Total Pageviews

Monday, March 5, 2012

The Proper Beliefs

There has been a lot of ink spilt over Freedom of Religion, especially in the wake of the recent decision on contraception. What, you don't know it? Well, see the White House decided that contraception (that's birth-control  medication to you) would be made available under health insurance policies to all women, even those who worked at Roman Catholic organizations. But after the cardinals frowned upon this, the White House revised this, and said that the health insurance policies for the employees at such places would simply offer this as an option. This way, it would be up to each individual female employee to take advantage of this part of the health insurance policy. Most Roman Catholic officials were willing to accept the compromise, although bishops still frowned.
Then some politicians, especially those for whom President Obama could do nothing good, grabbed hold of this and lo and behold! the whole thing was really about Freedom of Religion. Not about an individual's right to get the medical help necessary, y'see, but a nefarious plot against all Christianity in general and the Roman Catholic church in particular. The United States Circus, uh, Congress even held a side show with clowns and such; a hearing on women's issues where only men spoke and one woman who tried to testify was not only refused but later publicly maligned and pilloried by still another clown.
The thing that has been missing in all this is that there are already laws on the books regarding certain limits: the banning of polygamy for Mormons, the required use of transfusions for Jehovah's Witnesses, the restriction of faith healing with many conservative groups. Or say some person believes all illness is caused by demonic possession, and denies someone the medical care they need, well that can be charged as murder, not Freedom of Religion.
When Thomas Jefferson wrote about the separation of church and state to those Baptists over in Danbury, he wasn't trying to abrogate the role of ethics in civil discourse, nor  to excuse people of faith from being accountable to the society around them. We also draw consciously or otherwise on our beliefs in whatever we do as individuals. But let us not claim discrimination because others will not accept our particular perspective on our particular beliefs. To paraphrase somebody or other, I may not agree with your views, but I will defend to the death your right to be a heretic!

2 comments:

  1. Jehovah's Witnesses blood transfusion confusion.

    Jehovahs Witnesses take blood products now in 2012.

    They take all fractions of blood. This includes hemoglobin, albumin, clotting factors, cryosupernatant and cryopoor too, and many, many, others.
    If one adds up all the blood fractions the JWs takes, it equals a whole unit of blood. Any, many of these fractions are made from thousands upon thousands of units of donated blood.
    Jehovah’s Witnesses can take Bovine *cows blood* as long as it is euphemistically called synthetic Hemopure.

    Jehovah's Witnesses now accept every fraction of blood except the membrane of the red blood cell. JWs now accept blood transfusions.

    The fact that the JW blood issue is so unclear is downright dangerous in the emergency room.
    --
    Danny Haszard

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Danny: Thanks for the information. My knowledge of Jehovah's witnesses is limited (as you showed.) But you did prove my point: the very nature of the abstruse and confusing procedure that JWs need to follow demonstrates the compromises necessary- and possible- between secular society and religious beliefs. Like most compromises, neither side is completely happy with the results, but at least it is better than the alternative.
      And no, I am not interested in another copy of the Watchtower

      Delete