(June 30, 2014 at 5:54 pm)blackout94 Wrote:(June 30, 2014 at 5:49 pm)Clueless Morgan Wrote: Exactly.
It's only a matter of time before the hypocrisy in allowing religious exemptions for certain types of BC and disallowing religious exemptions for blood transfusions is made clear. The justices are cherry-picking what they agree with.
It's a crying shame SCJ hold their position for life.
I know this is a little out of context, but can a religious guardian refuse his/her son/daughter a blood transfusion for religious reasons it it's a matter of life or death (in the USA)? Considering a child cannot consent.
I think that is a case by case thing. If the kid is in their mid to late teens but not 18, the kid can be asked by the doctor and be considered old enough. But personally I think that is bullshit because they most likely have been indoctrinated since they were toddlers.
But most definitely you CANNOT deny medical treatment to kids not old enough to make their own decisions. Parents have been arrested and convicted of child endangerment and neglect and in some cases manslaughter or murder. The younger a kid is the less religion can be used as an excuse to deny treatment.
