Supreme Court Blood Case - WTS LOSES

The principal criterion usually revolves around whether the minor truly understands the likely consequences of their decision. 

In this area, JW's have been their own worst enemy, because the majority of rank and file members have been educated to believe that blood component therapy is bad medicine; it is never indicated under any circumstances; it does far more harm than good and that quality non-blood alternatives are always available for any situation.  

When a minor is that badly misinformed it is not entirely surprising for a court to decide that they do not truly understand the likely consequences of their decision. Even with JW adults, it has been suggested that some form of non-interventional paternalism would serve the patient better. 

Unless they were trying to infuse her with blood from a dead person, the Bible provides no objection to receiving blood for medical treatment.

I read an article in MSNews which held the opinion that the recent case of the boy with Lymphoma whose mother was refusing chemo therapy (some kind of "native American" new age stuff) may have profound legal results for more mainstream religions such as the Jehovah's Witnesses who have traditionally rejected certain mainstream medical procedures.

Part of that court's decision to make the kid take the treatment was that the kid had been sort of brainwashed into his disbelief in doctors...he was about 13, homeschooled, and could not even read!!!

Hate to say it, but most 13 year old witnesses are equally brainwashed, and have probably not read anything other than WTS junk.

The issue of Canada vs. JWs (on issues such as blood transfusion, parent-child relationship rights, and the transmission of its culture and values) appear to me quite similar to the issue of Canada vs. its Aboriginals (on issues such as residential schools, parent-child relationship rights, and the transmission of its culture and values).  Just as the Canadian government has had to apologize to the Aboriginals, as a first step in recognizing Native autonomy and sovereign rights of the respective Aboriginal nations, so too must the Canadian government apologize to JWs, as a first step to recognizing the sovereign rights of Jehovah over his people whom he has called out as a nation for his name.  Without full human rights accorded to each and every human in its territory, respect continues to need to be elevated.

Spike Tassel..First Nations People and the JW blood issue have nothing in common..

You don`t know what you are talking about..Which is`nt unusual..

                                                                                                  ....................LOL!!...OUTLAW

The search and seizure methods sanctioned by the Government of Canada, whether against Japanese during WWII, the Aboriginals during the Residential school era, or JW children in health matters are all clear violations of UN charter human rights.  Just because they garner newspaper headlines indicates the controversial nature.  These tragedies continue in fulfillment of Proverbs 22:3, which reads "Shrewd is the one that has seen the calamity and proceeds to conceal himself, but the inexperienced have passed along and must suffer the penalty."

Prov 22:3 would describe the govts here shrewdly taking action against the calamitous actions of the governing body in their making of unscriptural rules due to their inexperience.

On the other hand, some may shrewdly avoid confrontations that inexperienced ones get suckered into.

Correct Spike tassal.  I do my best to assist those who have been suckered into the JW cult to shrewdly avoid that kind of confrontation by exposing to them the facts about the WT...so they can hopefully see thru the cult and wake up.

I shrewdly avoid confrontations with you that inexperienced ones such as me have got suckered into.

As a reminder, Isaac, just call me Spike.

Good choice spike...inexperienced- and you obviously do not know what you are talking about in relation to blood transfusions and the WT ban....and you follow the leadership of the cult who are unable to do any sort of change to lift the ban due to backlash and legal issues that could result.  So you are wise to keep your mouth shut on this.  You have been roundly refuted on all points you have mentioned.

I avoid the misuse of blood by my own health decisions

spike tassal, a blood transfusion is not a misuse of bllod- it is medicinal use that has saved many lives.  You have not shown scripturally that it is a misue, or even touched on in the Bible.  That is my rulebook.  What is yours?

Hopefully the US Supreme Court follows the lead of the Canadian Court.  The WTBS policy on blood is sooo wishy washy.

I would hope for the Supreme Court of Canada to go by its own Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as I mentioned earlier.  The rule of the Bible (as correctly written, translated, understood, and applied) is what must prevail, and what will prevail.  We all live in Jehovah's Universe after all.  Jehovah's the One boss we don't want to mess with.

correct about the bible spike.  And nowehre does the Bible address blood transfusions.  So all of your other statements are relative to this are simply fluff and circular logic.

...whether against Japanese during WWII, the Aboriginals during the Residential school era...

What is the connection between the purely legal question of the competency of a minor and these past wrongs?

If what is related below can be documented beyond all doubt, would the declared "ulterior motives" of both Fred Franz and Clayton Woodworth bear directly upon the authenticity of so-called spirit-directed theology and practices of Jehovah's Witnesses?

"After the Judge's death, as World War II was ending and persecution against the Witnesses began declining, along with the attendant drop in news-media publicity, Hayden C. Covington told the author [of THE FOUR PRESIDENTS] that Fred Franz saw the prohibition against blood transfusions as a way to accomplish two things: to continue to publicize the religion, and to create an uproar in the community. This reaction would convince the membership they were being "persecuted" and "suffering for righteousness sake," a sure sign they were "in the truth."

According to Jerry Bergman, author of BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS: A HISTORY AND EVALUATION OF THE RELIGIOUS, BIBLICAL, AND MEDICAL OBJECTIONS, 1994, p. 5:

   "The blood issue has brought witnesses more publicity than any other issue in the last twenty years."

   "The ban on blood transfusions was an effort to solidify the Knorr administration." [Knorr initially objected to the weird scriptural interpretation justifying the abstaining from blood; he understood the scriptures to be in reference to animal blood only. Nevertheless, he went along with the ban.]

   "Key Watchtower officers held a view of distrust toward the medical profession."

   "Some high level Watchtower official naively reasoned that, if eating blood was wrong, blood transfusions were also wrong because they are 'intravenous' feeding as opposed to extravenous feeding, or normal eating."

While Rutherford swallowed some irrational rantings by Franz and Woodworth over the beginnings of the blood issue, he would not allow publication of FWF's "special knowledge" as "new light" in THE WATCHTOWER. The two mischief makers kept things stirred up and began convincing others, including Knorr. The author was told that now that "King Saul" [FWF] is dead, the leadership would like blood transfusions to be a matter of conscience and lay the blame for all the suffering at the feet of Franz and Woodworth.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/members/private/177078/1/Attention-Mouthy-Fred-Franz-Started-the-Blood-Uproar