RE: Religious couple do it again

RE: Religious couple do it again (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/24/2013 11:11:10 AM)
Not a dime...couldn't even buy beer..... Ironic to get beer we had to drive into Utah. Go figure

cordeliasub -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/24/2013 2:28:04 PM)
This is horrible. I am a Christian, and I gladly give up my right to KILL my child through deluded, stubborn inaction. Taking a kid to church is one thing....watching them DIE is another. Anyone who can't get that distinction..... These parents are criminals.

tazzygirl -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/24/2013 7:06:14 PM)
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/101/4/625.abstract Conclusions. When faith healing is used to the exclusion of medical treatment, the number of preventable child fatalities and the associated suffering are substantial and warrant public concern. Existing laws may be inadequate to protect children from this form of medical neglect. ......... This is medical neglect.

tweakabelle -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 12:13:01 AM)
quote: tazzygirl This is medical neglect. Yes indeed. For me this disturbing case raises a few questions beyond that initial conclusion. There is no doubt that this particular twisted couple now have the deaths of two children on their consciences and records. Why haven’t their other children been taken from their ‘care’? By any standards, being the custody of parents like these two psychos is an unsafe environment for these children. If they are to remain under their parent’s care, then at the barest minimum full time nursing (and I mean 24/7) to ensure the remaining children survive their upbringing, is IMPERATIVE. It appears that the source of the problem is this sect’s particular interpretation of the Bible. Will this church be allowed to continue preaching this dangerous filth? Surely the church and preacher share some responsibility for this disaster. What steps are being taken to prevent this church continuing to preach outrageous notion? There is no mention of the reaction of other Christian sects to this killing. Have they been silent on this matter? If so why? One can imagine the furore if the parents had been Muslim ...... Do all members of this fanatical sect share this approach to child raising? If so how many other children are at risk? What steps are being taken to ensure their survival? Are people who believe this nonsense to be a religious obligation suitable for parenting? Freedom of religion is a cherished fundamental right - but there is no way that can be extended to include allowing innocent children to be put at risk of death because of their parent’s insane religious beliefs. That this was allowed to happen once is inexcusable, that it was allowed to happen twice is unforgivable. If it happens a third time (please forgive me for even thinking this) I will be thinking about killing these dangerous fanatical parents myself.

Real0ne -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 2:01:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl http://www.seattlepi.com/news/crime/article/2nd-child-of-Pa-couple-dies-after-only-praying-4455524.php At what point does religion start becoming worried about these children? "Whether their religion had anything to do with the death of their baby, we don't know." ___ Rubinkam reported from northeast Pennsylvania. Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/crime/article/2nd-child-of-Pa-couple-dies-after-only-praying-4455524.php#ixzz2RSpNF8yK

LafayetteLady -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 3:01:31 AM)
According to the article, the first child who died suffered symptoms that could be attributed to a cold, although when you can't get your child to eat for more than a day, a doctor visit is warranted. What I truly don't understand is that their probation dictated that the children be taken to the doctor. The attorney is aware of this particular child seeing a doctor at 10 days old, but knows nothing of other visits. The child was 8 months old when it died! It's one thing to not take your 8 year old to the doctor several times a year when they are healthy, but those first couple of years, your baby needs well care visits pretty frequently. Looks like probation and children's services dropped the ball on this one. Everyone keeps asking when will it stop. Well, I think charging the church and its ministers with the death would be a damn good way to bring it home. Yes, it can be a slippery slope of sorts, however this isn't listening to a rock and roll singer. A reasonable person expects to be able to get guidance from their priest, pastor, minister, reverend, rabbi, whichever your religion has. A reasonable person doesn't expect to get guidance from a rock band, athlete or celebrity. So there IS a difference. Let's see if those church authorities can continue to preach no medical intervention when they are facing murder charges.

