We have all seen the JW's throw their favorite blood scripture into the debate:
"You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell." Acts 15:29
This is quoted from the New International Version (NIV), which I will use throughout, though it shouldn't make much difference. Anyway, the JW say that this proves that blood transfusions are prohibited by God, since you do not abstain from blood, if you have a blood transfusion.
Of course, this is not what the scripture really says. So let's investigate, what the JW's read into this scripture, that is opposed to it's real meaning:
_________________________________________________
JW's assume, that this scripture states a universal rule or law, that all believers are to adhere to. But that is simply not true. The whole question arose, because som christian jews came from Judea to Antioch, and began telling the non-jewish believers in Antioch they had to be(come) circumcised according to the law of Moses to be saved (Acts 15:1). After a lot of dispute (Acts 15:2) they sent a delegation to Jerusalem to get this sorted out. In Jerusalem som pharisean jews again claimed the non-jewish christians had to obey everything in the law of Moses (Acts 15:5).
* Some background information, about what is really going on here: The first christians were jews, and some of them belonged to the pharisean part (sect) of the jews - a sect, that required strict obediance to the law as a requisite from God. Later, non-jews became christians too, which was a great problem to many of the jews, since they customarily viewed non-jews as ungodly and unclean. This was especially true of the pharisean christians. So this place really is about the jews requiring, that the non-jewish christians at least start acting as jews. *
Anyway: There was a lot of discussion at the meeting at Jerusalem (Acts 15:5-20). As a result, it was decided to send a letter back to Antioch (in Syria) with the following wording:
"The apostles and elders, your brothers, To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia: Greetings. 24We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— 26men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. 28It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell." Acts 15:23-29
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts%2015;&version=31;
What is imideately noticed is, that this was not a letter sent to every Christian congregation. No, it was sent from the christian jews in Jerusalem to the non-christian jews in Antioch - it was a local compromise, created by the two quarreling parties, namely the christians at Antioch and the Christian jews in Judea.
So the first serious mistake in the JW explanations following this scripture is, that they assume it was a general rule sent forth from a centralised governing body to the whole mass of christians in the whole world. But the reality is, that it was a local solution created to fix a local quarrel or problem.
_________________________________________________
If the JW's were right, that Acts 15:29 represent a general information about how christians should live, then why did Paul give counsel which directly opposed the compromise the christians in Antioch were to live by:
"You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell." Acts 15:29
This doesn't only talk about abstaning from blood, it also (among others) talks about abstaining "from food sacrificed to idols". Now obviously, the christians in Antioch would then abstain from food sacrificed to idols, since this was part of the compromise reached at the meeting in Jerusalem. Paul had himself been part of reaching this compromise, and he had himself (Acts 15:25) read the letter out loud to his congregation at Antioch.
But to the non-jewish christians at Corinth, Paul gave opposing advice. They were free to eat food sacrificed to idols. This proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the letter that was sent to Antioch does not constitute a general rule of living, that all christians were to live by. Obviously everybody were to live chaste, since this is attested elsewhere in scripture, but one cannot assume Acts 15:29 constitute a general ban on blood for all christians, since such a ban is not described elsewhere in the New Testament. The proof: abstaning from food sacrifices to idols was not a general ban either:
"But not everyone knows this. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat such food they think of it as having been sacrificed to an idol, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.
Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak. For if anyone with a weak conscience sees you who have this knowledge eating in an idol's temple, won't he be emboldened to eat what has been sacrificed to idols? So this weak brother, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. When you sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to fall." 1. Cor 8:7-13
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20cor%208;&version=31;
So the christians in Corinth were allowed to eat food sacrificed to idols (Paul also in chapter 10 tells them, they can eat any food bought at the meat market, which would include meat sacrificed to idols, since the sacrificed meat were later sold at the common meat market).
Why were the christians in Corinth allowed to eat food sacrificed to idols, while the christians in Antioch were not? Because the agreement described in Acts 15:29 is not a general law all christians are to abide by, but a local agreement reached between the christians from Jerusalem and Antioch. Notice, that Paul advices the christians in Corinth to abstain from idol food, because eating it may be disturbing to fellow christians: Paul completely understood the value of compromise with others, and he himself had been an important part of reaching the compromise between the jewish christians and Jerusalem and those from his own congregation at Antioch.
Nowhere in the New Testament is there a general ban on blood, because the was no general ban on blood among the first christians. Actually, the ban on idol food was a nessessity, when the compromise between the Antioch and Jerusalem congregations were reached, since eating meat offered to idols would imply eating meat containing blood. So since part of the agreement was to abstain from blood, they also logically had to abstain from meat offered to idols.
But the christians in Corinth did not have such an agreement, and could therefore eat idol meat: that would imply eating meat containing blood. So just as the ban on blood for christians in Antioch implied abstaning from idol meat, the eating of idol meat in Corinth implied, that they did actually eat meat with the blood. That is the reason, that no general ban on blood is found in the New Testament: because they did not have such a general ban. Quite to the contrary, we know the christians at Corinth ate idol meat, thus not abstaining from either blood nor idol food.
_________________________________________________________
So how compromising should a person be toward a JW spouse, who wishes to ban his child from a life-saving blood transfusion? She shouldn't compromise at all!!! We are talking life and death now, not reaching a compromise about eating food with og without blood - or eating food with a religious past we do not adhere to. There is a time to compromise, and a time not to compromise (Eccl 3:1-8). One is allowed to break the sabbath to save an animal or a person from death, but there is no excuse for letting a child die because of religious superstition.
On the other hand - if a blood transfusion is only about maximizing comfort for the patient, then one may reach some sort of compromise with a JW spouse, but do not let yourself be fooled: let the doctor be the expert, not the JW's who will say anything to have your child avoid blood.
JW's often carry a blood card explaining, that they wish to abstain from blood, no matter what the consequences. If you are to live with a JW spouse, I recommend a similar card for yourself: that under no circumstances do you wish to have family or friends prohibit treatment (of you or any of your children) recommended by the treating doctor in charge. That way JW's will not be able to stop you or your children from having life-saving blood treatment, despite any legal attempts from JW or your husband.
I admit, that is a radical step, but JW is a radical sect, that will take radical measures, when it comes to the blood question.