Quote:
Originally Posted by frogstamper
Your hardly making a fair comparison roger, letting youngsters cross the road and swimming in the sea are hardly in the same ball-park as sitting back and watching your fifteen year old child die a completely meaningless and pointless death that could easily have been prevented.
As stated above the key point here is that the person in question is/was a child not an adult, so it was incumbent on those parents to have done everything reasonably possible to keep their son alive, and if that meant going against his wishes then so be it.
In the 21st century its complete bloody madness that a child is allowed to comitt suicide, with he's parents tacit approval, based wholly on a book written over two thousand years ago. I know you'll say that is a simplistic view of the JW faith, but essentially its no different had this child believed in the Greek gods and threw he's life away because Zeus was supposed to have made a vacuos statement concerning blood thousands of years ago.
What would society say if this had been the case?? there is absolutely no difference between either doctrines, they are both ridiculous.
This is no better than than state sanctioned suicide, how far is the state willing to go in letting children throw their lives away based on religious dogma??
|
not fair comparison hmm
my brother in law and an uncle died swimming at the sea side nearly lost a nephew at the same time as my brother in law
another uncle lost a leg crossing the road and my mothers cousin died under a bus
as of yet despite me having two ops with out blood my mother having 2 cancer related operations and 2 other unrelated ops all with out blood my sister having a hysterectomy with out blood none of us have died
from my and most others point of view the things i mention are far more likely to kill a member of our family than blood
as to the boy even if his parents had wished to make him have blood ( of which there is no guarantee it would have saved him and in any case artificial substitutes give as good a chance if not better now than blood any how ) they could not have overrided his wishes any way
due to many cases that have gone to court at this age he was the sole arbitrator of what happened the hospital could have ( and it doesn't take long so time isn't an issue on this ) if they thought that he was being coerced or wasn't making this decision by him self easily applied to court to do as they wished
here is one done for a non JW
http://www.ivteam.com/court-orders-transfusion/
and another involving JW parents
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/br...-14080269.html
but recently as other cases of right to die etc have gone to court including one by a young girl who had decided she wanted no more treatment for her cancer ( she later changed her mind ) the courts have been far more respectful of the persons wishes if they can show it is their wish
we are also not the only ones refusing blood ( though we do it because of our belife and not because we think it is safer ) on safety grounds
and interesting read here
http://www.mybloodsite.com/content/t...odless-surgery
not that I or the religion endorse anything there its just it shows we are not alone
blood transfusions are mostly put up as if you take it you live if you don't you die it is far from that clear cut