Freedom of religion is one of our fundamental rights.

While there is no questioning the importance of this concept, the issue of whether life and quality of life should be valued over one's religious beliefs constantly arises. This question has been at the center of many controversial issues, such as stem cell research and abortion. The advancement of science and technology constantly contradicts religious doctrine, and the results can often be tragic.

Consider the story of Emma Gough, a 22-year-old resident of Shropshire, England.

Gough gave birth to twins, a boy and a girl, during the early hours of Oct. 25. Shortly after holding her newborn babies for the first time, Gough suffered a birth-related hemorrhage and fell unconscious due to significant blood loss. Gough, a Jehova's Witness, signed a form prior to giving birth that stated she would not take any blood transfusions in the event of an emergency, as doing so would violate the teachings of her religion. Medical staff at Royal Shrewsbury Hospital in Shropshire begged Gough's family to overrule her decision so they could save her life. Her husband Anthony, along with the rest of her family, refused the request. Gough died of blood loss shortly after.

The story of Gough's death can be viewed from two perspectives.

On one hand, Gough could be admired for her religious conviction. She was fully aware of the risk she was taking when she signed forms that prevented her from receiving an emergency blood transfusion. By not signing the papers she was consciously putting her life in the hands of a higher power. Ultimately, she and her family chose religion over life. There's no denying the depth of Gough's faith.

On the other hand, this story can be seen as a very selfish act. Her children will be raised motherless as a result of her actions and, in this regard, they are truly the tragic victims of this story. Someday they will have to cope with the fact that their mother's life could have been saved but was not. According to the Confidential Inquiry into Maternal Deaths Report (CEMD), a women increases her chances of dying during childbirth by 100 when she refuses blood transfusions. By refusing treatment, Gough essentially committed suicide with her family's approval and assistance.

The doctrine in the Jehova's Witness faith that opposes blood transfusions is derived mostly from four sections in the New World Translation of the Bible: Genesis 9, Leviticus 17, Acts 15 and Acts 21. The Watchtower, which is the official Web site of the Jehova's Witness faith, states that "when a Christian abstains from blood, he or she is in effect expressing faith that only the shed blood of Jesus Christ can truly redeem him or her and save his or her life." These passages also suggest that blood must not be eaten or transfused. While physical ingestion of blood is explicitly deplored in these passages, the medical significance of a blood transfusion is not even mentioned. During the time that the Bible was written, the technology to store and transfuse blood was not available, and probably not even considered.

It seems that time and time again the line between faith and logic is tested. Technology has given us the capability to save lives and it's asinine to not embrace this truth. While giving one's life could be considered the ultimate act of devotion to one's beliefs, the ramifications of this sacrifice must be considered. Every person has the right to practice their religion how they see fit, but there is no value in unnecessary death whether it results from refusing a blood transfusion, becoming a suicide bomber or assassinating a doctor who performs abortions. Albert Einstein said it best when he stated: "True religion is real living; living with all one's soul, with all one's goodness and righteousness." Ultimately, faith can, at times, cause people to turn their back on our creator's greatest gift - life.

Treadway is a radio-television-film sophomore.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools