PDA

View Full Version : These "parents" should face criminal charges


Pages : [1] 2

DaneMcCloud
03-27-2008, 08:12 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080328/ap_on_re_us/daughter_s_death_prayer

Parents pick prayer over docs; girl dies

WESTON, Wis. - Police are investigating an 11-year-old girl's death from an undiagnosed, treatable form of diabetes after her parents chose to pray for her rather than take her to a doctor.

An autopsy showed Madeline Neumann died Sunday of diabetic ketoacidosis, a condition that left too little insulin in her body, Everest Metro Police Chief Dan Vergin said.

She had probably been ill for about a month, suffering symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, excessive thirst, loss of appetite and weakness, the chief said Wednesday, noting that he expects to complete the investigation by Friday and forward the results to the district attorney.

The girl's mother, Leilani Neumann, said that she and her family believe in the Bible and that healing comes from God, but that they do not belong to an organized religion or faith, are not fanatics and have nothing against doctors.

She insisted her youngest child, a wiry girl known to wear her straight brown hair in a ponytail, was in good health until recently.

"We just noticed a tiredness within the past two weeks," she said Wednesday. "And then just the day before and that day (she died), it suddenly just went to a more serious situation. We stayed fast in prayer then. We believed that she would recover. We saw signs that to us, it looked like she was recovering."

Her daughter — who hadn't seen a doctor since she got some shots as a 3-year-old, according to Vergin — had no fever and there was warmth in her body, she said.

The girl's father, Dale Neumann, a former police officer, said he started CPR "as soon as the breath of life left" his daughter's body.

Family members elsewhere called authorities to seek help for the girl.

"My sister-in-law, she's very religious, she believes in faith instead of doctors ...," the girl's aunt told a sheriff's dispatcher Sunday afternoon in a call from California. "And she called my mother-in-law today ... and she explained to us that she believes her daughter's in a coma now and she's relying on faith."

The dispatcher got more information from the caller and asked whether an ambulance should be sent.

"Please," the woman replied. "I mean, she's refusing. She's going to fight it. ... We've been trying to get her to take her to the hospital for a week, a few days now."

The aunt called back with more information on the family's location, emergency logs show. Family friends also made a 911 call from the home. Police and paramedics arrived within minutes and immediately called for an ambulance that took her to a hospital.

But less than an hour after authorities reached the home, Madeline — a bright student who left public school for home schooling this semester — was declared dead.

She is survived by her parents and three older siblings.

"We are remaining strong for our children," Leilani Neumann said. "Only our faith in God is giving us strength at this time."

The Neumanns said they moved from California to a modern, middle-class home in woodsy Weston, just outside Wassau in central Wisconsin, about two years ago to open a coffee shop and be closer to other relatives. A basketball hoop is set up in the driveway.

Leilani Neumann said she and her husband are not worried about the investigation because "our lives are in God's hands. We know we did not do anything criminal. We know we did the best for our daughter we knew how to do."

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-27-2008, 08:27 PM
It's all part of God's plan, Dane.

ChiefsFan4Life
03-27-2008, 08:28 PM
They chose a fairy tale over their daughter's life - nice

MIAdragon
03-27-2008, 08:29 PM
Wow I hope they take those 3 other kids away ASAP.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 08:32 PM
Madeline — a bright student who left public school for home schooling this semester — was declared dead.

Dammit. A school nurse would have picked up on this immediately. Just stupid. Just so ****ing stupid.

And the mother is lying when she says there were signs of improvement. It's all downhill. Just a damned lie. Damn ignorant fools.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 08:35 PM
Freedom of Religion is part of our country.

They get to choose whether they go to a doctor.

It's a bad thing that happened but there isn't anything that should be done about it.

What I'm saying is that you can't have it both ways.

The next thing you know the government will make all of your decisions for you and also take all of your stuff to distribute to others .. you know, like Hillary and Obama want to do.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 08:39 PM
It's a bad thing that happened but there isn't anything that should be done about it.

Like hell there isn't! Lock these morons up and take their children away, IMMEDIATELY.

CrazyPhuD
03-27-2008, 08:44 PM
So does this decide the Darwinism over Intelligent design argument?

Frazod
03-27-2008, 08:47 PM
At least when psychos kill their own kids by being psychos, they're doing their part to rid themselves from the gene pool. Perhaps we should grease the other three and then spay and neuter mom and dad, all in the Name Of God, of course.

:shake:

a1na2
03-27-2008, 08:47 PM
Like hell there isn't! Lock these morons up and take their children away, IMMEDIATELY.

In doing so you would be removing their right to practice religion the way they see fit.

It's a catch 22 and they would win in a court of law.

I work with a guy that almost died last fall because he does not believe in doctors. We have talked to him and tried to reason out why he should have gone to a doctor. He was down for a couple of months. He is pretty much recovered now, but we asked him what he would do if his kid broke his arm. He said that he would set it to the best of his ability and pray for him.

That is just an area that is best left alone. I worry about my family and my situation, I can't, we can't, be the judgment seat for those that believe differently than we do. Look at what is going on everywhere else!

It's a no win situation.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 08:48 PM
So does this decide the Darwinism over Intelligent design argument?

If it does for you I think you are the only one.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 08:50 PM
In doing so you would be removing their right to practice religion the way they see fit.


You're damn right I would be. And if your religion called for you to kill all homosexuals, or all white people over 42 years of age, guess what? I'd fight like hell to remove your right to practice religion the way you want to, and I wouldn't feel one damn bit bad about it.

They can practice this "religion" in a lonely 6 by 6 cell room for about 40 years.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 08:53 PM
You're damn right I would be. And if your religion called for you to kill all homosexuals, or all white people over 42 years of age, guess what? I'd fight like hell to remove your right to practice religion the way you want to, and I wouldn't feel one damn bit bad about it.

They can practice this "religion" in a lonely 6 by 6 cell room for about 40 years.

But their religion does not tell them to go out and kill. It tells them to trust God for what they need.

In this one you are just wrong.

What other freedoms would you be willing to take away from people just because you don't understand their belief or like the way they do things?

You are setting a bad precedent.

BigVE
03-27-2008, 08:54 PM
Eh, if your a christian and a person who believes in the bible this is not acceptable as a parent IMO.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 08:55 PM
Eh, if your a christian and a person who believes in the bible this is not acceptable as a parent IMO.

I don't think we get to make that judgment. JMO, but I'm pretty sure my opinion goes with the "laws of the land".

BigVE
03-27-2008, 08:59 PM
I don't think we get to make that judgment. JMO, but I'm pretty sure my opinion goes with the "laws of the land".

Maybe. I'm saying it's like your drowning and begging God for a lifeboat but your too ignorant to climb in. Dr.'s are here to help and to NOT utilize basic medical care COULD be ignoring what a person is praying for IMO.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 08:59 PM
But their religion does not tell them to go out and kill. It tells them to trust God for what they need.

In this one you are just wrong.

I'm not wrong one bit!

These people are bad parents. They have no ****ing sense. They let their daughter die, because they did not take care of her. They should have, you know, "took care of the sick" - didn't Jesus say that. They sound like some sort of Christian - so they would appreciate that.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 09:00 PM
You are setting a bad precedent.

Nope. Punishing stupid, bad parents and taking their children away is a good precedent. Very good, indeed.

MIAdragon
03-27-2008, 09:01 PM
Freedom of Religion is part of our country.

They get to choose whether they go to a doctor.

It's a bad thing that happened but there isn't anything that should be done about it.

What I'm saying is that you can't have it both ways.

The next thing you know the government will make all of your decisions for you and also take all of your stuff to distribute to others .. you know, like Hillary and Obama want to do.

really with holding proper medical care is OK!?!?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

BigVE
03-27-2008, 09:04 PM
really with holding proper medical care is OK!?!?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

Dude, your NORTH Cuban, what do you know about proper medical care????



lol, love the avatar.

mikey23545
03-27-2008, 09:06 PM
But their religion does not tell them to go out and kill. It tells them to trust God for what they need.

In this one you are just wrong.

What other freedoms would you be willing to take away from people just because you don't understand their belief or like the way they do things?

You are setting a bad precedent.

You are crazier than a shithouse rat.

When it comes to endangering minors in their custody, they should have no rights whatsoever. If they want to kill themselves with their fairytale beliefs, or can convince those above the age of consent to follow their insane little cult, so be it. But to sentence a child whose welfare has been entrusted to you to die for your foolish, wicked beliefs, we should expedite their journey to "Heaven".

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 09:08 PM
Like hell there isn't! Lock these morons up and take their children away, IMMEDIATELY.

do not feed the trolls!

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:08 PM
I'm not wrong one bit!

These people are bad parents. They have no ****ing sense. They let their daughter die, because they did not take care of her. They should have, you know, "took care of the sick" - didn't Jesus say that. They sound like some sort of Christian - so they would appreciate that.

Do you believe that God/Jesus can heal you? It's a question of faith, their faith not yours.

You are wrong here. I do not think that we can do anything. But then we allow people to kill children every day in abortion clinics. Shouldn't they be put away for their crimes?

The courts have already said that it's ok to let babies die by the thousands a day or week, whatever the count is.

These people had a sincere belief that God was going to answer their prayers and heal their kid.

I go to doctors because that's the way my religion is formed. God put "tools" here to help us and doctors are some of those tools.

We can argue all night but you are not going to convince me that those people should be punished for exercising their right to believe in their religion.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:09 PM
You are crazier than a shithouse rat.

When it comes to endangering minors in their custody, they should have no rights whatsoever. If they want to kill themselves with their fairytale beliefs, or can convince those above the age of consent to follow their insane little cult, so be it. But to sentence a child whose welfare has been entrusted to you to die for your foolish, wicked beliefs, we should expedite their journey to "Heaven".

Nice comeback, you don't have anything productive to say so you insult and throw out information that has no base. These people were not doing anything against the law.

Let it play out and see if the authorities do it. I doubt that they will, it's a no win situation.

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 09:11 PM
Just FYI this kind of "healing" has been banned in colorado because of this

BigVE
03-27-2008, 09:11 PM
Do you believe that God/Jesus can heal you? It's a question of faith, their faith not yours.

You are wrong here. I do not think that we can do anything. But then we allow people to kill children every day in abortion clinics. Shouldn't they be put away for their crimes?

The courts have already said that it's ok to let babies die by the thousands a day or week, whatever the count is.

These people had a sincere belief that God was going to answer their prayers and heal their kid.

I go to doctors because that's the way my religion is formed. God put "tools" here to help us and doctors are some of those tools.

We can argue all night but you are not going to convince me that those people should be punished for exercising their right to believe in their religion.
Dude, I'm a christian, I'm religious and I agree with you to a point but one thing needs to be addressed with your statement here: the American "way" with our rights and freedoms is NOT the only "right" way. What are you saying...God is AMERICAN and supports OUR bill or rights???? dont think so.

MIAdragon
03-27-2008, 09:12 PM
Freedom of Religion is part of our country.

They get to choose whether they go to a doctor.

It's a bad thing that happened but there isn't anything that should be done about it.

What I'm saying is that you can't have it both ways.

The next thing you know the government will make all of your decisions for you and also take all of your stuff to distribute to others .. you know, like Hillary and Obama want to do.

If you are an adult and want to forgo proper medical care and take your chances so be it but to force a minor to the same should be a crime and I think it is.
<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
Does anyone remember the couple who forced a baby to follow a vegan diet and it died? I think they both received lengthy prison sentences.

I found it.


"Crown, a 3 1/2 pound vegan infant, starved to death on a diet (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/235539/theme/1363/diet.html) which primarily consisted of soy milk and apple (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/235539/theme/1521/apple.html) juice. At the tender age (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/235539/theme/1516/age.html) of 6 weeks, Crown's death came far too soon. The vegan lifestyle his parents (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/235539/theme/1438/parents.html) opted for in attempts to promote a healthy (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/235539/theme/1404/for_your_health.html) life ironically caused his early demise.

Vegan parents, Jade Sanders, 27, and Lamont Thomas, 31, have been found guilty of malice murder, felony murder and first degree cruelty to children. The first time parents (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/235539/theme/1438/parents.html) received a life sentence for their son's death. The jury deliberated 7 hours before returning with the verdict."<O:p</O:p

Third Eye
03-27-2008, 09:14 PM
Freedom of Religion is part of our country.

They get to choose whether they go to a doctor.

It's a bad thing that happened but there isn't anything that should be done about it.

What I'm saying is that you can't have it both ways.

The next thing you know the government will make all of your decisions for you and also take all of your stuff to distribute to others .. you know, like Hillary and Obama want to do.

Actually, no. You have these rights only so long as they don't interfere with someone else's rights. It should be, don't know if it will be simply because of its sensitive nature, the same as yelling "Fire" in a packed theater. Sure you have the right to free speech, but once you endanger someone else you forfeit said right.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:16 PM
Actually, no. You have these rights only so long as they don't interfere with someone else's rights. It should be, don't know if it will be simply because of its sensitive nature, the same as yelling "Fire" in a packed theater. Sure you have the right to free speech, but once you endanger someone else you forfeit said right.

I don't think that goes into the family unit. I agree with what you say, but inside your own family I don't think there is precedent for arguing that in court. It wouldn't even take a good lawyer to win a case like that.

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 09:16 PM
Faith-Healing Couple Sentenced

Dennis and Lorie Nixon were sentenced in early June to 2-1/2 to 5 years each in prison for the death of their daughter, Shannon, 16, who succumbed to treatable complications from diabetes in June 1996 when her parents followed their church's faith-healing doctrine rather than summoning medical help.
The Nixons were convicted of involuntary manslaughter and child endangerment in April for the death of their second child due to faith-healing practices. The Nixons previously pleaded no contest and were given probation for the 1991 death of their son, Clayton, 8, who died of an untreated ear infection.

Mrs. Nixon, 44, was due to give birth to her eleventh child in July. Blair County Judge Norman Callan has ordered social workers to visit the Nixons' home monthly to protect the remaining children.

mikey23545
03-27-2008, 09:16 PM
Nice comeback, you don't have anything productive to say so you insult and throw out information that has no base. These people were not doing anything against the law.

Let it play out and see if the authorities do it. I doubt that they will, it's a no win situation.

Did you even read my post? Do you not have a shred of decency or compassion in you, or has your "loving" God ripped the last vestiges of humanity right out of you?

As I said, if adults want to be so retarded as to sentence themselves to death, fine. Are you saying that you feel it is also fine for them to do the same to children who themselves are too young to know what is right?

What a sick faith you follow....

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:18 PM
Dude, I'm a christian, I'm religious and I agree with you to a point but one thing needs to be addressed with your statement here: the American "way" with our rights and freedoms is NOT the only "right" way. What are you saying...God is AMERICAN and supports OUR bill or rights???? dont think so.

I'm not sure where you got that, but what I'm saying is that we AS AMERICANS, have some undeniable rights and one of those rights is to practice our religion as we see fit. This has nothing to do with the religion part of the equation but the freedoms that we enjoy as Americans.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 09:19 PM
We can argue all night but you are not going to convince me that those people should be punished for exercising their right to believe in their religion.

Maybe you should sleep on this over the night. Because this is not sane. This is stupidity and a disregard for any good common sense, decency and humanity. A little girl is dead because her parents sat around and did not call a doctor and get help for her when she was clearly sick. Unbelievable!! No one would support them just walking away!!! NO SANE PERSON!!! This is not a freedom of religion argument. This is watching a child die!!

MIAdragon
03-27-2008, 09:20 PM
I'm not sure where you got that, but what I'm saying is that we AS AMERICANS, have some undeniable rights and one of those rights is to practice our religion as we see fit. This has nothing to do with the religion part of the equation but the freedoms that we enjoy as Americans.

Not if it leads to DEATH!?!?

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:20 PM
Did you even read my post? Do you not have a shred of decency or compassion in you, or has your "loving" God ripped the last vestiges of humanity right out of you?

As I said, if adults want to be so retarded as to sentence themselves to death, fine. Are you saying that you feel it is also fine for them to do the same to children who themselves are too young to know what is right?

What a sick faith you follow....

Considering your statement you wouldn't know faith if it came up and kicked you in the balls.

You have no concept of what is being discussed. All you can do is lower insults and call people names. Try, just this once, to explain what you think you know so we can all understand your basis of belief.

What is my faith? You seem to have the thought that you know exactly where I am. Spill it out dude. I want to know just what you feel is fact about what I believe and what I do not believe.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:22 PM
Not if it leads to DEATH!?!?

I'm sure that nobody in this country has ever died because of a mis-belief or a mistake.

You guys are trying to levy criminal law against someone that was living their life the way we all have the opportunity to do.

All I can see here is another stair step for those that have no religion, or do not have the capacity to understand religion, to jump on their soapbox and decry the whole concept.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:23 PM
Maybe you should sleep on this over the night. Because this is not sane. This is stupidity and a disregard for any good common sense, decency and humanity. A little girl is dead because her parents sat around and did not call a doctor and get help for her when she was clearly sick. Unbelievable!! No one would support them just walking away!!! NO SANE PERSON!!! This is not a freedom of religion argument. This is watching a child die!!

Do you believe that God can heal a human being? If so, why is it that a family that has a sick child cannot believe the same thing for that child?

BigVE
03-27-2008, 09:24 PM
I'm not sure where you got that, but what I'm saying is that we AS AMERICANS, have some undeniable rights and one of those rights is to practice our religion as we see fit. This has nothing to do with the religion part of the equation but the freedoms that we enjoy as Americans.


Dude, that is exactly what the issue is. They have been brought together by these people and by you thus the comparison. Using our "rights' to support your religious faith brings this into question.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:26 PM
Faith-Healing Couple Sentenced

Dennis and Lorie Nixon were sentenced in early June to 2-1/2 to 5 years each in prison for the death of their daughter, Shannon, 16, who succumbed to treatable complications from diabetes in June 1996 when her parents followed their church's faith-healing doctrine rather than summoning medical help.
The Nixons were convicted of involuntary manslaughter and child endangerment in April for the death of their second child due to faith-healing practices. The Nixons previously pleaded no contest and were given probation for the 1991 death of their son, Clayton, 8, who died of an untreated ear infection.

Mrs. Nixon, 44, was due to give birth to her eleventh child in July. Blair County Judge Norman Callan has ordered social workers to visit the Nixons' home monthly to protect the remaining children.

Link?

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 09:27 PM
You guys are trying to levy criminal law against someone that was living their life the way we all have the opportunity to do.

And glad to do so!! We actually don't all have the opportunity to go around letting our children die when we could be saving their lives. Because you get thrown in jail for a long time because of that. For instance, if my wife and I had a baby, we could not thrown it in the crib and pray that God takes care of it while we are on vacation. That's just wrong. And other adjectives.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:27 PM
Dude, that is exactly what the issue is. They have been brought together by these people and by you thus the comparison. Using our "rights' to support your religious faith brings this into question.


Either we have freedom to practice our religion as we see fit or we don't. If we don't the constitution is null and void. This country was founded on the basis of freedom of religion. You might want to go back and check the original documents to verify that.

MIAdragon
03-27-2008, 09:27 PM
I'm sure that nobody in this country has ever died because of a mis-belief or a mistake.

You guys are trying to levy criminal law against someone that was living their life the way we all have the opportunity to do.

All I can see here is another stair step for those that have no religion, or do not have the capacity to understand religion, to jump on their soapbox and decry the whole concept.

Brother Im about as relgious as they come but come on now this is nothing more than nelgect as a parent religous or not you HAVE to explore every option when it comes to your children.

Swanman
03-27-2008, 09:28 PM
Under our current system of laws in many states, those parents do have the right to withhold medical care because of their wacky-ass religious beliefs. But that doesn't make them any less moronic. They have a right to exercise their freedom of religion, and at the same time I'll exercise my freedom of speech and call them idiotic shitheads for what they did.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 09:28 PM
Do you believe that God can heal a human being? If so, why is it that a family that has a sick child cannot believe the same thing for that child?

