morning / afternon / evening, Peter here with news of World Have Your Say, on air at the usual time 1800 GMT 
HAS MUSHARRAF DONE THE RIGHT THING ?
Police have used tear gas and baton charges to break up demonstrations by Pakistani lawyers against the country’s state of emergency. Lawyers said many colleagues were arrested as protests were dispersed in Lahore, Karachi and Rawalpindi. The Islamic party Jamaat-e-Islami was also targeted, saying hundreds of its members were arrested overnight. President Pervez Musharraf declared the emergency on Saturday, saying he was acting to curb extremism. Critics, however, believe General Musharraf was acting to pre-empt a judgment by the Supreme Court on whether his re-election last month was legal.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ?
Do you accept this logic of his 3 stages of democracy – starting with stage 1, he says, which was the original coup back in 1999, ending with the events of the weekend — stage 3. Did he have another option ? How does he keep the lawyers, the executive and the legislature all in place ? Will he keep the military on board ? Will this become violent ? What should the US and the EU do next ? They donate billions every year as part of the war on terror – what should happen to that aid money now ?
JEHOVAH’S WITNESS — LIFE VERSUS FAITH
A young mother has died after giving birth to twins, following claims that she had refused a blood transfusion because of her faith. Jehovah’s Witness Emma Gough was 22 when she gave birth — the babies are healthy and well. The hospital, here in the UK, is refusing to comment on reports she had refused a blood transfusion. One family friend however is being quoted as saying “We follow the Bible and abstain from blood and I’ve got no reason to believe that Emma didn’t share those views.” Jehovah’s Witnesses refuse blood transfusions because they believe that God has forbidden it in the Bible. They believe that accepting a blood transfusion is a sin.
Should doctors ignore this kind belief, if it’s life and death ? Should we always – ALWAYS – respect someone’s faith ? What about the twins — they now have a 24 year old Dad, and no Mother. This stance is born out of one part of the Bible — a book written thousands of years ago, can, or should, it still be applied today ?
As ever:
WORLDHAVEYOURSAY.COM
TEXT: 44 77 86 20 60 80
PHONE: 44 20 70 83 72 72
Later, Peter
RSS feed
This WatchTower Society requirement that Jehovah’s Witnesses must refuse to accept any blood transfusions dates back only to 1945. Misinterpreting the Old Testament prohibition against eating animal blood as a routine food item, the WatchTower Society began teaching in 1945 that receiving a blood transfusion was “eating human blood”. Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that receiving an infusion of human blood into their body’s circulatory system is scientifically the exact same thing as eating or ingesting blood into their body’s digestive system.
“A patient in the hospital maybe fed through the mouth, through the nose, or through the veins. When sugar solutions are given intravenously it is called intravenous feeding. So the hospital’s own terminology recognizes as feeding the process of putting nutrition into one’s system via the veins. Hence the attendant administering the transfusion is feeding the patient through the veins, and the patient receiving it is eating through his veins.” — The WATCHTOWER magazine, July 1, 1951.
Jehovah’s Witnesses refuse to acknowledge that when human blood is transfused into their body’s circulatory system that the transfused human blood remains to be human blood and continues to function as human blood. Jehovah’s Witnesses refuse to acknowledge that if blood is eaten, then the ingested blood enters the body’s digestive system, where the blood would be treated by the body exactly the same as it would treat a hotdog, a potato chip, or any other food item. Ingested blood would be completely digested and broken down into proteins, carbohydrates, fats, and waste; which are then either assimilated or excreted by the body.
The WatchTower Society uses scriptures which speak about the blood of slaughtered animals to teach Jehovah’s Witnesses that blood is “sacred” because blood is the “symbol of life”. Then, the WatchTower Society turns around and requires Jehovah’s Witnesses to sacrifice their own “life” to maintain the alleged “sacredness” of a “symbol” of the very thing they are sacrificing — their life. Jehovah’s Witnesses refuse to acknowledge that the WatchTower doctrine on blood moronically places a higher value on the SYMBOL than it does on the THING SYMBOLIZED.
In fact, the Old Testament scriptures permitted the eating of unbled animal meat, which the Bible treats exactly the same as eating animal blood itself. In isolated occasions, when humans needed to eat unbled meat in order to sustain their own human life, the Mosaic Law permitted such, but then required the eaters to fulfill the requirements of being “unclean” for a few days. Thus, the Bible recognized that the sustaining of human life was more “sacred” than maintaining the sacredness of animal blood. To do otherwise would be doing exactly what the moronic WatchTower Society does. It would make the SYMBOL more SACRED than the THING SYMBOLIZED.
In fact, the WatchTower Society is leading Jehovah’s Witnesses to disobey GOD and violate the Holy Scriptures in one of the most serious ways possible. Because humans were created in GOD’s image, GOD considers human life sacred. A Jehovah’s Witness who sacrifices their SACRED LIFE in order to maintain the sacredness of a SYMBOL of that SACRED LIFE varies little from those who profane life by committing suicide. Those Jehovah’s Witness Elders who teach and police this moronic doctrine vary little from common accessories to murder. The Bible is fairly clear in how GOD views murder, and how He deals with Murderers.