muhly22222 -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 5:22:43 AM)
quote: Well, I think charging the church and its ministers with the death would be a damn good way to bring it home. Yes, it can be a slippery slope of sorts, however this isn't listening to a rock and roll singer. A reasonable person expects to be able to get guidance from their priest, pastor, minister, reverend, rabbi, whichever your religion has. A reasonable person doesn't expect to get guidance from a rock band, athlete or celebrity. So there IS a difference. Let's see if those church authorities can continue to preach no medical intervention when they are facing murder charges. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you in sentiment, but there are a lot of problems with doing that. First is causation. No matter what the pastor/minister/reverend taught, the parents made the decision to take it to such an extreme. While they received the spiritual guidance that led them to that conclusion from the minister, the minister did not make that decision for them, which means that the minister (arguably) wasn't the proximate cause of the child's death. Next up is freedom of speech. Like it or not, he does have a right to preach those teachings. We should expect adults to be able to listen to him and realize that "Don't take your children to the doctor when they're sick" is a stupid idea, and to ignore it. Punishing the minister because somebody listened to his idiotic ideas opens up all kinds of potentially unwanted legal results. There's also a problem with the freedom of religion. He has a right to refuse medical treatment because of his religious beliefs. The adults in his church have a right to do the same. It's a valid (though ridiculous) religious belief. Again, people need to use common sense, and we have to give them the chance to do that. The parents should be punished here, but I wouldn't go after the minister.

DomKen -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 6:59:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: muhly22222 quote: Well, I think charging the church and its ministers with the death would be a damn good way to bring it home. Yes, it can be a slippery slope of sorts, however this isn't listening to a rock and roll singer. A reasonable person expects to be able to get guidance from their priest, pastor, minister, reverend, rabbi, whichever your religion has. A reasonable person doesn't expect to get guidance from a rock band, athlete or celebrity. So there IS a difference. Let's see if those church authorities can continue to preach no medical intervention when they are facing murder charges. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you in sentiment, but there are a lot of problems with doing that. First is causation. No matter what the pastor/minister/reverend taught, the parents made the decision to take it to such an extreme. While they received the spiritual guidance that led them to that conclusion from the minister, the minister did not make that decision for them, which means that the minister (arguably) wasn't the proximate cause of the child's death. Next up is freedom of speech. Like it or not, he does have a right to preach those teachings. We should expect adults to be able to listen to him and realize that "Don't take your children to the doctor when they're sick" is a stupid idea, and to ignore it. Punishing the minister because somebody listened to his idiotic ideas opens up all kinds of potentially unwanted legal results. There's also a problem with the freedom of religion. He has a right to refuse medical treatment because of his religious beliefs. The adults in his church have a right to do the same. It's a valid (though ridiculous) religious belief. Again, people need to use common sense, and we have to give them the chance to do that. The parents should be punished here, but I wouldn't go after the minister. While you're right about all of that, could he not be prosecuted for his actions? In a previous case like this the preacher went to the child's home and exhorted the parents to "stay strong in their faith" and led prayers over the child as she died. Is that still free speech and assembly? It strikes me as awfully close to the "shouting fire in a crowded theater" type of speech.

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 9:13:59 AM)
Isn't there a precident for charging the preachers? I thought various hate groups like the KKK have had charges levied on them for advocating murder and violence. Unless these nuts were living not under but inside the rock they would have to have some notion that denial of medical care is dangerous. Therefore, they are willing advocating criminal behavior that could lead to bodily harm.

DomKen -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 10:40:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280 Isn't there a precident for charging the preachers? I thought various hate groups like the KKK have had charges levied on them for advocating murder and violence. People have been prosecuted for directly telling their followers to commit crimes, Manson is a prominent example.

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 11:05:26 AM)
So would you say that sets the stage for prosecuting the religious leaders if they are directly advocating denial of medical treatment?

DomKen -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 11:56:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280 So would you say that sets the stage for prosecuting the religious leaders if they are directly advocating denial of medical treatment? I'm not sure. It seems to be more of a grey area. Telling someone to follow their beliefs seems different than saying "go kill people."

Hillwilliam -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 12:15:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280 So would you say that sets the stage for prosecuting the religious leaders if they are directly advocating denial of medical treatment? I'm not sure. It seems to be more of a grey area. Telling someone to follow their beliefs seems different than saying "go kill people." If they are advising their flock to pray instead of calling in a professional, could they not be prosecuted for "Practicing medicine without a license"?

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 12:27:37 PM)
Well, one way or another, it is time to start slapping some of the blame on the leaders. At the bare minimum, this crap might not be preached at least. Could you imagine if the NRA started advocating never calling the cops? This religious sensitivity needs to be flushed. For everything from cult christians to islamist radicals, there comes a point were it is not 'part' of their faith, but just wrong-headed stupidity.