They can pray to God just fine. I'm all for it. But they can not physically neglect their child with the care the child needs. And that's what they did.

Third Eye
03-27-2008, 09:28 PM
I don't think that goes into the family unit. I agree with what you say, but inside your own family I don't think there is precedent for arguing that in court. It wouldn't even take a good lawyer to win a case like that.

Waco comes to mind.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:29 PM
And glad to do so!! We actually don't all have the opportunity to go around letting our children die when we could be saving their lives. Because you get thrown in jail for a long time because of that. For instance, if my wife and I had a baby, we could not thrown it in the crib and pray that God takes care of it while we are on vacation. That's just wrong. And other adjectives.

Your commentary has absolutely nothing to do with what has happened. The family in question did not abandon the kid, they were there doing everything that was in their power, according to their belief, to take care of their child.

You all are acting like they did something purposely to kill the kid and that is just not the case.

BigVE
03-27-2008, 09:29 PM
Either we have freedom to practice our religion as we see fit or we don't. If we don't the constitution is null and void. This country was founded on the basis of freedom of religion. You might want to go back and check the original documents to verify that.


Nope, now your wrong. We have the right to practice our religion within the boundaries of our LAWS. IF you choose to practice a religion that condones murder THEN WHAT??

Third Eye
03-27-2008, 09:30 PM
Either we have freedom to practice our religion as we see fit or we don't. If we don't the constitution is null and void. This country was founded on the basis of freedom of religion. You might want to go back and check the original documents to verify that.

Tell that to your friendly neighborhood satanist.

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 09:31 PM
http://www.ffrf.org/fttoday/1997/august97/news.html

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:31 PM
Waco comes to mind.

Waco was a cult of fanatics lead by a fanatic that was charismatic and could convince others to follow blindly. They were armed and planned to defend themselves with force. Totally different scenario and in the same cult situation as Jim Jones and all of those that died in South America.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:32 PM
Nope, now your wrong. We have the right to practice our religion within the boundaries of our LAWS. IF you choose to practice a religion that condones murder THEN WHAT??

Tell me what law is on the books in the United States of America, or any individual state that forces you to see a doctor for any reason.

BigVE
03-27-2008, 09:32 PM
Waco was a cult of fanatics lead by a fanatic that was charismatic and could convince others to follow blindly. They were armed and planned to defend themselves with force. Totally different scenario and in the same cult situation as Jim Jones and all of those that died in South America.
But but but...it was THEIR RELIGION that allowed/made them do it so it's ok. RIght?????

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:33 PM
http://www.ffrf.org/fttoday/1997/august97/news.html



Sorry, the link does not exude credibility in any form or fashion.

BigVE
03-27-2008, 09:33 PM
Tell me what law is on the books in the United States of America, or any individual state that forces you to see a doctor for any reason.


I call you a dumb@ss in the name of religion so I MUST be right since it's my RIGHT as an american. Have a nice day.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:34 PM
But but but...it was THEIR RELIGION that allowed/made them do it so it's ok. RIght?????

In waco they broke federal law. This couple did not break any laws that has been mentioned. You cannot force anyone to go to a doctor nor force them to take their family to a doctor.

mikey23545
03-27-2008, 09:34 PM
Believe it or not, this religious moron neg repped me for standing up for the rights of an innocent child.

Well, idiot, I am also diabetic, and thank GOD I had loving parents who got me the help I needed instead of letting me die as a child while praying to some Cosmic Tooth Fairy. Perhaps you haven't noticed that damn near the entire BB thinks you're an idiot, so I hope you're working double-time handing out that neg rep.

Oh, and right back at ya, moron.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 09:34 PM
Your commentary has absolutely nothing to do with what has happened. The family in question did not abandon the kid, they were there doing everything that was in their power, according to their belief, to take care of their child.

How can you say that? Everything in their power would have been to pray 24/7 to God AND get quality medical help for their sick, vomiting, thirsty, dying child. My commentary is very similar.

mikey23545
03-27-2008, 09:34 PM
Link?

ROFL

Third Eye
03-27-2008, 09:34 PM
Waco was a cult of fanatics lead by a fanatic that was charismatic and could convince others to follow blindly. They were armed and planned to defend themselves with force. Totally different scenario and in the same cult situation as Jim Jones and all of those that died in South America.

If Koresh had just been a guy with a lot of guns and messianic complex, we would never have went near him. It was all the reports of child molestation (which turned out not to be true) that got the ball rolling.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:35 PM
I call you a dumb@ss in the name of religion so I MUST be right since it's my RIGHT as an american. Have a nice day.


All that tells me is that you don't have an argument that can stand. There were no written laws broken.

I always have a nice day. I live, I am blessed and I am an American!

BigVE
03-27-2008, 09:36 PM
All that tells me is that you don't have an argument that can stand. There were no written laws broken.

I always have a nice day. I live, I am blessed and I am an American!


Cool. Do you thank God for that or do you thank a veteran that helped preserve that freedom??

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 09:36 PM
ROFL

I was gonna pos rep ya but I'm all out :sulk:

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:36 PM
If Koresh had just been a guy with a lot of guns and messianic complex, we would never have went near him. It was all the reports of child molestation (which turned out not to be true) that got the ball rolling.

I don't think I can agree with that. He did break biblical law by fathering children by the wives of his "church". At any rate, it's a moot point with him, he is taking the permanent dirt nap.

mikey23545
03-27-2008, 09:37 PM
I was gonna pos rep ya but I'm all out :sulk:

It's all good, bro!

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:38 PM
ROFL

Great comeback. Did you read the link? It's very upright and clear of all biases and agenda's.

:rolleyes:

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 09:39 PM
HOUSE BILL 01-1286 [Digest]

BY REPRESENTATIVE(S) Alexander, Borodkin, Boyd, Coleman, Garcia, Grossman, Hefley, Lawrence, Mace, Romanoff, Saliman, Tochtrop, Veiga, and Williams S.;

also SENATOR(S) Hagedorn, Hernandez, Linkhart, and Teck.



AN ACT

CONCERNING FAITH HEALING IN THE CRIME OF CHILD ABUSE.



Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado:

SECTION 1. Repeal. 18-6-401 (6), Colorado Revised Statutes, is repealed as follows:

18-6-401. Child abuse. (6) A parent, guardian, or legal custodian who chooses and legitimately practices treatment by spiritual means through prayer in accordance with section 19-3-103, C.R.S., shall not be considered to have injured or endangered the child and to be criminally liable under the laws of this state solely because he fails to provide medical treatment for the child, unless such person inhibits or interferes with the provision of medical treatment for the child in accordance with a court order, or unless there is an additional reason, other than health care, to consider the said child to be injured or endangered.

SECTION 2. Effective date - applicability. This act shall take effect July 1, 2001, and shall apply to offenses committed on or after said date.

SECTION 3. Safety clause. The general assembly hereby finds, determines, and declares that this act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety.

Approved: April 16, 2001

Adept Havelock
03-27-2008, 09:39 PM
All I can see here is another stair step for those that have no religion, or do not have the capacity to understand religion, to jump on their soapbox and decry the whole concept.

That's all you see, because that's all you want to see.

The parents have a right to their faith. They do not have the right to allow their child to die due to indifference towards proper medical care for that child.

If these same parents had let the child starve to death because they felt he could be fed spiritually by prayer, they would be just as culpable.

Denverchief, bravo to Colorado for that law. I hope we will see something similar here in MO from the fallout of a similar case in Lee's Summit.

Tom, if freedom of religion is such an absolute with you, unless you're a hypocrite you should also support the right of anyone who claims and practices the faith of Rastifarianism to smoke as much wacky weed as they want with no legal repercussions whatsoever. Or for a "Christian Identity" whackjob to enslave another human being because of their color, as their faith teaches them the Children of Ham (which they interpret as pretty much anyone not Aryan) are fit only to be "hewers of wood and drawers of water." and there is nothing wrong with treating them as property.

My point with the latter two examples is we as a society have already drawn a line at which "Freedom of Religion" isn't an absolute because it infringes on other laws or rights. Thankfully, most people have the common sense to include allowing a child to die from medical inattention to that list.

Every state has laws against child endangerment and neglect, and this certainly qualifies.

BigVE
03-27-2008, 09:39 PM
I don't think I can agree with that. He did break biblical law by fathering children by the wives of his "church". At any rate, it's a moot point with him, he is taking the permanent dirt nap.


According to WHOSE faith? HIS or YOURS????

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:40 PM
Cool. Do you thank God for that or do you thank a veteran that helped preserve that freedom??

Both, God gives me life, those that I served with and all of those before us gave us all that freedom.

If you don't know that it all works together there could be problems.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:40 PM
According to WHOSE faith? HIS or YOURS????

I believe the Bible covered that and they claimed to use the same one that I do.

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 09:42 PM
http://www.post-gazette.com/regionstate/20010601faith5.asp

HOLLIDAYSBURG, Pa. -- Dennis and Lorie Nixon went to prison yesterday, convicted of letting their teen-age daughter die, giving her prayers when the law said they should have gotten her medical help.

It is the start of a 2 1/2-to-five-year prison sentence, and it's a day that prosecutors asked for but that nobody really relished.

Here were the parents of a big, mannerly, tight-laced family -- easy-going folks who worked hard, shunned television and lived from the Bible -- and now, they were going to state prison.

At home, the Nixons leave 10 children, with two of them in their 20s tending a clutch ages 3 to 17.

"With the children, I don't think it's sunk in yet," said Dennis Nixon Jr., 25, suddenly head of a household that he will run with sister Jennifer, 20. "I'll need God's help. I've never run a family before."

Bewildering it might be, but not enough to make him let go of a resolute grip on the family beliefs.

"Why didn't we seek medical treatment? The answer is we didn't feel it's right because of our religion," he said yesterday in one of the few times during a five-year legal odyssey that family members have spoken publicly. "I'm not trying to persuade anybody to see things my way. I just have my beliefs, and I want to be accepted for them."

