No, it’s not. It’s a science, and science is based on the assumption of there being one objective reality.
Sincere question: how do the Theories of Relativity describe objective reality?
As I said before, it would be a shame if the parents’ beliefs harmed their child, but that happens all the time whether the beliefs in question involve a deity or not. I’m going to be just a little stubborn about this, if only because so much of the recent evidence with respect to this case seems to have been offered or collected with a particular viewpoint in mind. These people do not fit the mold of religious fanatics who would readily sacrifice their child for the sake of an abstraction, and that makes me a bit distrustful of those who would paint them in those colors.
Sometimes people shun medicine because of their religion, and sometimes people embrace a religious approach to injury and disease because they perceive medical avenues have already been closed to them. Sometimes, foregoing a trip to the doctor is just another decision, weighing an imperfect understanding of economics and probabilities and pediatrics and clinical diagnostics against a very real if unquantified understanding of one’s own (temporal and financial and physical and emotional and spiritual and what else have you got?) limitations.
Parents should not substitute faith for science, and the more I learn the more I think that’s what might have happened here. But religious parents who offer prayer are not more blameworthy than atheist parents who offer their sincerest hopes – they’re just a bigger target.
I must respectfully disagree that this is exactly what they did. I give them full marks for having the strength of their convictions and not wavering even in the face of their daughter lapsing into a coma, but their daughter is needlessly dead because they chose faith over reality.
Are you reading the same articles I am? If you could point out any bias evident in the articles presented, I’d be astonished to see it. On top of that, all the statements offered by Police Chief Vergin have been factual, and far from castigating the parents. In fact, the Wausau Daily Herald has run an editorial asking the public to refrain from condeming the Neumanns until more evidence has been gathered.
Their daughter was in a coma for at least a day, and unable to walk or talk before that. They didn’t call 911 until she stopped breathing. Who in their right minds does not contact a doctor when their child is too weak to talk or becomes unresponsive after a week of failing health? Either they’re negligent or stupid.
This situation is much larger than not taking your kid to the doctor when you slam their fingers in the car door or asking God for guidance while undergoing chemotherapy.
I don’t think I’ve ever suggested that their negligence makes them more blameworthy than an atheist who does something similar. I do believe, however, that you’d be less likely to find an atheist who would ignore their child’s needs to such an extent and in such a manner. There’s no defense for their actions. Or inaction, whichever you’d like to choose.
The Neumann’s beliefs are in the minority among Christians, you know. It’s one thing to pray for someone as they undergo treatment or seek solace in prayer. As a person who has no faith, I’m OK with that; if it brings you comfort, go for it. It’s an entirely different thing to ignore medicine entirely and rely completely on prayer. The response from people of faith I’ve been hearing is that God created doctors, too, so the faithful should use them. The Neumanns are way out in left field somewhere, ignoring the bounty their God has put in front of them. The bounty that includes modern medicine, by the way.
Because as far as the data shows, they describe what the world is actually like ? What’s your point ?
:rolleyes: Atheist parents aren’t at all likely to DO that because of atheism. Atheism isn’t full of delusions about how the world works, nor does it demand the denial of reality - religion does. And what makes you think the religious parents are a bigger target, in a nation that loathes atheists ?
And religious people who offer prayer in place of something that might actually work are to blame.
Yeah, I trusted a former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice in this incidence. 
I’ve no idea! I’d assume, like hekk, that is was a relic of the Cold War era, but it doesn’t seem to be in the same spirit of “God-iness” as sticking “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, but I’m also not sure when it was voted into law. I trust my state representatives not to be moronic douches, but I used to be represented by Steve Freese, so even bad things can happen in a state mostly populated by reasonable people. Wisconsin is very much a state the believes “God helps those who help themselves,” so I can’t really see it as a whole being in favor of such a law.
I assume that’s what happened in this case in Milwaukee, where an autistic boy was smothered during an exorcism to cure his autism via demon eviction. I’m sure there’s plenty of differences between those cases, though, since the person convicted wasn’t the boy’s father, but was asked by his mother to perform the exorcism. The mother didn’t have any charges filed against her, if I remember correctly.
I think this would be a good time to start writing letters to our legislators and the governor, Wisconsin Dopers.
Maybe she’s being tapped as the patroin saint of fellatio. Or is there already one? Where would you go to look that up?
No, everyone knows God is a boy-fucker.
Let’s not quibble. People of all faiths and genders can suck a dick. It could be such a great unifier!
Scientology, too.
“Your reality is already half video hallucination.”
There seem to be two different sorts of religious belivers: those whose belief is strong enought that they make potentially life-altering decisions based on it, and those who just believe enough to put off thinking critically about the implications of their faith. The former are mentally ill, the latter are just mistaken.
