The fallacy of equivocation, which is what Bane has committed here could just as easily be done with the final abstention in the Decree, "Fornication"
Would anyone seriously suggest that marital sex and adultery were equivalent acts because they both would fall into the more generic category of "Sex"? Is all sex in any context illicit?
That's a ridiculous question, but it is exactly what Bane has done with blood.
By regressing to a more generic category that both the consumption of blood and the transfusion of blood would both fall into, (i.e. Taking in) he's not only shown his complete and utter disrespect for the Bible, he's seriously suggesting that all uses of blood are illicit.
As with the example of sex above, that idea is contradicted by nature itself. When blood and its respective components carry oxygen, remove wastes, fight infection, maintain hemostasis, etc. these are nothing if not legitimate uses of blood and it would be pointless for creatures of flesh and blood to argue otherwise.