Then, quietly, came the assurance that his parents would be safe in so foreign a world as a state prison. Officials have not said in which prisons the Nixons will serve their sentences.

"If God has a reason for them being there," Nixon said, "God's going to take care of them."

The beliefs are a mainstay for members of Faith Tabernacle Congregation, a low-profile, closely-bound congregation in which Dennis and Lorie Nixon -- he's 45, she's 49 -- grew up. Dennis Nixon's father is pastor there.

A decade ago, those beliefs meant the death of the Nixon's 8-year-old son, consumed by what doctors testified was a treatable ear infection. Dennis and Lorie Nixon pleaded no contest to endangering the welfare of a child and were sentenced to 125 hours of community service.

In 1996, daughter Shannon Nixon, 16, died of diabetes acidosis, a treatable condition in which her blood sugar levels soared twelvefold. She opted for prayer over medicine, fell into a coma and died.

Prosecutors put the blame on Shannon's parents, rejecting arguments that the girl was old enough to make her own medical decisions and winning convictions for manslaughter and endangering the welfare of children.

BigVE
03-27-2008, 09:42 PM
Both, God gives me life, those that I served with and all of those before us gave us all that freedom.

If you don't know that it all works together there could be problems.


A persons faith and religion SHOULD be universal...our freedoms as Amercians are not.

irishjayhawk
03-27-2008, 09:45 PM
Tom -

If you cannot infringe on religious belief (and therefore the absence of belief) can you explain to me whether I could simply start my own belief system that indulged in every illegal activity except murder and claim religious protection? Would that be allowed?

What about religious systems that decided that murder was the best form of loyalty? Could they claim religious protection?

Where do you draw the line?

MIAdragon
03-27-2008, 09:45 PM
Tell me what law is on the books in the United States of America, or any individual state that forces you to see a doctor for any reason.

give me some time. This is from a study by the Committee on Bioethics.

"...the constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion do not sanction harming another person in the practice of one's religion, and they do not allow religion to be a legal defense when one harms another."

"Two important sets of interests are in apparent opposition - those of children in the benefits of proven medical and health care and those of parents in making a decision about their children's well-being. Some parents believe that a constitutionally protected freedom of religion allows them to deny their children some or all of the benefits of standard medical intervention. However, this interpretation of the US constitution is in contradiction to important court rulings to the effect that parents may not martyr their children based on parental beliefs and that children cannot be denied essential health care."

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:46 PM
That's all you see, because that's all you want to see.

The parents have a right to their faith. They do not have the right to allow their child to die due to indifference towards proper medical care.

If these same parents had let the child starve to death because they felt he could be fed spiritually by prayer, they would be just as culpable.

Denverchief, bravo to Colorado for that law. I hope we will see something similar here in MO from the fallout of a similar case in Lee's Summit.

Tom, if freedom of religion is such an absolute with you, unless you're a hypocrite you should also support the right of anyone who claims and practices the faith of Rastifarianism to smoke as much wacky weed as they want with no legal repercussions whatsoever. Or for a "Christian Identity" whackjob to enslave another human being because of their color, as their faith teaches them the Children of Ham are fit only to be "hewers of wood and drawers of water." and there is nothing wrong with treating them as property.

My point with the latter two examples is we as a society have already drawn a line at which "Freedom of Religion" isn't an absolute because it infringes on others laws or rights. Thankfully, most people have the common sense to include allowing a child to die from medical inattention to that list.

I think that you are floating way off track. I don't care what you are smoking. I don't have to be responsible for your actions, only my own. I don't belong to a wackjob religion that enslaves others because of their color. And for the record color has no play in what we have on this earth. In my belief God created Mankind (it doesn't say white, black, brown, yellow or any other color). There is only one race on this earth, the Human Race. If you ever get a grip on that you may live life easier.

As far as you last comment. By the way you wrote your comment you felt that they intentionally let the kid die. You don't know what efforts they put into the care of that kid while they were sick. When my kids were young and sick I didn't rush them to the emergency room when they had a hangnail. There are health issues that we all handle on a day to day basis. If you honestly feel that this couple did intentionally let their kid die I hope that you never have to be near a kid or family member when they come to that part of their life. You would be useless.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:47 PM
Tom -

If you cannot infringe on religious belief (and therefore the absence of belief) can you explain to me whether I could simply start my own belief system that indulged in every illegal activity except murder and claim religious protection? Would that be allowed?

What about religious systems that decided that murder was the best form of loyalty? Could they claim religious protection?

Where do you draw the line?

I draw the line at answering idiot questions from someone that doesn't have a clue as to what is being discussed.

Go away.

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 09:47 PM
Court also rejects 'faith healing' defense

The Supreme Court yesterday also rejected the appeal of a Pennsylvania couple who lost two of their 13 children because they believe only God can cure illness. In 1991, Clayton Nixon, 8, died of an ear infection. Dennis and Lorie Nixon prayed over their child, but sought no medical services. As a result, they were arrested on charges of involuntary manslaughter and endangering the welfare of a child. They pleaded no contest and were put on probation. Four years later, their 16-year-old daughter Shannon died of diabetes acidosis—also treatable. It took less than two hours for a 1997 jury to find the couple guilty of manslaughter.

Delivering the sentence shortly thereafter, Judge Norman Callan wrote, "They are good, family people. Except they endanger the well-being of their children by failing to seek medical treatment when their children need it. … Religious freedom cannot shield criminal conduct." Appeals have been going through the court system ever since. Now that the Supreme Court has turned down their last hope in the judicial system, they will be leaving their remaining children to serve two-and-a-half to five years in prison.

What happens next to the couple and the family during the imprisonment is "something you leave in God's hands," Dennis Nixon told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. "If it's something he allows, you go with it." As a final clarification, here are the words of Charles Nixon, Dennis's father and the pastor of the family's 140-member Faith Tabernacle congregation: "We do not believe in 'faith healing.' We believe in 'divine healing' through Jesus Christ."

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2001/aprilweb-only/4-30-22.0.html

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:50 PM
http://www.post-gazette.com/regionstate/20010601faith5.asp

HOLLIDAYSBURG, Pa. -- Dennis and Lorie Nixon went to prison yesterday, convicted of letting their teen-age daughter die, giving her prayers when the law said they should have gotten her medical help.

It is the start of a 2 1/2-to-five-year prison sentence, and it's a day that prosecutors asked for but that nobody really relished.

Here were the parents of a big, mannerly, tight-laced family -- easy-going folks who worked hard, shunned television and lived from the Bible -- and now, they were going to state prison.

At home, the Nixons leave 10 children, with two of them in their 20s tending a clutch ages 3 to 17.

"With the children, I don't think it's sunk in yet," said Dennis Nixon Jr., 25, suddenly head of a household that he will run with sister Jennifer, 20. "I'll need God's help. I've never run a family before."

Bewildering it might be, but not enough to make him let go of a resolute grip on the family beliefs.

"Why didn't we seek medical treatment? The answer is we didn't feel it's right because of our religion," he said yesterday in one of the few times during a five-year legal odyssey that family members have spoken publicly. "I'm not trying to persuade anybody to see things my way. I just have my beliefs, and I want to be accepted for them."

Then, quietly, came the assurance that his parents would be safe in so foreign a world as a state prison. Officials have not said in which prisons the Nixons will serve their sentences.

"If God has a reason for them being there," Nixon said, "God's going to take care of them."

The beliefs are a mainstay for members of Faith Tabernacle Congregation, a low-profile, closely-bound congregation in which Dennis and Lorie Nixon -- he's 45, she's 49 -- grew up. Dennis Nixon's father is pastor there.

A decade ago, those beliefs meant the death of the Nixon's 8-year-old son, consumed by what doctors testified was a treatable ear infection. Dennis and Lorie Nixon pleaded no contest to endangering the welfare of a child and were sentenced to 125 hours of community service.

In 1996, daughter Shannon Nixon, 16, died of diabetes acidosis, a treatable condition in which her blood sugar levels soared twelvefold. She opted for prayer over medicine, fell into a coma and died.

Prosecutors put the blame on Shannon's parents, rejecting arguments that the girl was old enough to make her own medical decisions and winning convictions for manslaughter and endangering the welfare of children.

So?

I don't agree with the concept. Either we are free or we aren't.

How many people have been prosecuted for not helping someone? The concept of the story is that an outside entity had to express their will on someone else. That does not make it right or constitutional.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:52 PM
give me some time. This is from a study by the Committee on Bioethics.

"...the constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion do not sanction harming another person in the practice of one's religion, and they do not allow religion to be a legal defense when one harms another."

"Two important sets of interests are in apparent opposition - those of children in the benefits of proven medical and health care and those of parents in making a decision about their children's well-being. Some parents believe that a constitutionally protected freedom of religion allows them to deny their children some or all of the benefits of standard medical intervention. However, this interpretation of the US constitution is in contradiction to important court rulings to the effect that parents may not martyr their children based on parental beliefs and that children cannot be denied essential health care."

Once again you are making the assumption that they just threw up their hands and said "well she is going to die, let's go out for a beer!"

Ignoring a sickness because you want someone to die is wrong, they did not ignore the sickness but their faith told them that God could handle the situation.

irishjayhawk
03-27-2008, 09:52 PM
I draw the line at answering idiot questions from someone that doesn't have a clue as to what is being discussed.

Go away.

Thank you. This is the equivalent of the "You're gay" card.

I have won. :toast:PBJ

MIAdragon
03-27-2008, 09:52 PM
So?

I don't agree with the concept. Either we are free or we aren't.

How many people have been prosecuted for not helping someone? The concept of the story is that an outside entity had to express their will on someone else. That does not make it right or constitutional.

But where do we protect the LIFE of a child!?

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 09:53 PM
So?

I don't agree with the concept. Either we are free or we aren't.

How many people have been prosecuted for not helping someone? The concept of the story is that an outside entity had to express their will on someone else. That does not make it right or constitutional.

