Re: The Raconteur Bible - What About the JWs?

In the recent 'editorial' on the foundation of the politic ethic on which I base my convictions, in the comments section specifically, Thomas got me thinking about examples in which people try not to impose their religious convictions on one another through policy and law.


So. Here's an example: The Jehovah's Witnesses. Their notions about blood and what is and is not permissible are pretty well known.

And yet, despite their sometimes fatal refusals to medical blood transfusions, I've yet to hear even once that any of them attempted to regulate such medical practice for people not of their own faith. Further, we can all easily guess what the reaction might be to a bill propagated by the JWs aimed at banning blood transfusions.

So then... very clearly our society is capable of isolating religious belief, very capable of restraining that belief in the context of rule, policy and law making, to apply only to those who subscribe to that particular belief.

Is it so hard to see the same principle applied to the larger context?