« Today’s (un)surprising fact | ::: | Another viewpoint »
“All I said was, that piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah”
I need to ask a question that has been raised by two related news articles I’ve just read (here and here).
A young woman has died after giving birth to healthy twins when her faith as a Jehovah’s Witness forbade her from having a blood transfusion. There is some speculation that she may still have died even if she’d had it, but no-one is 100% sure. Apparently, because of this verse in the Bible, Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that blood transfusions are a sin:
“And any man from the house of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, who eats any blood, I will set My face against that person who eats blood, and will cut him off from among his people.” Leviticus 17:10
I’m sorry but I don’t see the connection; a blood transfusion is not “eating” blood. OK, you accept the blood of another into your body and maybe you can stretch the definition and call that eating, but it is a stretch. And let’s remember it is blood that has been freely given, without suffering on the part of the giver, for the greater good of all.
Maybe I could be swayed by the argument if it was just a question of semantics, or if it was just on a par with not eating fish on a Friday, but it’s not. You look at cases like this one and you have to ask: why? Why would you, as a mother-to-be, risk your life for a religious idea rather than hold to the physical certainty of the two children you’ve just given birth to? Why would your family allow you to do this? It’s obvious why the hospital allows it - they’d get sued to pieces if they intervened - but I can’t understand why, or how, the family could just stand by and let it happen. What are they going to tell that little boy and little girl as they grow up and wonder where their Mummy is?
Comments
5 Responses to ““All I said was, that piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah””
I think you know what to do....
Wolfs Stuff
Wolfs Helpers
-
I think it’s because the theme throughout the Bible is that the Life is in the blood. I’m not sure; I am not a Jehovah’s witness, but I am a Christian who witnesses for Jehovah (Yahweh God) and the Gospel of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. God Bless! Laura
[...] already commented on the recent case of a Jehovah’s Witness mother who died giving birth because her religion [...]
[...] already commented on the recent case of a Jehovah’s Witness mother who died giving birth because her religion [...]
For me I would not take a blood transfusion and I am not a Jehovah’s Witness, though my Grandmother is.
There is also a risk of getting another disease from a blood transfusion and a lot of people were given tainted blood, some bringing hepatitis and aids with it.
Do you honestly know if the blood you are taking is not tainted with some disease?
Does the hospital take the time to tell you?
So there is a risk and you must decide if you want to take the risk or not. Free will for some but it is also necessary to take risk so that we can understand the meaning of our lives when we allow the unexpected and unforseen to happen. You must decide what you will risk.
[Wolfie edit: Juenelle originally posted this comment on the old Wolfs Howl, but I thought it was worth moving over]
@Jeunelle Foster:
Thanks for your thought-provoking comment, Jeunelle.
Blood transfusions are, as in the case described in this post, often needed in life-threatening situations - if you don’t get some blood to replace what you’ve lost, you are going to die. The risk of tainted blood is small; yes, it can happen but in the position I would rather take the small percentage risk that I might contract a disease against the almost certain outcome of death if I don’t take it.
As you say, personal choice does come in to it - and that was my original point. It’s a personal choice and your religion (which is not the same as your belief in your God) should not have a say.