October 08, 2009

Why Was This Even An Issue?

After all, even prisoners have certain religious liberties upon which the state cannot infringe.

A judge says the state of Pennsylvania cannot force a seriously ill prison inmate to undergo a blood transfusion - even if it could save his life.

In a ruling made public Wednesday, Commonwealth Court Judge Keith B. Quigley said inmate Anthony Lindsey's wishes must be respected under the First Amendment.

Lindsey suffers from a serious kidney ailment. A doctor at the Laurel Highlands state prison says the 37-year-old prisoner is in imminent danger of dying if he does not have a transfusion.

Lindsey says he refuses to allow a transfusion because it violates his religious beliefs as a Jehovah's Witness. He is serving a 13- to 36-year sentence for drug trafficking.

Now I recognize that the government can limit the exercise of religion in jails and prisons for security purposes, and I am generally supportive of their doing so to some degree. But attempting to limit a decision to forgo medical treatment made on religious grounds makes no sense, as it in no way burdens the state. That litigation was necessary here is just offensive.

Posted by: Greg at 11:56 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 202 words, total size 1 kb.

1

Lindsey says he refuses to allow a transfusion because it violates his religious beliefs as a Jehovah's Witness. He is serving a 13- to 36-year sentence for drug trafficking.

Posted by: Rosella Mosher at Thu Aug 30 00:23:37 2012 (YhIxY)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
5kb generated in CPU 0.0057, elapsed 0.0153 seconds.
21 queries taking 0.0116 seconds, 30 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
[/posts]