortion flex. The entire SDA health system would then have to be made subject to localized church oversite.This would create massive chaos to say nothing about hospital revolt.Particularly when such a large majority of the hospital staff are neither SDA nor Christian.

[Dr. Shane]

No, individual members are now subject to church discipline from the local church where their membership resides. For example, if an Adventist doctor is arrested and found guilty of some crime, the local church has authority to discipline him or her.

[doug yowell]

No, individual members are now subject to church discipline from the local church where their membership resides. For example, if an Adventist doctor is arrested and found guilty of some crime, the local church has authority to discipline him or her.

Yes, but what about those Dr.'s who aren't SDA or attend other SDA churches in the area (ever counted the number of SDA churches within 1/2 hr. drive of Loma Linda,or Shady Grove)or who don't go to church at all? And what happens iftwo different churches interpret the guidelines in two different ways?

[Nic Samojluk]

Not necessarily true. Why then did the GC go after Creation SDA?

Probably because they were accepting tithes and offerings instead of sending them to the GC.

[Dr. Shane]

what about those Dr.'s who aren't SDA

If they are not SDA, then they are not our problem. Are they?

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

what about those Dr.'s who aren't SDA

If they are not SDA, then they are not our problem. Are they?

Not if their not employed by a Seventh-day Adventist institution that the guidelines are directed to.But if,as employees or administrators, they violate the "official church guidelines" who becomes responsible for any discipline?

[Dr. Shane]

who becomes responsible for any discipline?

God. Can you trust Him to do that? I can.

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

who becomes responsible for any discipline?

God. Can you trust Him to do that? I can.

That's like saying I'll discipline my SDA church organist for coming to play while drunk every Sabbath but letting God be responsible for disciplining the non-SDA choir director that comes drunk each week.A real cop out and derelection of our responsibility for managing that which God has given us. If the hospital is under the auspicious of SDA then we become the responsible party for the integrity of it's name.The old "am I my brother's keeper" ploy is no justification for letting the inmates run the asylum.

[Overaged]

The Church chooses when and where to discipline errant members; but it's influence is more limited when non-members are involved. To quibble about this is pretty moot. The fact is, is that some here just don't like the Church's decisions on this matter; and that's not wrong, unless one tries to make the church out as saying/teaching something that it actually does not. In the case at hand; from what I have seen, the member in question has had some roadblocks set in his path for a reason; and it wasn't all the church's doing.

[Nic Samojluk]

The Church chooses when and where to discipline errant members; but it's influence is more limited when non-members are involved. To quibble about this is pretty moot. The fact is, is that some here just don't like the Church's decisions on this matter; and that's not wrong, unless one tries to make the church out as saying/teaching something that it actually does not. In the case at hand; from what I have seen, the member in question has had some roadblocks set in his path for a reason; and it wasn't all the church's doing.

Two days ago I heard Ted Wilson say in public: “Don’t be ashamed to tell the world that you are an Adventist," and I thought about Mark Price and the original owner of the “Adventist for Life” domain. Both of them were severely penalized for trying to tell the world that they were Adventists.

Mark’s Facebook web page, which took countless number of hours to build, was destroyed without warning, and the original owner of said domain name was forced to de-register. Is this the proper way of encouraging our members to tell the world that we are Adventists? I wonder!