I'm sorry I missed where you went to law school? oh right you didn't STFU

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 09:53 PM
So?

I don't agree with the concept. Either we are free or we aren't.

Remeber a1na2, a young girl is now neglected a most important freedom she could ever have - life. Your take on this is totally, very wrong a1na2.

Adept Havelock
03-27-2008, 09:55 PM
I think that you are floating way off track. I don't care what you are smoking. I don't have to be responsible for your actions, only my own. I don't belong to a wackjob religion that enslaves others because of their color. And for the record color has no play in what we have on this earth. In my belief God created Mankind (it doesn't say white, black, brown, yellow or any other color). There is only one race on this earth, the Human Race. If you ever get a grip on that you may live life easier.

:rolleyes: Done patting yourself on the back? Good.


As far as you last comment. By the way you wrote your comment you felt that they intentionally let the kid die. You don't know what efforts they put into the care of that kid while they were sick. When my kids were young and sick I didn't rush them to the emergency room when they had a hangnail. There are health issues that we all handle on a day to day basis.

The fact others in the family were as concerned as they were tells me that the parents were not doing what was necessary for the health and well being of the child, whatever efforts the parents may have made.


If you honestly feel that this couple did intentionally let their kid die I hope that you never have to be near a kid or family member when they come to that part of their life. You would be useless.

Geh Kak Afen Yam! I've held the hand of a dying 13 yo child I dearly loved. I put my life on hold for the better part of a year to help support that family and child. I've sat with my young cousin in the hospital in his last days as he was dying from a brain tumor. Don't presume to tell me how I'd handle the situation. I doubt you've ever been involved in a situation like that, or you wouldn't be so callous about this.

I never said I felt the couple let the kid die intentionally. I only said that by their course of action, they endangered the health and life of their child, and that is a crime in every state in the US.

Remeber a1na2, a young girl is now neglected the most important freedom she could ever have - life. Your take on this is totally, very wrong a1na2.

Spot on.

MIAdragon
03-27-2008, 09:55 PM
Once again you are making the assumption that they just threw up their hands and said "well she is going to die, let's go out for a beer!"

Ignoring a sickness because you want someone to die is wrong, they did not ignore the sickness but their faith told them that God could handle the situation.


IM not doing that at all but I AM saying they DENIED her medical care that would have saved her life. Freedom of religion applies to what you BELIEVE, not what you DO. Your actions are subject to the law.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:56 PM
Remeber a1na2, a young girl is now neglected the most important freedom she could ever have - life. Your take on this is totally, very wrong a1na2.

I don't think so. For one, you don't know anything about the kid. You don't know what she was prepared to do in the name of her religion.

She wasn't neglected freedom or neglected life, she died due to an illness. The total question here has to do with her personal religion as well as that of her family and/or church.

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 09:57 PM
OH I GOT NEG REPPED!

a1na2
03-27-2008, 09:57 PM
IM not doing that at all but I AM saying they DENIED her medical care that would have saved her life. Freedom of religion applies to what you BELIEVE, not what you DO. Your actions are subject to the law.
:rolleyes:

underEJ
03-27-2008, 09:58 PM
This is very much one of those slippery slopes. Will you start forcing Amish people to go to hospitals? Or is it okay to stay away if you wear a specific type of clothing and commit to a very extreme separation from general society.

And before you call me ignorant, I grew up in a faith healing home. I don't believe in the faith. I was never given medical treatment as a child for any of a number of injuries and ailments (two life threatening,) I am angry at my parents for it.

That being said, I would still stand by their right to act as they did.

Guru
03-27-2008, 09:58 PM
You are crazier than a shithouse rat.

When it comes to endangering minors in their custody, they should have no rights whatsoever. If they want to kill themselves with their fairytale beliefs, or can convince those above the age of consent to follow their insane little cult, so be it. But to sentence a child whose welfare has been entrusted to you to die for your foolish, wicked beliefs, we should expedite their journey to "Heaven".

Trust the government to make good decisions? Keep dreaming. Hell, the social services in KS goes out of their way to keep good kids in bad homes and practically ignores calls regarding kids that are in dire need because of their families lack of money

a1na2
03-27-2008, 10:03 PM
OH I GOT NEG REPPED!

don't cry little one. it's just me keeping you from the doctor.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 10:04 PM
This is very much one of those slippery slopes. Will you start forcing Amish people to go to hospitals? Or is it okay to stay away if you wear a specific type of clothing and commit to a very extreme separation from general society.

Believe it or not, the Amish are sane, have good, common sense, and go to a doctor, nurse, hospitals, etc. when needed. The Amish do not stand around watching their children die.

MIAdragon
03-27-2008, 10:06 PM
a1na2 so where do we draw the line? Is all fair in the name of religion? I can do what ever I want as long as its in the name of religion? I agree its a fine line but IMO when a minor is involved it becomes a little clearer.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 10:07 PM
I don't think so.

I know you don't think you're wrong. And it's very troubling. Not being able to tell that letting your child die is wrong is very scary. It's a disregard for life. For instance, if people saw a man dying on the side of the road because people beat him up, they should NOT turn away and simply pray that God helps him. They should do something. There is a story similar to this that I've read/heard a few times.

Adept Havelock
03-27-2008, 10:08 PM
Believe it or not, the Amish are sane, have good, common sense, and go to a doctor, nurse, hospitals, etc. when needed. The Amish do not stand around watching their children die.

Indeed.

Question: Do the Amish go for health care services? How do they deal with technological advances of health care? Do the Amish allow the Doctors to go all out when they are ill or do they place restrictions on medical care provided? Do they believe in immunizations?

Answer: The Amish use local doctors, dentists, eye doctors, etc., and will go to specialists and hospitals as needed. They make use of advances in health care that are used in hospitals, etc. They generally try home remedies for ailments first before going to a doctor or the hospital. They also are inclined to go to Mexico for major treatments because of the cost of medications. [Editor's note: The Amish do not participate in medical or insurance plans and instead pay for all medical costs themselves.] The children do get immunizations (although not all may do so just as not all Englishers may do so either). Answer coordinated by THE BUDGET.

For a well done essay on Amish health issues written by Thomas Ulrich, read Keeping The Faith. This article documents a number of the medical problems that face the Old Order Amish in their very tight knit society.

http://www.amish.net/faq.asp

I am mildly amused by the notion of an Amish website. :D

a1na2 so where do we draw the line? Is all fair in the name of religion? I can do what ever I want as long as its in the name of religion? I agree its a fine line but IMO when a minor is involved it becomes a little clearer.

I asked that question regarding "Christian Identity". He dodged it.

underEJ
03-27-2008, 10:10 PM
Believe it or not, the Amish are sane, have good, common sense, and go to a doctor, nurse, hospitals, etc. when needed. The Amish do not stand around watching their children die.

After they try home remedies first, but there's a moment of decision that might be missed. This can apply just to people in very rural areas or people with no health care too. When is the point you propose to take over the decisions? It's just an answer that will never be absolute.

mikey23545
03-27-2008, 10:10 PM
I'm beginning to recognize a1ana2's defense now.

Just like at the Nuremberg trials, "I was only following orders" is the excuse of the day. The only difference is that 60 years ago, Nazis said it about der Fuerher, now it's certain freak Christians saying it about der God...

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 10:11 PM
They also are inclined to go to Mexico for major treatments because of the cost of medications.

This is interesting too ...I wonder if they fly or ride that horse to death?

Adept Havelock
03-27-2008, 10:13 PM
This is interesting too ...I wonder if they fly or ride that horse to death?

I'd assume they fly. I've been told that using modern transportation and technology is acceptable in certain rare circumstances. I'd think major medical emergencies would qualify.

After they try home remedies first, but there's a moment of decision that might be missed. This can apply just to people in very rural areas or people with no health care too. When is the point you propose to take over the decisions? It's just an answer that will never be absolute.

It's not an absolute, but I'd say at the point the laws against child endangerment and neglect kick in. :shrug:

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 10:15 PM
I'd assume they fly. I've been told that using modern transportation and technology is acceptable in certain rare circumstances. I'd think major medical emergencies would qualify.

damn I was hoping that you were going to tell me they ride the horse to death...since it is their religious right ;)

C-Mac
03-27-2008, 10:18 PM
You're damn right I would be. And if your religion called for you to kill all homosexuals, or all white people over 42 years of age, guess what? I'd fight like hell to remove your right to practice religion the way you want to, and I wouldn't feel one damn bit bad about it.


What if your religion called for you to go kill American soldiers or kill Muslims, or kill heretics, or kill pagans, or burn witches at the stake and kill anyone who spoke against the church. Are you sure you could still speak and act so boldly? Its a historical fact that during WW2 the German Catholic church leaders (also the Protestant)wholeheartedly supported the Third Reich and prayed for their soldiers to conquer the enemy. You can also grab any respectable encyclopedia (even the Catholic encyclopedia) and do a little research under the word "Crusades" and also find out a little something about religious hatred, religious intolerance, religious abuse and religious ignorance.
Even today many people willingly and are proud to offer their young(18yo) children up to the god of war or will take the life of an unborn without blinking an eye. So yes, these parents are seriously misguided, but one must be careful not to be hypocritical or tread on the sacredness of freeness of speech and freedom of religion for they are the basis upon which this country's constitution was started from.

Adept Havelock
03-27-2008, 10:18 PM
damn I was hoping that you were going to tell me they ride the horse to death...since it is their religious right ;)

ROFL

Thig Lyfe
03-27-2008, 10:21 PM
God was too busy helping an NBA team win to cure the girl.

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ap_gs2TDfX6SkM:http://images.acswebnetworks.com/1/117/Power_of_Prayer.jpg

DenverChief
03-27-2008, 10:22 PM
God was too busy helping an NBA team win to cure the girl.

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ap_gs2TDfX6SkM:http://images.acswebnetworks.com/1/117/Power_of_Prayer.jpg

LMAO

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 10:25 PM
What if your religion called for you to go kill American soldiers or kill Muslims, or kill heretics, or kill pagans, or burn witches at the stake and kill anyone who spoke against the church. Are you sure you could still speak and act so boldly?

