I didn’t say it was different from what he was arguing. It was different from what YOU were arguing. That is why I quoted you. Atheist parents hoping a sick child will get better don’t have a shield law to protect them like praying religious parents do.
I agree, and I think it’s wrong. I think atheist parents should be offered the same legal protections. And, in reality, I think they are. There isn’t a law written about it because they’re not so likely to be prosecuted for it, not because they’re unlikely to let it happen.
An atheist parent who doesn’t take their kid to the hospital is seen as stupid by the coroner, and you and I never hear about it. A religious parent who doesn’t take their kid to the hospital is seen as criminal and ends up in the newspapers. Is *that *fair?
Are you kidding? Those people in the OP would problably be under criminal charges already if it weren’t for the shield law protecting their right to pray as a means of medical treatment. Maybe they’ll eventually be charged with something, I dunno, but atheists would SOL from word one.
No.
Malicious neglect rather than religious freedom, is what I’m thinking.
Also, I’m a she.
WhyNot, I really don’t think that a person mopping their child’s brow and hoping they’ll get better is the same as people praying over their child and having a certain expectation that they’ll get better. Hope is not the same as faith.
Excuse me. I was responding to Whynot saying to me, “That’s not what he’s arguing.” I didn’t even look to find out who he was, because I was responding to a comment directly from Whynot.
I knew you were femaile… I think we even met briefly at a Chi-Dope several years ago, but I could be misremembering.
Where Der Trihs (the “he” above) gets it wrong, I think, is in asserting that religion makes people illogical. People are not illogical because they’re religious. They’re religious because they’re illogical. Religion merely provides a convenient umbrella for the classification of illogical behavior. If religion weren’t available, they’d come up with something else to be illogical about, or some other means of justifying the illogic.
I’m not entirely sure that’s true. I think that religious people teach their children to suspend logical thinking in order to accept religious, er, “mysteries”. So it’s argueable that in those cases, at least, religion is the cause of illogic. And I know several people who, from everything I can tell, are totally rational beings, EXCEPT in their religious belief. I don’t buy that they have some kind of mental defect that would show up through some other avenue if they didn’t have religious faith. It seems to me this is more evidence that they learned this suspention of rational thought for certain subjects.
Touche. :smack:
I don’t think the atheist parents (or agnostic parents, or whatever parents) should be afforded the same legal protections; I think they should be taken away from the religious parents. Offering religious parents a carte blanche for allowing them to neglect/abuse their children to the point of death mightily offends me.
Offering the government the power to take away my kids because I educate myself and choose not to follow a human, fallible doctor’s advice (advice which is often controversial at the time or later research finds not helpful or even harmful) mightily offends me. The doctor is *my *tool, I am not his slave.
I don’t know if this situation is parallel, but I’m placed in sort of a “free speech means I’ll defend to the death your right to say horrible offensive things” position here. Do I agree with what these people did? Hell, no. Do I think they were morons who directly caused their daughter’s death when there are simple and affordable therapies that could have saved her life? Yes. But if I want the right to raise my kids the way I want, making my own medical decisions for them, then how can I approve of legal action against them? I don’t know.
If you think of it not as punishing them for their religious beliefs, but as them facing the consequences of that decision. I don’t believe the freedom of religion clause removes the possibility of suffering the consequences of your actions in the course of pursuing that religion. Like if a religion told you to starve your child to drive the devils out, you wouldn’t be exempt from murder charges. Freedom of religion doesn’t trump someone’s right to live.
Of course my dumbass state has that stupid clause in the child abuse/neglect law that allows parents to refuse medical treatment based on religious grounds. If this case goes to court, that will be tested, I’m assuming. I wouldn’t be surprised if it ended up in the State Supreme Court
I see no nuances. If your religious beliefs conflict with the health and wellbeing of your children, they are wrong. If the parents can not be trusted to make decisions which logically will keep their children healthy ,they should not be allowed to raise them.
Yes, you are allowed the freedom to raise your children as you see fit, but no, you aren’t allowed to do anything you please because you want to raise your children that way. I don’t really see any nuances either, but the state of Wisconsin obviously does.
I’ve been staying out of this thread. It’s still not clear that anything I add will be regarded as a contribution, and I’m not sure I’m ready to withstand the shredding I might be opening myself up to here in the pit but… Not only am I religious, I practice a religion which teaches spiritual healing. Six generations of my family have relied on prayer for healing. It has worked every time I’ve needed it. How is doing what’s worked for me and mine since the 19th century illogical? Why would a make a different choice for my son? I don’t suggest that anyone here should take up my religion, or any religion. But the U.S. Constitution says I can practice it freely, and several states have laws which further support that right.
I can’t imagine what the Neumanns are going through with the death of their daughter, and the legal and press scrutiny on top of that. I do not believe that the simple fact that they follow a religion which professes to teach faith healing automatically exempts them from culpability in Kara’s death. At the same time, the fact that they are religious shouldn’t open them to more or different scrutiny than parents who find themselves in the same dreadful circumstances who aren’t religious.
If a child died at home after parents sought medical care and it would not be Western Medicine that was investigated regarding responsibility for that child’s death. Children and adults who rely on prayer for healing sometimes die during treatment. Children and adults under the care of physicians sometimes die during treatment. Either way it’s sad, and in both cases sometimes it’s avoidable and sometimes it isn’t.
Fascinating. Some questions:
Do you think that a person with an illness who is “treated” by practicing your version of spiritual healing is just as likely to get better than than someone treated by medical practices verified by experimental methodology?
Why does God require one to pray for a sick child? Will God intervene on the behalf of a child who is prayed for more than He would for a child who is not prayed for?
What would your attitude be if a controlled study of medical science showed better results than prayer for the treatment of certain illnesses?
gwendee, I respect you and your beliefs, but I think you have been lucky so far with practicing faith healing rather than having illnesses treated, six generations or not. If you are ever involved in a situation like the Neumanns, I’ll be just as harsh in judging you as I am in judging them, and I trust that your local authorities will be, also. A diabetic child doesn’t need prayer; she needs injected insulin.
Your Fatwa is in the post. Please allow 7-10 working days for delivery.
She’s not dead, she’s pining for the fjords.
Yes. I have to or I couldn‘t effectively practice it
My concept of God does not require anything, and is not cognizant of us as individuals. I don’t see God as a cosmic accountant keeping track of who prays and who doesn’t, dispensing and withholding health or disease. When my son has some sort of symptoms I am not praying that God make a child who is sick well. My prayer is to be able to see his inherent wellness.
I’m not sure what such a study would look like. Medicine makes more of a distinction among diseases than what I practice. My method for treating a headache is essentially the same as how I’d treat poison ivy or a cold.
(bolding mine). This and DanBlather’s quotes around “treated” make me want to emphasize that praying for healing IS treatment. There are steps to follow and a methodology.
As for harsh judgement, by all means. All I’m asking is that you don’t ONLY judge religious parents harshly. ALL parents should be equally accountable for the care they give their children.