Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Jehovah's Witnesses' literature teaches that their refusal of transfusions of whole blood or its four primary components—red cells, white cells, platelets, and plasma—is a non-negotiable religious stand and that those who respect life as a gift from God do not try to sustain life by taking in blood, [5] [6] even in an emergency. [7]
Jehovah's Witnesses officially reject transfusions of whole allogeneic blood and some of its fractionated components. Jehovah's Witnesses are taught that the Bible prohibits the consumption, storage and transfusion of blood , based on their understanding of scriptures such as Leviticus 17:10, 11: "I will certainly set my face against the one ...
Jehovah's Witnesses typically refuse blood transfusions, which they consider a violation of God's law based on their interpretation of Acts 15:28, 29 and other scriptures. [280] [281] This prohibition has existed since 1945. [90] They also do not eat blood-based foods, such as blood sausage. [282]
In all, Jehovah's Witnesses brought 23 separate First Amendment actions before the U.S. Supreme Court between 1938 and 1946. [36] [37] Supreme Court Justice Harlan Fiske Stone once quipped, "I think the Jehovah's Witnesses ought to have an endowment in view of the aid which they give in solving the legal problems of civil liberties." [38]
Bethany Hughes (1985–2002) was a 17-year-old Jehovah's Witness that died from leukemia. [1] Hughes was forced to accept blood transfusions , which was a treatment that interfered with her beliefs. The case received significant media attention.
Since Jehovah’s Witnesses are not allowed to accept external blood products, their view on organ donation is complicated by the medical procedure itself. [8] Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that organ donation with no transfusion of blood is an individual decision. [2] [10]
Based on their understanding of the Bible admonition to "keep abstaining from blood" (Acts 15:28-29), Jehovah's Witnesses refrain from accepting any blood transfusion or whole blood products. Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the successor to the Apostles of the early church is the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses, and their decisions are ...
R v Blaue (1975) 61 Cr App R 271 is an English criminal law appeal in which the Court of Appeal decided, being a court of binding precedent thus established, that the refusal of a Jehovah's Witness to accept a blood transfusion after being stabbed did not constitute an intervening act for the purposes of legal causation.