Absolutely. First, I would not join a religion that called for me to kill ANYONE. Secondly, I do believe that self defense is acceptable to fight for. In this particular case, common sense prevails and says that watching your child vomit and the other effects of this lack of insulin for a month is wrong and needs to be punished.

Coach
03-27-2008, 10:31 PM
I gotta say, those people are deluisonal and lacking of common sense. I mean, if I feel tired for some reason, and it's not becuase of lack of sleep, I'd advise myself to go to the doctor just to make sure it all checks out.

This has child endangerment and child abuse written all over on it, regardless if you are religious or not.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 10:33 PM
I know you don't think you're wrong. And it's very troubling. Not being able to tell that letting your child die is wrong is very scary. It's a disregard for life. For instance, if people saw a man dying on the side of the road because people beat him up, they should NOT turn away and simply pray that God helps him. They should do something. There is a story similar to this that I've read/heard a few times.

You should be more in tune with what is being said. The Bible talks of doctors/physicians. I don't understand how the interpretation gets mixed around but it does. Look at your favorite preacher from Topeka, mr. fred phelps, he preaches that God hates fags. That is not biblical and I don't think forsaking doctors is biblical either. BUT WE AS A PEOPLE CANNOT FORCE SOMEONE TO USE A DOCTOR. Look at all of the groups that do not believe in doctors. They have been discussed in this very thread. Also, if you want to legislate safety of kids, how many "foster kids" have died in homes that the government put them in? It's somewhat of a different issue but at the same time very connected. You are advocating that the government tell you what to do with your family and when to do it.

THAT IS WRONG, VERY VERY WRONG AND IT'S JUST THE THING THAT THE LIBERALS ARE ADVOCATING FOR THE NEXT ADMINISTRATION IF IT IS HILLARY OR OBAMA!!!!!!! Think about it.

Once again you are telling us that the parents were letting their child die. That is not the case. They have a great regard for life, an unencumbered life free from foreign intervention and the intercession of someone that they believe is not Godly.

Next, you are comparing apples to oranges and it's not working.

Whomever here I dislike the most would get aid if they were injured or needed help. But if my belief was that doctors were of the devil, and some people do believe that, I would not go to one.

C-Mac
03-27-2008, 10:33 PM
Absolutely. First, I would not join a religion that called for me to kill ANYONE. Secondly, I do believe that self defense is acceptable to fight for. In this particular case, common sense prevails and says that watching your child vomit and the other effects of this lack of insulin for a month is wrong and needs to be punished.

My mistake, I had thought you stated in the past that you were a practicing Catholic.
Secondly, I'm not in anyway condoning faith healing or that nothing should be done for the child. Even one of the gospel writers (Luke) was a doctor. All I'm saying is that one must be careful not to be hypocritical.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 10:42 PM
My mistake, I had thought you stated in the past that you were a practicing Catholic.
Secondly, I'm not in anyway condoning faith healing or that nothing should be done for the child. Even one of the gospel writers (Luke) was a doctor. All I'm saying is that one must be careful not to be hypocritical.

You are right, I am a practicing Catholic. So far, I have never been called to kill anyone. Killing people is against Catholicism, although most every Catholic would find killing for self-defense acceptable. St. Augustine was one of the main proponents of the Just War Theory.

But anyway, that is neither here nor there. I agree about not being hypocritical. In this case, I do not think I have been.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 10:45 PM
IM not doing that at all but I AM saying they DENIED her medical care that would have saved her life. Freedom of religion applies to what you BELIEVE, not what you DO. Your actions are subject to the law.

Let me ask you a question. Can you deny someone something that you do not believe in?

It's obvious that their religion rejects doctors. Were they withholding treatment because they wanted their kid to die or were they doing what they knew in the basics of their faith?

If you grew up in a home with strict rules about any subject. Were you automatically going to go against your parents and do what they had taught you all your life not to do?

There are things that you grow up with that are nature to you. Check out all of the religious groups that shun modern appliances and electricity. Are they going to be prosecuted for killing their child if they don't get the horse and wagon and carry them for 4 hours into the nearest town and the kid dies?

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 10:46 PM
Whomever here I dislike the most would get aid if they were injured or needed help. But if my belief was that doctors were of the devil, and some people do believe that, I would not go to one.

a1na2, you can have that belief. You can even, unfortunately, subject your children to that belief. However, you must face the consequences, and that is, when you have neglected your child in this way, your child dies, and you go to prison, while your other children are raised by either a responsible family member or foster parent; someone who will get medical help for the child when they are in need of it.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 10:47 PM
You are right, I am a practicing Catholic. So far, I have never been called to kill anyone. Killing people is against Catholicism, although most every Catholic would find killing for self-defense acceptable. St. Augustine was one of the main proponents of the Just War Theory.

But anyway, that is neither here nor there. I agree about not being hypocritical. In this case, I do not think I have been.

I can find some that might disagree with you, but that's not the point here.

Do you think that killing was against the principles of the family that lost their child? Now do you think they intentionally let her die or do you think they did everything within their power and faith to help her?

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 10:51 PM
I can find some that might disagree with you, but that's not the point here.

Oh, I'm sure you could. As I said, most Catholics subscribe to the Christian War Theory. Some might not. But on a quick thought, every Catholic I know does.

Do you think that killing was against the principles of the family that lost their child? Now do you think they intentionally let her die or do you think they did everything within their power and faith to help her?

I obviously do not. They did not get the needed medical help for their child. That is neglect and they should be punished.

a1na2
03-27-2008, 10:53 PM
a1na2, you can have that belief. You can even, unfortunately, subject your children to that belief. However, you must face the consequences, and that is, when you have neglected your child in this way, your child dies, and you go to prison, while your other children are raised by either a responsible family member or foster parent; someone who will get medical help for the child when they are in need of it.

You have totally missed the point of the whole thread. You came in with hatred in your heart because a family does not believe the same as you do. You have been very vehement regarding your stance.

You sound like someone that is claiming they killed the child intentionally. Once again, they did not. They followed their faith. What makes your faith any different than theirs? Oh, yes ... your faith believes in doctors and theirs does not. Get past the semantics and understand that different religions have different doctrines. Even the Catholic Church has doctrines that are not fully in line with the Bible. Are you aware of why that is? Because man, a fallible being created those doctrines. Not just in the Catholic Church but in every mainstream denomination going down the Pike. Not to mention all of the other non-mainstream religions that the family in question may have been a member of.

What you are doing is participating in a sin that is paramount to any other. Judge not lest ye be judged. Don't feel lonely, everyone has been guilty of that. Should all be stoned and/or put to death?

Adept Havelock
03-27-2008, 10:53 PM
Oh, I'm sure you could. As I said, most Catholics subscribe to the Christian War Theory. Some might not. But on a quick thought, every Catholic I know does.


Not to hijack, but...

Is it a "Christian" war theory? A just war theory, perhaps.

After all, Saint Augustine did get it from that old Roman Pagan, Cicero. ;)



I obviously do not. They did not get the needed medical help for their child. That is neglect and they should be punished.

But...but...their heart was in the right place while they neglected that child!!!





- This is the entirety of Tom's argument, and it is balderdash.

Frazod
03-27-2008, 10:53 PM
Since this thread has devolved into a full blown heavenly smack down, perhaps it's time to relocate it to DC?

a1na2
03-27-2008, 10:56 PM
I obviously do not. They did not get the needed medical help for their child. That is neglect and they should be punished.

If you don't believe in medical doctors are you neglecting your child? You are judging them by your standards. Just hope that when you are judged that your standards are what you are judged by.

The child dying was a tragedy, but I do not feel that the parents are criminal for not doing something they do not believe in.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 10:56 PM
Not to hijack, but...

Is it a "Christian" war theory? A just war theory, perhaps.

After all, Saint Augustine did get it from that old Roman Pagan, Cicero. ;)

I've heard it called the Christian Just War Theory, but it's most commonly called the Just War Theory. I call it the Just War Theory, because it's more inclusive than Christian doctrines and stuff. I'm not sure why I switched in that post.

Now quiet or stay on topic! ;)

a1na2
03-27-2008, 10:57 PM
Since this thread has devolved into a full blown heavenly smack down, perhaps it's time to relocate it to DC?

Why? Isn't there enough strife over there?

Adept Havelock
03-27-2008, 10:58 PM
I've heard it called the Christian Just War Theory, but it's most commonly called the Just War Theory. I call it the Just War Theory, because it's more inclusive than Christian doctrines and stuff. I'm not sure why I switched in that post.

Now quiet or stay on topic! ;)

Just wanted to make sure credit was given where it was due. :p

I'd move back to the topic, but Tom said he was putting me on ignore (easier than actually addressing my first post, I suppose)...at the same time he called me a coward and an a**hole (well, he's got the last part right at least). :hmmm: ROFL

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 11:08 PM
You have totally missed the point of the whole thread. You came in with hatred in your heart because a family does not believe the same as you do. You have been very vehement regarding your stance.

I will admit to being very consistent, fair, and assertive in my view, yes. Hatred, no, but I do feel these parents are completely damn fools. My reasoning for that is because they neglected the well being of their child by not seeking medical care.

You sound like someone that is claiming they killed the child intentionally. Once again, they did not. They followed their faith. What makes your faith any different than theirs? Oh, yes ... your faith believes in doctors and theirs does not. Get past the semantics and understand that different religions have different doctrines. Even the Catholic Church has doctrines that are not fully in line with the Bible. Are you aware of why that is? Because man, a fallible being created those doctrines. Not just in the Catholic Church but in every mainstream denomination going down the Pike. Not to mention all of the other non-mainstream religions that the family in question may have been a member of.

For one, I believe that my faith does not conflict with common sense. The kind that says "When your child is sick, give them medical care." Different religions do have different doctrines. I am fully aware of this. When part of the doctrine is that it is better to sit and not give your child the medical care they need, I will stand up and say that's wrong. Yes, the Catholic Church has a different interpretation of the Bible than many Protestants.