When I said that evidence seems to have been adduced according to a particular viewpoint, one of the things I was thinking about was the girl’s coma, which originated as a suggestion to police that she “may have” gone into a coma by relatives who were not present and whose relationship with the parents may have been strained, at least partly over their religious beliefs, and quickly became established fact in message board discussions.
Let me be clear: I’ve seen enough to agree that the girl was very poorly served by her parent’s decisions, and it’s not the first time that prayer has been matched against diabetes and come up short. And the law that allows parents to utilize prayer alone to fulfill their obligation to protect children from harm strikes me as unconstitutional (the law basically requires secular authority to judge what words and actions constitute legitimate prayer) as well as just plain stupid. What prayer substitutes for seat belts, which for food and shelter, and what hymns are good for protection against eating lead paint chips and breathing asbestos? It seems to provide an unfalsifiable defense for negligent and irresponsible parents. I find it interesting, in fact, that these parents are running away from this defense as fast as they can (the way the law is worded, I suppose it does still protect parents whose religion does not decry medical intervention but who substitute prayer anyway, but it’s definitely not the way to appear sympathetic when using it).
So far as I can tell, atheism isn’t full of delusion because it isn’t full of anything – there’s not only no prize in the bag, there’s not even a bag. There’s no rule that says anyone has to fill the gap left by religion with wisdom. The religious delusion is that to commit error in the name of God is not still error. The atheist delusion is that denying God eliminates the error. These parents were irresponsible and religious. Neither better religion nor a lack of religion would have improved their parenting one bit.
Uh, since she died of ketoacidosis, there’s no doubt that she went into a coma at some point, and was very ill before that. There’s a pretty standard progression of events when it comes to ketoacidosis, and there was nothing to suggest that her experience didn’t match that process. If you have proof otherwise, please share it. I would be very surprised to read it.
Of course, the evidence, as reported by her parents, has since indicated that she was unable to walk and talk the day before she died, so . . . the end result is the same. Her parents didn’t acknowledge the seriousness of the situation.
Can you explain what you mean by this? To me, atheism is the use of logic and reasoning over obedience to a code of religious law written on the assumption that there is a god or gods. Your statement makes atheists sound like nihilists, which isn’t quite right.
I believe that a lack of religion would probably have made them less likely to depend on prayer or similar measures as a method of healing, so the situation would never have arisen. I suppose they could have used aromatherapy or rikki massage as a treatment or something, and the result would have been the same.
What I think you’re saying is that the error doesn’t lie within in their faith, but within themselves. Their actions were based upon their beliefs, though. Religion as a whole isn’t at fault, just their very specific set of beliefs. This doesn’t mean that all religions should be repudiated, just that their specific religion/belief set led them down a terrible path.
I haven’t read this entire thread so excuse me if this point was already made, but:
If religion wasn’t involved couldn’t you make a case for child endangerment or at least neglect? If this isn’t a freedom of religion question wouldn’t Child Protection Services be sniffing around?
I believe it was already mentioned that the local authorities are considering filing charges against the family.
Yep. From this article from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
We won’t know if there are any charges until the investigation is completed and the district attorney reviews the evidence.
The problem is that they had just as much justification for their belief as any other religion; i.e., none. That is not true for things like medicine, physics, geology, or even economics. The facts and theories behind those can be examined and alternate conclusions can be compared.
That is not true of religious belief. I am sure these parents were sincere in their belief, as are people who believe in one of the thousands of other faiths in the world.
When I gave up my religious belief I realized that I had no more evidence that my religious upbringing was the true one, and that if all the people who believed in their own faith were mistaken, then the chances are I that was mistaken as well.
So, to me that means it’s not the parents’ “specific religion/belief set” that was wrong, it is the nature of faith itself. Blind faith allows people to justify truly crazy things like nailing themselves to crosses, flogging themselves til they bleed, denying certain sexual pleasures, and endangering their children. If you can forgo consuming pork for religious (as opposed to cultural) reasons then it is not further to endanger your children by denying them medical care.
I’m sorry, Dan, but I don’t like making blanket statements like that with regards to religion, hence the reason I describe myself as an agnostic and not an atheist. There are too many nuances in the world to do that, and blanket statements are by their nature black and white.
There are plenty of religions that accept with open arms medicine and science, which demonstrates to me that you can still have faith and critical thinking skills. Most people of faith do not use their faith as a shield for their mistakes, in my experience.
I know that there are great religions (like UU for one) and tons of very intelligent religious people. There are also lots of nasty, dumb atheists. The point I am trying to make (admittedly not well) is that it is the nature of religious “faith” itself that is a problem. That is the mechanism by which a brilliant physicist can convolute his thinking to defend a 6,000 year-old earth or a loving parent can watch as their child dies and not summon a doctor.