GotSteel -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 12:57:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: muhly22222 Next up is freedom of speech. Like it or not, he does have a right to preach those teachings. We should expect adults to be able to listen to him and realize that "Don't take your children to the doctor when they're sick" is a stupid idea, and to ignore it. Punishing the minister because somebody listened to his idiotic ideas opens up all kinds of potentially unwanted legal results. There are limitations to the first amendment, for instance the KKK can't legally tell people to go commit crimes against black people. That is speech which results in jail time. If their minister was telling them to neglect their kid I wonder if he could be found to be similarly culpable.

absolutchocolat -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 1:13:45 PM)
FR Usually, I don't believe in involuntary sterilization, but in their case, it seems necessary. Jesus Christ, they need straitjackets!

DomKen -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 3:37:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280 So would you say that sets the stage for prosecuting the religious leaders if they are directly advocating denial of medical treatment? I'm not sure. It seems to be more of a grey area. Telling someone to follow their beliefs seems different than saying "go kill people." If they are advising their flock to pray instead of calling in a professional, could they not be prosecuted for "Practicing medicine without a license"? Maybe? In a lot of states this stuff is actually explicitly legal. I don't know what is posible in those states that don't protect groups like this.

GotSteel -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 7:54:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Maybe? In a lot of states this stuff is actually explicitly legal. I don't know what is posible in those states that don't protect groups like this. quote: ORIGINAL: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-05-20-forced-chemo_N.htm Swan said in many cases religious exemptions in state law have discouraged prosecutors from filing charges and police from investigating cases....Swan said only five states —Hawaii, Nebraska, Massachusetts, Maryland and North Carolina— have no religious exemptions for child abuse and neglect in state civil or criminal codes.

Aswad -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 8:14:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML You can't be serious. The prime responsibility of a parent is the health, safety, and nurturing their child toward adulthood. Indoctrination? How Orwellian is that?[:-] Actually, it's the least Orwellian possibility out there. A human being without indoctrination is an ape with no restraints, no boundaries, no ability to survive, and most certainly no morals, culture, language, knowledge or reasoning. Indoctrination is indeed the prime responsibility of any parent, but parents often fail to reflect on this, partly because children learn by uncritical sublimation for much of their early life (see crosscultural studies of children's learning habits), and partly because they themselves don't know just how much of their whole identity, knowledge and skillset has been learned, and partly for other reasons not worth covering here. If you want to see what an adult human being looks like without indoctrination, have a look at late stage dementia, just before motor skills are lost. Hell, yes, it's the prime responsibility of any parent to make their child something more than that. Indoctrination is a technically correct term for it, because it's comprehensive and largely uncritical. What you mean is, parents should indoctrinate children, but not according to their own standards and beliefs. Then whose standards and beliefs should they use? Yours? The State's? The UN's? Either of those options is truly Orwellian. IWYW, — Aswad.

Aylee -> RE: Religious couple do it again (4/25/2013 8:30:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: muhly22222 quote: Well, I think charging the church and its ministers with the death would be a damn good way to bring it home. Yes, it can be a slippery slope of sorts, however this isn't listening to a rock and roll singer. A reasonable person expects to be able to get guidance from their priest, pastor, minister, reverend, rabbi, whichever your religion has. A reasonable person doesn't expect to get guidance from a rock band, athlete or celebrity. So there IS a difference. Let's see if those church authorities can continue to preach no medical intervention when they are facing murder charges. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you in sentiment, but there are a lot of problems with doing that. First is causation. No matter what the pastor/minister/reverend taught, the parents made the decision to take it to such an extreme. While they received the spiritual guidance that led them to that conclusion from the minister, the minister did not make that decision for them, which means that the minister (arguably) wasn't the proximate cause of the child's death. Next up is freedom of speech. Like it or not, he does have a right to preach those teachings. We should expect adults to be able to listen to him and realize that "Don't take your children to the doctor when they're sick" is a stupid idea, and to ignore it. Punishing the minister because somebody listened to his idiotic ideas opens up all kinds of potentially unwanted legal results. There's also a problem with the freedom of religion. He has a right to refuse medical treatment because of his religious beliefs. The adults in his church have a right to do the same. It's a valid (though ridiculous) religious belief. Again, people need to use common sense, and we have to give them the chance to do that. The parents should be punished here, but I wouldn't go after the minister. While you're right about all of that, could he not be prosecuted for his actions? In a previous case like this the preacher went to the child's home and exhorted the parents to "stay strong in their faith" and led prayers over the child as she died. Is that still free speech and assembly? It strikes me as awfully close to the "shouting fire in a crowded theater" type of speech. If we (the state) do prosecute the parents and the preacher, are we also going to start prosecuting parents, and those who advocate it, that fail to vaccinate their children? (Exceptions for those who are not able to be vaccinated.)

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875