A few hours after a judge ruled that a 14-year-old Jehovah's Witness sick with leukemia had the right to refuse a blood transfusion that might have helped him, the boy died.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/29/jehovahs.witness.ap/index.html
If religion were classified as a mental illness, he'd be alive today.
2007-11-29 23:03:50 · 16 answers · asked by I'm an Atheist 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
How can you blame the judge? He was following the law AND the boy's religion.
2007-11-29 23:26:50 · update #1
Yeah it had killed Selena already..this isn't the first time.Many people don't know that after she was shot she was still alive but died later because her JW parents wouldn't allow a transfusion.
2007-11-29 23:07:53 · answer #1 · answered by berlytea 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Leukemia is a cancer of the blood marrow. It is a personal decision to have a bone marrow transplant for a JWs. I’m not sure if the little brother got that. It is also up to the person, to have the alternative to red blood cells (which carries oxygen to the body) with other oxygen carrying alternatives, and even hemoglobin which is a fractionalized red blood cell. Are those alternatives given to the child? We don’t know.
The blood that is being transfused right now to everybody is lacking nitric oxide so as Dr Stamler said :
“It doesn't matter how much oxygen is being carried by red blood cells, it cannot get to the tissues that need it without nitric oxide," said Dr. Jonathan Stamler of Duke University, leader of one of the research groups.
Another recent news stated :
The transfusions are designed to improve the delivery of oxygen to the body's tissues.
But researchers found patients who received a transfusion had a three-fold increase in complications linked to lack of oxygen
So will the blood transfusion help this kid? I personally don’t believe so.
Doctors are also humans, they are not God, I personally think that they can’t tell someone or anyone that the sick person can live 5 more years or 1 more week.
I respect this little brother, and the judge who preserved the dignity of this brother. And even if this little brother died, we all have the hope of the resurrection, because as the Bible says “that there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.”
It is not the religion that killed this little brother but the cancer.
2007-11-30 03:54:15 · answer #2 · answered by trustdell1 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Religion didn't kill the boy, the boy's decision didn't kill him,it was the lukemia whatever type of lukemia it was, that killed him ,a blood transfusion will never cure lukemia, you are right the boy died, from lukemia, but he may also have died from the blood transfusion, yet if he had died from the blood transfusion nothing would have ever been written about that,as it isn't about many non-JW's who die due to having blood transfusions, I know of some who have personally, and there was no interest shown there, this boy obeyed God's law, which is to abstain from blood (Acts15:29)29You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell.
If a doctor told you to abstain from alcohol while on a certain medication, would that mean that if you injected the alcohol you would be abstaining from it?this boy may have died but he died faithful to God, he was a smart boy, for he knew that God as the Originator of life can restore his life whereas man cannot!
2007-11-30 00:04:46 · answer #3 · answered by I speak Truth 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
If the cancer was in his bone marrow, then the boy can no longer create blood properly, he's going to die anyways. Laws should only be in place to protect us from harm. The suffering which he would have endured would not be worth living. The judges decision may have had nothing to do with religion.
2007-11-29 23:13:15 · answer #4 · answered by ricnoodle 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I read the article and it says that even if he did have the blood transfusion, he would only be alive for 5 more years. The boy would rather live for eternity not in heaven but on earth in the future. He knows about the promise that God gave him in Rev. 21:4 that the will be in paradise and live forever and in Psalms 37:10, 11 says that same thing.
Plus on the other side, the bible says that we should abstain from blood. (Acts 15:28, 29) In this test, it even lists it along with fornication and adultery. You see that this is in violation from what God tells us.
In the times of Noah, God himself says that blood was sacred. Genesis 9: 4, 16. We are just humans. We can't says to God today that blood insn't sacred when He, hinself created us.
Also, GOd wants obedience more than sacrifice. 1 Samuel 15:22; Mark 12:33. If we disobey his law about blood, then we will not be in his good side. Putting one's life ahead of God's law is fatal. (Mark 8:35, 36)
2007-11-30 00:06:57 · answer #5 · answered by Mely 1 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Well, as you can see, this just goes to show that man-made ideas are certainly not God's ideas. I've checked the bible and I have not found anywhere where it says that accepting blood transfusions is a sin, JW made that one up, becuase it is certainly not biblical.
2007-11-29 23:12:48 · answer #6 · answered by Binahl 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
As a leukemia sufferer, and a triple bypass recipient AND A J.W. I refute your accusation.
Transfusions will never cure leukemia. And we do not know what SORT of leukemia he had.
The boy was being obedient to a God given commandment.
And he must have convinced the judge of his commitment to being obedient.
A scared boy who was being forced to this sort of decision would not have been so convincing. the judge made the correct decision.
He would never allowed it otherwise.
2007-11-29 23:14:28 · answer #7 · answered by pugjw9896 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Leukemia killed the boy.
The doctors said blood would give him 5 more years.
Jehovah has promised him an eternity.
You do the math.
Why is it that if you die for God, you are a fanatic.
Die for man and you are a hero?
I am proud to call this young man my brother.
.
2007-11-30 00:35:08 · answer #8 · answered by TeeM 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋
It's not a mental illness, just a choice. If aborting your baby were considered a mental illness it would save thousands of children everyday.
2007-11-29 23:13:53 · answer #9 · answered by Todd P 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
this is a horrible thing-not the loss of life-people die everyday and death is the one thing all humans share-it is the unnecessary death when he might have lived longer except for the fact that his religion has taught him that certain medical techniques are against what his god allows him to do-maybe someday we will grow up as a species and realize that there is no god and we have to take care of ourselves-just my thoughts-smile and enjoy the day
2007-11-29 23:11:13 · answer #10 · answered by lazaruslong138 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