BIG-JW Sues over Blood demand

by Refriedtruth 42 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  rebel8

  Report a State/Church Violation
• 

  WhatWasIThinking

  "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

  The government is not infringing on her First Amendment rights. They allow the JWs to exist and they are not stopping her from getting bloodless surgery in line with her religious beliefs. Refusing to pay for an out of state surgery when there is a viable, local alternative != not allowing her to get the surgery.

  "But in court papers, state lawyers noted that Stinemetz acknowledged that she could redeem herself if she did receive a blood transfusion and was 'truly repentant.'"

  Hopefully the court will take her statement into account and find that the state does not have to pay for her bloodless surgery. I'm sorry, and I don't want to sound heartless, but standing up for your beliefs sometimes requires sacrifice. The WTBS will fight for this woman to have bloodless surgery on the taxpayer's dime, when there is a viable alternative, but will tell parents to let their kids die rather than have a transfusion when there is no alternative. What is wrong with these people?

  I'm all for bloodless surgery when possible. If I need surgery I would prefer the surgeon try to minimize blood loss so that a transfusion is not necessary. But if during the procedure he or she decides I need blood to save my life, then by all means fill me up.
• 

  Band on the Run

  I don't have time to read the articles. My specialty is the Establishment Clause. I feel I should do a macro of my short bio. Why should my tax dollars support someone's religious beliefs when government is neutral in this country. To tax me to pay for her beliefs is to inflict the Witnesses as my belief which is strictly forbidden.

  Frankly, if this were a kosher issue, I might not be so harsh. I need a special JW filter so my hatred in my gut doesn't get me carried away. There was a huge debate in orthodox Jewish circles when heart valve replacements became feasible. Pig valves are used. I forget why. The vast majority of rabbis ruled that it was permissible for even a rabbi to have a pig valve. The law is present to serve life, not vice versa.

  Why can't she opt for the cheaper surgery and just sit in the back of the KH for a while. Many JWs have chosen this path.
• 

  GLTirebiter

  One line from the article (quoting a state official) says it best:

  “The beneficiary’s religious preference to have a bloodless liver transplant does not meet medical necessity.”
• 

  jwfacts

  A JW can have a liver taken from another person, containing blood from the other person, but cannot then store their own blood for a transfusion during the operation. Where is the logic in that? The doctors must shake their heads at such an ignorant Watchtower stance.
• 

  Band on the Run

  I read the article. It is disappointing that the newspaper did not consider the Establishment clause concerns. She is not being denied free exercise. I predict if the case is appealed, she will lose. The more recent Supreme Court case is controlling. I've read it several times but don't recall all the details. Free exercise law is so clear and universally applied it is boring. The Court will always rule in favor of free exercise. In the peyote case, the Court ruled that the other case was not controlling. The antihallucogen legislation was clearly neutral and applied to all residents. One particular religion was not singled out.

  The Witnesses were honest that she would not be ostracized. I wonder if she would be minus the press attention. She is not facing a heavy burden. Bigamy laws are valid even tho some fundamentalist wacky Mormons believe they are targetted. There are several examples. There is no animus towards the Witnesses in the law and regulations. Murder might be a tenet of a religion. The state can still enforce murder laws. Imagine what a sick person like Manson could develop as religion and then be scott free. He could rape, murder and enslave millions and then claim his free exercise rights are denied.

  It does seem strange that Witnesses will not pool their money together for her. We know the Society will not. She is probably paying for her own lawyer. The Witness lawyer will only represent the Witnesses. Filing an amicus brief is easy compared to litigating an entire case. Why can't a special collection be held? The early Christians did it.
• 

  inbetween

  coffee_black: that is terrible, and I´m very sorry for that. Surely in his mind it must have been a capital sin to take an organ transplant, and he would have lost the favour of God. I also know, the moral liability for that is on the WTS, no doubt.

  However, regarding the legal liability, those celebrated lawyers of the society would surely insist, it was a consciences decision, since no church actions would follow, if he accepted an organ transplant. Thats their twist on things, therefore my question was, whether cannibalism would lead to dfd.
• 

  Refriedtruth

  Just up NOW #1 rank need supportive comments easy register anonymous postings Appeals court hears case of Jehovah's Witness in need of transplant ‎ Kansas City Star - Brad Cooper - 26 minutes ago The answer could decide whether 64-year-old Mary Stinemetz, a Jehovah's Witness from Hill City, Kan., can replace her failing liver that has left her near ...

• Jehovah's Witness ask Kan. Court of Appeals to allow bloodless ... ‎ Greenfield Daily Reporter - John Milburn - 8 hours ago An attorney for a Jehovah's Witness told the Kansas Court of Appeals on Wednesday that her client is willing to die for her faith rather than get a liver ...

  HERE ALSO