Mother dies after refusing blood

retired_sedimohasel · 11-05-2007, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Wallin:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Andy Jordan:
was just waiting for someone to post something like this.

don't care what you think or don't think about other people's beliefs, it's not your place to tell them how to behave as long as their behavior does not violate any major laws.

Ain't suicide illegal though?

Quote:

Originally posted by cms186:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by poyplemonkeys:
Would she have had a transfusion from another JW?

what i was thinking tbh </BLOCKQUOTE>

No she wouldn't and they hadn't given it. Though IIRC she could have gotten one from herself but that takes some planning. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Someone posted earlier that she couldn't even get a transfusion from herself. Not sure what the truth is though

retired_khabmth · 11-05-2007, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gregg Carter:
Their beliefs mean that even blood transfusions where their own blood is used is not permissible.

You sure? IIRC that has been done. (could be my memory tricking me though)

retired_khabmth · 11-05-2007, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Red_Hector:
The passage of the bible in question mates...

<BLOCKQUOTE>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

...yeah how do you translate that into no transfusions mates? </BLOCKQUOTE>

Stupidity?

retired_annmariealexander · 11-05-2007, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Wallin:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Red_Hector:
The passage of the bible in question mates...

<BLOCKQUOTE>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

...yeah how do you translate that into no transfusions mates? </BLOCKQUOTE>

Stupidity? </BLOCKQUOTE>

Isn't it readable for today's txt-speech kids?

It says that if you have any blood inside your body that does not belong to you (isn't you're own blood) God will turn away from you and you will no longer be part of God's 'In-Crowd'.

retired_kathydonatto · 11-05-2007, 07:18 PM

natural selection still alive and kickg then, unlike this daft bint

surely a prime candidate for the darwin awards!

retired_khabmth · 11-05-2007, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Rafalution:
Martians? Anyway, there is a difference between belonging to an established religion and following those beliefs, and believing Martians are gonna get you. You must be able to see that?

I'd wager in there being more people believing in aliens than there being Jehovas in the world, so what's the difference?

Quote:

Originally posted by The Rafalution:
Because adopting the beliefs of those round you is a natrual human trait that does not incur on being 'of sound mind'. Having paranoid delusions that Martians are out to get you would only be the same if you were brought up surronded by those beliefs, and generally people arent (and I assume the hypothetical person you were referring to earlier wasnt, as you seemed to want to make a connection between crazies and the religious)

So you belive people should only be allowed to be born into a religion? No conversions?

retired_khabmth · 11-05-2007, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Abe Lenstra:
Isn't it readable for today's txt-speech kids?

Long time since I was last called that tbf.

retired_kathydonatto · 11-05-2007, 07:27 PM

if an alien is purely someone from another planet - then I would say that statisitically there is more chance of that then there being a god simply because we ourselves are proof that life can exist somewhere and because there is simply no proof that god exists.

aliens 1 god 0

retired_derek · 11-05-2007, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by LFCfan:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by James07?:

What if it was a child who needed the treatment, and the parents are refusing? Would you give them the right to do this on behalf of their child?

If the child decided not to have a transfusion and the parents accepted that wish, then they have every right to refuse a transfusion. </BLOCKQUOTE>

you';re a cretin.

retired_kathydonatto · 11-05-2007, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gregg Carter:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by LFCfan:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by James07?:

What if it was a child who needed the treatment, and the parents are refusing? Would you give them the right to do this on behalf of their child?

If the child decided not to have a transfusion and the parents accepted that wish, then they have every right to refuse a transfusion. </BLOCKQUOTE>

you';re a cretin. </BLOCKQUOTE>

seconded

there is a reason why children are deemed to young to decide certain things, i would suggest this being a prime example of why.

if a child needed a tranfusion and the parents where refusing to let them have one for any reason at all, religious or not. The child should be given the transfusion and taken away from the parents who are clearly not fit to be responsible for themselves nevermond anybody else.

it doesnt matter if the grounds are religious or not.

Mother dies after refusing blood

Grab a beer, sit back and relax.

Mother dies after refusing blood