Truemors
Opinion
Barry Artiste, Now Public Contributor
Jehovah's Witnesses, we have all seen them on street corners passively passing out the "WatchTower" to pedestrians. They are hard to miss, with their button down suits and permanent smiles, smiles that look as if someone stuck an "Upside Down Coathanger" in their mouth.
Jehovahs have always been at odds against the Government who interfere with their wishes to avoid Blood Transfusions at all costs, even if it means the death of their children. Certainly a moral quandary, where Life is paramount, but Jehovah's place religion "Higher than Life" it seems.
The Governments arguement is that they speak for those who cannot speak for themselves, namely children, as minors may not realise the consequences of their actions beliveing their religion will save them. The cemetary is full of religious believers who felt that Religion over Medicine was their ticket to life.
When Aids reared it's ugly head in the early 1980's , Jehovah Witnesses warned of the impending Apocolypse and smug in their beliefs Aids is transmitted through Blood and Bodily Fluids seem to have court advantage, as their 2,000 year old Ancient Gospel had warned of this plague.
The one positive side in all this are medical advances made in Bloodless Surgery, which due in part to Jehovahs witnesses reluctance to have Blood Transfusions has forced the Medical Community to come up with alternatives, which they have and thus Blood Transfusions for the most part are not necessary.
Perhaps one day, hopefully soon, Jehovah's Witnesses will abandon their ridiculous belief that God opposes blood transfusions.
Until then, it's up to the state to continue to protect minors who need medical treatment from the religious beliefs of their parents and religious leaders.
Every so often, you hear of minors who refuse blood transfusions because they've been led to believe that a practising Jehovah's Witness would never undergo such a procedure. Inevitably, the government steps in and ensures the treatment goes ahead.
The rationale behind the state's involvement is simple and necessary. Saving the lives of children is more important than bowing to the senseless and potentially damaging dictates of religion.
This week, the Supreme Court of Canada heard the case of a former Winnipeg teen who was given a blood transfusion against her will in 2006 when she was 14.
In an affidavit to the Supreme Court, the teen compared the experience to "being raped and violated." Her reaction is undoubtedly heartfelt, but it underscores the necessity of promoting the best interests of children in such circumstances.
Comments (0)