The state and religion - Any other decision was impossible

YESTERDAY’S ruling that allows doctors to intervene and give blood transfusions to save the lives of two severely anaemic babies immediately after their birth, despite their parents’ objections on religious grounds, is very welcome.

Any other decision by the Supreme Court would have been unimaginable and unacceptable in a society based on values of humanism, tolerance and equality.

Ours is a society where we try, but don’t always succeed, to have respect for the dignity of human life and the wellbeing of all of the individuals who make up this increasingly disparate community.

That always includes the helpless, sick children born to parents of any or no religion.

It would be impossible for the state to allow two of its youngest citizens face a life-threatening jeopardy because of the religious beliefs of anyone, even if those beliefs are strongly held by the parents of the twounborn children in question.

None of us can be sure we understand why people believe what they do; sometimes it’s hard to understand even our own beliefs. But, for a moment, try to consider objectively the dreadful dilemma faced by the parents-to-be of these babies.

Every natural instinct would lead most parents to protect, at any cost, the wellbeing of these helpless infants. But the parents’ commitment to their lives as Jehovah’s Witnesses precluded the medical intervention advised by doctors needed to save the babies’ lives.

The parents’ beliefs took precedence over the lives of their children.

Very few of us would have the strength or depth of belief that would allow us to put religious commitment before the lives of our children — for most of us such a position would be untenable. Even if we did have such a belief, the values that shape our society make the application of these beliefs impossible.

That may be difficult for members of our Jehovah’s Witnesses community to accept or understand. They may feel that their religious freedom has been curtailed and that one of their central beliefs dismissed.

There is really no point in beating around the bush on this one — no matter what the teachings advanced by Jehovah’s Witnesses are — this society puts the lives of all of its citizens, most especially helpless children — before any religious doctrine.

This is not to offend or deride Jehovah’s Witnesses but they must understand that in this society every life is cherished.

Just as the mutilation of young women among immigrant communities from some African countries is unacceptable, just as Sharia courts cannot be tolerated, letting a child die because the tenets of Jehovah’s Witnesses preclude medical procedures is utterly alien to the spirit and instincts of this society.

It is also, thankfully, alien to our laws and yesterday’s ruling confirmed that.