This is one of the most well-written, and thought-provoking articles on the 'blood issue' that I have read in a long time, and I agree, I think this is HUGE.
The WBTS' stance on this issue is all over the place...totally irrational, and incomprehensible. Truly, "blind guides" is all they are. After the Society's extensive pontificating on the subject, all James Pell*cchia can say is that it is "up to the individual to decide whether they want to apply that law or not." Interestingly, the only portion of his statement quoted in the article prior thereto is that tranfusion "would be a violation of God's law". The word 'transfusion' is not even a part of his quote. Transfusion of what though, neither the writer of the article, nor, presumably, James Pell*chia dares say. How hypocritical! It's all semantics, a magic show. In the end, YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN. However, the "Witness liason" is there to support your compromise, should you decide to take that route!
What a bunch of gobbledygook. Like others have so aptly said, the more the WBTS speaks, the deeper they dig their own grave.
Just my 2 cents.