Here we go again. Another pair of delusional religious lunatics are trying to deprive their child of the right to life by preventing a hospital from giving a blood transfusion.
The parents of a 4-year-old girl are being allowed to address the High Court to explain why they think their daughter should not receive a life-saving transfusion if it becomes necessary.
Now, you probably know what I think about this, but I’m going to tell you again anyway.
I think the parents should certainly address the court, but not about the blood transfusion. The only reason these parents should be addressing the court is to explain why they should not immediately be flung into jail for criminal neglect of their child. And if they aren’t jailed on the spot, they should then have to explain why the child should not be taken into care and removed from the control of two lunatics.
These people’s religious beliefs, like all religious beliefs, are simply that: beliefs. They are not rights, they are not facts or immutable axiomatic truths. They’re just beliefs, and they do not confer the right to endanger a harmless child.
It doesn’t matter what they believe. It doesn’t matter if they think the Bible forbids blood transfusions. It wouldn’t matter if they thought the moon was a giant pancake. That’s their personal lunacy, and they’re entitled to it, as long as they don’t try to inflict it on a defenceless sick child.
There’s no rational reason why a court of law, or for that matter any other public body, should attach any weight whatever to religious beliefs, and it’s about time we stopped affording disproportionate respect to any individual’s personal delusions.
There is no absolute right in this country to practise religious beliefs. Polygamy is illegal. So is the ritual burning of Hindu widows. We don’t permit female circumcision. We don’t even allow Sikhs to wear turbans with a police uniform, so we’re hardly going to let a baby die because some religion doesn’t like blood transfusions.
Of course not.
If an adult chooses to refuse a blood transfusion and dies as a result, it’s another matter, but in that case, maybe they’d have the decency to go and die someplace else, instead of taking up a bed in a hospital where other patients need life-saving treatment.
Isn’t it about time that the government enacted legislation to end this constant procession of Jehovah’s Witnesses taking up the High Court’s time, and wasting hospitals’ money, with religious argumentation that has no place in a court of law?
As usual, and as expected, the court has rejected the parents’ case for the disgraceful idiocy that it is.
Why do we need to go through this expensive charade time after time? Why can’t we just have a law permitting hospitals to save a child’s life no matter what delusions its parents hold?
Previously on Bock: