I know we have all talked about this topic before, but for some new ones on the forum, or to refresh ourselves, I wanted to start this thread.
The Society likes to go on about the Sacredness of Blood, and how it should not be transfused etc.
They liken it to a symbol of life itself. Something that should be respected and therefore not transfused.
BUT, what is more important: REAL life, or a Symbol of life?
An illustration came to mind.
If we give a bunch of flowers to a loved one as a symbol of our love for them, are those flowers more important than the LOVE itself? Is it not better to actually demonstrate our love by our conduct? Simply giving flowers doesn't make up for displaying real love to that one.
So too with taking in blood. If the REAL life is at risk of being lost, and blood can be used to save that REAL life, is that not the right thing to do? Saying that "blood is a symbol of life, and therefore should be respected and not transfused" is a cop-out, because here we have a REAL life in front of us that can be actually saved!