What you are doing is participating in a sin that is paramount to any other. Judge not lest ye be judged. Don't feel lonely, everyone has been guilty of that. Should all be stoned and/or put to death?

I can judge people, and I am open to other people judging me. We judge people all the time and it is good for us to do so. We decide what is right and wrong, just and unjust, good and bad, moral and immoral through judging. Being a judge involves critical thinking and it's normal human activity. I might even someday like to be a professional judge when I am older. We should all use common sense in our judgments. These fools did not. They need to be punished.

C-Mac
03-27-2008, 11:09 PM
You are right, I am a practicing Catholic. So far, I have never been called to kill anyone. Killing people is against Catholicism, although most every Catholic would find killing for self-defense acceptable. St. Augustine was one of the main proponents of the Just War Theory.
But anyway, that is neither here nor there. I agree about not being hypocritical. In this case, I do not think I have been.
Are you suggesting that the Catholic church doesn't support war or troops? Seriously?
Well for what its worth, I do know first hand that they do and by doing so they are thus condoning the killing of their fellow man...even a fellow Catholic.
So maybe your being honest hearted but it does make the Catholic church hypocritical.....anyway that is neither here nor there. ;)

a1na2
03-27-2008, 11:20 PM
For one, I believe that my faith does not conflict with common sense. The kind that says "When your child is sick, give them medical care." Different religions do have different doctrines. I am fully aware of this. When part of the doctrine is that it is better to sit and not give your child the medical care they need, I will stand up and say that's wrong. Yes, the Catholic Church has a different interpretation of the Bible than many Protestants.

I can judge people, and I am open to other people judging me. We judge people all the time and it is good for us to do so. We decide what is right and wrong, just and unjust, good and bad, moral and immoral through judging. Being a judge involves critical thinking and it's normal human activity. I might even someday like to be a professional judge when I am older. We should all use common sense in our judgments. These fools did not. They need to be punished.

You are talking about your beliefs. You are totally disregarding the beliefs of others, doctrines and all. You believe in doctors so you are prone to sending a kid to a doctor.

You claim that you can judge people and then are open to judgment by others. Well fillet me with a butte knife. It is not for you to judge others according to what I've read in the Catholic Bible (and most of the other translations as well.

You are make judgments without considering all the facts. If you were to become a judge you would fail with that attitude.

Your faith says that it is a sin to kill but Catholics kill. Your faith says that it is a sin to judge but you judge. It makes me think that your faith can be compromised based on your emotions, and that is exactly where you are right now.

Again, let me reiterate. If you do not believe in something there is no conscience wrong if you do not use that something. There are some religious sects that do not believe (again) in electricity. If they are working in the dark and an electric light is available and the do not use it and someone dies are they criminally liable? NO they are not. And in the case of the girl dying, they did not and, as far as you know the girl was old enough to be accountable for her actions, did not believe in doctors either.

It was bad that she died, but those parents lost more than freedom when their child died, and I fear that it something that you do not have the capacity to understand or even be compassionate about.

Jenson71
03-27-2008, 11:43 PM
Are you suggesting that the Catholic church doesn't support war or troops? Seriously?
Well for what its worth, I do know first hand that they do and by doing so they are thus condoning the killing of their fellow man...even a fellow Catholic.
So maybe your being honest hearted but it does make the Catholic church hypocritical.....anyway that is neither here nor there. ;)

I don't mind addressing these concerns in this particular thread, or any thread. I was joking when I told Adept to stay on topic.

I really can't point to any official document where the Vatican came out in full support of a war or troops. But, I know the general belief is that there are times when it is okay to kill - this is where the Just War Theory comes in; St. Augustine supported it basically when Rome was having those problems with the Germanic tribes and things weren't going so well for the empire. It's generally accepted. But the Catholic Church knows it can't take any real political lines and declare sides in a war. Of course, war is always going to be seen as a bad thing. But I really don't have the depth of knowledge to know if they said "World War II is a just war." I just don't know what their approach to that is. I know statements asking for peace are popular.

Now, in history, the Church has had some rough times. Some missteps, or giant pitfalls. The Church is a human institution, and many Church leaders, popes, priests, bishops have made wrong, bad, evil decisions. There's no denying that, and in that sense, there has been many examples of hypocrisy by Church leaders. But still, you are not supposed to kill people, outside of what would be considered a just reason for that act. That was always the case. It just, unfortunately, was not always followed.

C-Mac
03-27-2008, 11:47 PM
You are talking about your beliefs. You are totally disregarding the beliefs of others, doctrines and all. You believe in doctors so you are prone to sending a kid to a doctor.

You claim that you can judge people and then are open to judgment by others. Well fillet me with a butte knife. It is not for you to judge others according to what I've read in the Catholic Bible (and most of the other translations as well.

You are make judgments without considering all the facts. If you were to become a judge you would fail with that attitude.

Your faith says that it is a sin to kill but Catholics kill. Your faith says that it is a sin to judge but you judge. It makes me think that your faith can be compromised based on your emotions, and that is exactly where you are right now.

Again, let me reiterate. If you do not believe in something there is no conscience wrong if you do not use that something. There are some religious sects that do not believe (again) in electricity. If they are working in the dark and an electric light is available and the do not use it and someone dies are they criminally liable? NO they are not. And in the case of the girl dying, they did not and, as far as you know the girl was old enough to be accountable for her actions, did not believe in doctors either.

It was bad that she died, but those parents lost more than freedom when their child died, and I fear that it something that you do not have the capacity to understand or even be compassionate about.

In Jensen's defense, as a Christian you are to "judge" or basically use good discernment on who you choose to associate with. (1 Corinthians 5:9-13) On the other hand your right in that the heart or one thinking emotionally can be very dangerous because it can alter rational thinking. (Jeremiah 17:9) That is where you can fall into criticizing something or someone just because you don't understand. Again the folks involved are totally misguided about biblical truth but like yourself, I was trying to point out to Jensen that one needs to be careful when your quick to judge whats on the surface of others before taking a deep look at yourself first.

alnorth
03-27-2008, 11:54 PM
The basic fundamental disagreement here, is whether or not children are private property that you have unquestioned ownership over until the age of majority.

Children are *NOT* your property to do with as you please without restriction. They are by default entrusted to the parents to provide care and upbringing with a lot of leeway to methods, but some very basic standards are absolutely required and inviolate for ANY reasons whatsoever. One of those standards is basic medical care when it is obvious to a reasonable person that its necessary. Failure to do that is child abuse and/or neglect, plain and simple. Whether intentional or unintentional, its still neglect.

You have the right to not go to a doctor for your own ailments, but you do *NOT* have the right to deny medical care to your children when it is needed. This is not a freedom of religion issue, because the kids are not old enough to consent to that self-destructive insanity.

You also do not have to intentionally hurt someone to be guilty of a crime. These parents are guilty of a very serious offense, and they should be punished for it. Their remaining kids also need to be moved to the care of someone who has the sense to care for them properly.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 12:01 AM
You are talking about your beliefs. You are totally disregarding the beliefs of others, doctrines and all. You believe in doctors so you are prone to sending a kid to a doctor.

It's not so much about believing in doctors. It's just the common sense to use them! Your child is sick. You have a moral obligation to get that child better. They have the means to do it - take her to a doctor. They chose not to, and they were wrong.

You claim that you can judge people and then are open to judgment by others. Well fillet me with a butte knife. It is not for you to judge others according to what I've read in the Catholic Bible (and most of the other translations as well.

Well, I just don't know the context of this in the Bible well enough for me to explain to you convincingly that I can judge, and you are free to judge me. Judging is a good thing, though, when it's fair. I think I'm pretty fair though. Are you judging that I'm not being fair? I think so, and I think you can!


You are make judgments without considering all the facts. If you were to become a judge you would fail with that attitude.

Well, this is true, too. The investigation is not over, they could find something totally different maybe. I don't know. Either way, we're both basing our opinions off the same article. Hopefully the actual case is longer.

Again, let me reiterate. If you do not believe in something there is no conscience wrong if you do not use that something. There are some religious sects that do not believe (again) in electricity. If they are working in the dark and an electric light is available and the do not use it and someone dies are they criminally liable? NO they are not.

I don't quite follow this example. I don't see the logic in this case and the case of parents letting their child die.

And in the case of the girl dying, they did not and, as far as you know the girl was old enough to be accountable for her actions, did not believe in doctors either.

There's just no real indication of this being the child's choice. Either way, the parents have an obligation to overrule that in the interest of their child's health. If my boy said I want to die, I would say "shut up, get in the car, we're going to the hospital" because that's what a good parent does. They take care of their child. Eleven years old is too young to make any kind of choice like that, and I doubt she was given the choice.

It was bad that she died, but those parents lost more than freedom when their child died, and I fear that it something that you do not have the capacity to understand or even be compassionate about.

Is this a judgment of yours? No, I'm quite understanding and compassionate.

alnorth
03-28-2008, 12:07 AM
Quick update after some research.

Wisconsin is one of the few retarded states remaining that still grants an exemption to prosecution for parents who opt for "treatment through prayer". This outrage may prod the state legislature to remove that statute just like they did in Colorado, but these irresponsible parents are probably going to walk.

C-Mac
03-28-2008, 12:10 AM
I don't mind addressing these concerns in this particular thread, or any thread. I was joking when I told Adept to stay on topic.

I really can't point to any official document where the Vatican came out in full support of a war or troops. But, I know the general belief is that there are times when it is okay to kill - this is where the Just War Theory comes in; St. Augustine supported it basically when Rome was having those problems with the Germanic tribes and things weren't going so well for the empire. It's generally accepted. But the Catholic Church knows it can't take any real political lines and declare sides in a war. Of course, war is always going to be seen as a bad thing. But I really don't have the depth of knowledge to know if they said "World War II is a just war." I just don't know what their approach to that is. I know statements asking for peace are popular.