This moronic twisting of scripture would be laughable if not for the fact that it has lead to the pointless deaths of numerous Jehovah’s Witnesses in the past, and it will continue to lead to the pointless deaths of many more Jehovah’s Witnesses in the future.
SUMMARIES OF 300 JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES LAWSUITS & COURT CASES
The following website summarizes over 315 U.S. court cases and lawsuits affecting children of Jehovah’s Witness Parents, including 200+ cases where the JW Parents refused to consent to life-saving blood transfusions for their dying children:
DIVORCE, BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS, AND OTHER LEGAL ISSUES AFFECTING CHILDREN OF JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES
http://jwdivorces.bravehost.com
As to the issue of the Jehovah’s witness case: I hate to sound so callous, but when we have people who have such wildly irrational beliefs, the best we can do is hope that these beliefs (and the genes of the people that hold them) do no get passed on. If, in fact, this woman died because some other wacko convinced her that blood transfusions are a “sin,” then that is a sad but deserved outcome. The fact that it is the year 2007 and we still have a majority of the world believing in myths (such as god, buddha, allah, the tooth fairy, etc.) is a stunning indictment of the failure of our educational systems. It is also indicative of the inherent irrational nature of us as a species, and goes a long way to explaining the frequent poor choices we make in relation to how we respond to each other and to the planet. I used to think that religions were simply a quaint vestige of a simpler, less educated time. But having barely survived the last 7 years of a neo-conservative christian fundamentalist president here in the U.S., I can see that religion, all religion, is ultimately about control, repression and fear. As just one example of this side of religion, I hold up the Westboro Baptist church. The sooner the extremists of all religions go away, the better off humanity will ultimately be. I don’t think that as a species we will ever completely eradicate religion – it is too “hard-wired” in most people’s brains. But maybe with work, and education, we can get today’s religions relegated to the roles that the ancient religions (such as Greek mythology) now occupy – cute, interesting little stories that may have some underlying meaning and are culturally significant, but are no more true than the myth of Santa Claus.
I ask that you withhold my name and email from any public forum, if you use this. Not because I am ashamed of my views, rather because I know all too well that the United States is filled with well-armed fundamentalists who would like nothing more than to bring harm to a “heathen” like myself.
Cheers
Mike, in Oregon USA
Secular and religious people have very different ideas about what happens after body death. I am a Christian who is fighting a life-threatening case of ALL leukemia. As a Christian, I believe in an afterlife and an eternal relationship with God. Presumably, secular people believe that their current life is all that they have. That difference in belief determines whether it worth doing something that we consider to be offensive to God to save our life.
Emma Gough clearly believed that having a blood transfusion would leave her separated from God from eternity – a far worse fate for a true Christian than the death of our bodies.
André E. Carrington, Machias, Maine, USA.
Hey… She is just exercising her right to choose and that should be respected.
There is a misinterpretation of scripture here and what would one say about a “Witness” who eats meat (it still has blodd in it even after washing it)? coz, the passage of scripture they are using is one that prohibits ingesting blood of animals. How can one diobey a direct command and cling to something not so direct yet deadly?
It does not matter what it is … fact is it is what she believes and she exercised her right based on that. We can not say before we believe we understand scripture better than she does, means she is wrong for following her belief. Infact, I do not see God saying I will destroy you cause you misunderstood my word to you cause you did not accept blood offered to save your life.
God may not destroy you for misinterpreting scripture but its a dangerous thing. There are no guarantees, infact you may destroy yourself as a result. The other danger is that by the time someone gives you the correct thing, there is a good chance that you will reject the new interpretation.God holds us responsible for how we handle the information we receive about Him, His Kingdom and oter issues of life.
Really, the problem here is not with her, she did what a serious believer is expected to do (she was faithful). The problem here and the greatest part of burden is with those who teach. they must be sure they are teaching the right thing. Jesus had some strong words against “Teaching commandments of men for doctrine”, setting aside God’s law and/or instructions. Misinterpreting scripture can lead to teaching “commandments of men”.
As for her, God will Judge her based on the “light” ie knowledge she has received and He may just Judge her to be a faithful daughter. But those who teach better beware. Let them deeply review this position just to make sure they are not causing unnecessary pain (as you may be aware,they did not have this teaching from the beginning). Life is precious.
HAS MUSHARRAF DONE THE RIGHT THING?
In Tobasco
Right now
Everything’s in a fiasco in Tobasco.
Right now
There’s no tobacco in Tobasco.
Right now
No one goes to Tobasco’s discos.
Right now
Time stops and from the housetops
Voices shout and yelp for help.
Right now
Everyone fears the rain, which–again–
Has shown its clout.
But flood or drought,
The looters are out:
They don’t care of what the flood’s made,
They loot even food aid.
And that’s the Man we are:
We cry when the fire is near
And laugh when we are afar.
Right now
The Taleban thrive in Pakistan.
They strive to drive everyone mad in Islamabad.
But Benazir and Perviz
Buzz like flies and hum like bees,
Each cries for a better Pakistan.
You’ve got to impose Martial Law
If you wanna hope for a prize
From Oslo.
But that’s the Man we are:
We cry when the fire is near
And laugh when we are afar.