Now, in history, the Church has had some rough times. Some missteps, or giant pitfalls. The Church is a human institution, and many Church leaders, popes, priests, bishops have made wrong, bad, evil decisions. There's no denying that, and in that sense, there has been many examples of hypocrisy by Church leaders. But still, you are not supposed to kill people, outside of what would be considered a just reason for that act. That was always the case. It just, unfortunately, was not always followed.
Heres a link to Catholic Church in St Paul thats having a support the troops breakfast on April 13th. http://www.stpaulsprinceton.org/
Sure looks like the church is still struggling with the "Thou Shalt not kill" thingy and your still in denial. Its not always followed because the church leaders have not and do not follow Jesus example when it come to "loving thy neighbor", therefore its only natural that their followers are confused when it comes to religious and political wars. I wish I could go kill and rob a bunch of people and then have you as my judge....but hey thats neither here nor there.

http://www.gigglesnfarts.com/Misc/Heilbishops.jpg

alnorth
03-28-2008, 12:13 AM
Another quick update, the local prosecutor is considering whether or not there is enough to go for second-degree reckless homicide (max 25 years) since they cant go for child abuse or neglect, but that will not work if the parents can demonstrate that they honestly had a "good-faith belief" that the kid was not about to die. (If they did think she was dying but chose prayer, then that's apparently enough to convict)

C-Mac
03-28-2008, 12:18 AM
The basic fundamental disagreement here, is whether or not children are private property that you have unquestioned ownership over until the age of majority.

Children are *NOT* your property to do with as you please without restriction. They are by default entrusted to the parents to provide care and upbringing with a lot of leeway to methods, but some very basic standards are absolutely required and inviolate for ANY reasons whatsoever. One of those standards is basic medical care when it is obvious to a reasonable person that its necessary. Failure to do that is child abuse and/or neglect, plain and simple. Whether intentional or unintentional, its still neglect.

You have the right to not go to a doctor for your own ailments, but you do *NOT* have the right to deny medical care to your children when it is needed. This is not a freedom of religion issue, because the kids are not old enough to consent to that self-destructive insanity.

You also do not have to intentionally hurt someone to be guilty of a crime. These parents are guilty of a very serious offense, and they should be punished for it. Their remaining kids also need to be moved to the care of someone who has the sense to care for them properly.

I mostly agree, but you and I should have the right to choose what type of medical treatment our children would get or what we deem would be the best care for them. Otherwise you could be allowing a doctor's opinion to become law, while having no liability or consequences if he or she is mistaken.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 12:21 AM
Heres a link to Catholic Church in St Paul thats having a support the troops breakfast on April 13th. http://www.stpaulsprinceton.org/
Sure looks like the church is still struggling with the "Thou Shalt not kill" thingy and your still in denial. Its not always followed because the church leaders have not and do not follow Jesus example when it come to "loving thy neighbor", therefore its only natural that their followers are confused when it comes to religious and political wars. I wish I could go kill and rob a bunch of people and then have you as my judge....but hey thats neither here nor there.


Well, in the link, that's just a show of patriotism and support for the troops that parishoners would have. You'll see those everywhere. It's not like the Vatican is deciding that they support American troops in the War on Terror. They just wouldn't make that statement. It's more complicated than how I could explain it.

The Just War Theory gets around that commandment and also how Jesus said turn the other cheek. Some people are complete pacifists, and I can admire and respect that - they have great reasons for it. I personally believe that we can protect ourselves and our loved ones. Many people do.

alnorth
03-28-2008, 12:26 AM
I mostly agree, but you and I should have the right to choose what type of medical treatment our children would get or what we deem would be the best care for them. Otherwise you could be allowing a doctor's opinion to become law, while having no liability or consequences if he or she is mistaken.

I'll fall back on what I said earlier about giving the medical care that a reasonable person would give. Before we get into slippery-slope arguments, yes society and the courts can define what that ("reasonable care") exactly means, and I'd say that asking for 2nd and 3rd opinions, and discussing all medically valid options with these doctors are entirely reasonable. (Presuming we dont have some kind of "cant wait" emergency, of the "bleeding from a gaping hole" variety or something similarly urgent. I'm assuming that a thorough discussion of all medically valid options is possible)

C-Mac
03-28-2008, 12:40 AM
Well, in the link, that's just a show of patriotism and support for the troops that parishoners would have. You'll see those everywhere. It's not like the Vatican is deciding that they support American troops in the War on Terror. They just wouldn't make that statement. It's more complicated than how I could explain it.

The Just War Theory gets around that commandment and also how Jesus said turn the other cheek. Some people are complete pacifists, and I can admire and respect that - they have great reasons for it. I personally believe that we can protect ourselves and our loved ones. Many people do.

If only you could hear yourself. You want to believe the bible principles and what Jesus taught but your torn because your church sits on a fence. If all the Catholic churches support the troops of their particular country and the Vatican doesn't denounce it....then they support it by default. Just like they did during the holocaust. By not taking a firm moral stand against it, they just sat back and let it happen. The German Catholic church was basically in bed with Hitler an the Vatican feared him and remained silent. The sin of omission applies to the church too.

http://www.gigglesnfarts.com/Misc/hitler_cardinal4.jpeg

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 12:54 AM
No, I don't see it as a huge conflict. You need a good military for national defense and other things. A lot of people support the troops without maybe supporting policies that the troops undertake.

I think anyone that knew what Hitler was doing to people and supported him was wrong.

I don't know all the details of the Churche's relations with Hitler. I know he was liked by many Germans. I don't know what the extent of the Church's support was after Kristallnacht, I can't really say much.

C-Mac
03-28-2008, 01:14 AM
No, I don't see it as a huge conflict. You need a good military for national defense and other things. A lot of people support the troops without maybe supporting policies that the troops undertake.

I think anyone that knew what Hitler was doing to people and supported him was wrong.

I don't know all the details of the Churche's relations with Hitler. I know he was liked by many Germans. I don't know what the extent of the Church's support was after Kristallnacht, I can't really say much.

Its cool, I know your honestly trying to make sense of it all. But there is no doubt that if everyone thought as Jesus did, there would be no wars. He was not a pacifist but he did state that "those who live by the sword will die by the sword" (Matthew 26:52) and to “return evil for evil to no one. Provide fine things in the sight of all men”(Romans 12:17) and that birds will eat the "fleshy parts of military commanders" (Revelation 19:18). All very interesting stuff to me.

POND_OF_RED
03-28-2008, 01:31 AM
I agree. Sentence them to lethal injection and see if they can pray hard enough to survive.

Pants
03-28-2008, 03:25 AM
Wow, some people really make me lose faith in humanity and common f***ing sense...

Fruit Ninja
03-28-2008, 04:44 AM
Eh, if your a christian and a person who believes in the bible this is not acceptable as a parent IMO.

I am not part of any organized religion as i dont really go for what they try to spit at me, but i would say i am a form of Christianity. I say my prayers and read the bible and what not, but this is very very unacceptable. Last night, my neice who is 6 months wouldnt stop caughing last night and we though something was seriously wrong. They called up my mom and she said take her to the doctor immediatley. I may not be a parent, but i did not sleep until i see my neice back at home and fine. I never been so scared in my life and i have been through alot of shit. God will be there when your back from the doctors. Kids? maybe not. Again, unacceptable.

bkkcoh
03-28-2008, 07:50 AM
Wow, some people really make me lose faith in humanity and common f***ing sense...

I have thought that common sense has long since been lost in this world. There are far too numerous instances in which this is and has been proven time and time again. :banghead:

Duck Dog
03-28-2008, 08:16 AM
The pain and misery that poor girl had to endure must have been awful. What kind of idiot does it take to do something like this?

Sully
03-28-2008, 08:56 AM
Just wanted to make sure credit was given where it was due. :p

I'd move back to the topic, but Tom said he was putting me on ignore (easier than actually addressing my first post, I suppose)...at the same time he called me a coward and an a**hole (well, he's got the last part right at least). :hmmm: ROFL

Put you on ignore, at the same time as calling you a coward and ignoring a direct question?

Seriously, that's hilarious.

chasedude
03-28-2008, 09:11 AM
Every state has laws against child endangerment and neglect, and this certainly qualifies.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap: Thread Closed

chasedude
03-28-2008, 09:15 AM
I'm not a religious person so it's tough for me to understand why the parents take this kind of action. Wouldn't the love for a child supersede everything else and cause a parent to take action on other means besides faith? I just can't fathom the love over a "spiritual" being over flesh and blood. If we're all made in God's image then why not love your child as God? Too many questions...

Third Eye
03-28-2008, 09:26 AM
I'm not a religious person so it's tough for me to understand why the parents take this kind of action. Wouldn't the love for a child supersede everything else and cause a parent to take action on other means besides faith? I just can't fathom the love over a "spiritual" being over flesh and blood. If we're all made in God's image then why not love your child as God? Too many questions...

Not my cup of tea, but here is a little quote for you:

"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." (Matthew 10:37)

chasedude
03-28-2008, 09:36 AM
Not my cup of tea, but here is a little quote for you:

"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." (Matthew 10:37)

No offense, but that's just plain stupid.

Third Eye
03-28-2008, 09:43 AM
No offense, but that's just plain stupid.

None taken, like I said, it isn't my thing.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2008, 09:48 AM
This is a tough one, but Christian Scientists don't treat illnesses either.
Case of conflicting rights and freedom of religion is part of that.

No one seems to be bothered when people die from a medical treatment though.
There's thousands of those and just from properly taken prescribed medicine.

MIAdragon
03-28-2008, 09:50 AM
Not my cup of tea, but here is a little quote for you:

"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." (Matthew 10:37)


I her you now please quote Jesus when he says the only healing can come from me via your prayers.

DenverChief
03-28-2008, 10:01 AM
No one seems to be bothered when people die from a medical treatment though.
There's thousands of those and just from properly taken prescribed medicine.

Really? I see medical malpractice lawsuits filed all the time

BucEyedPea
03-28-2008, 10:10 AM
Really? I see medical malpractice lawsuits filed all the time
Most of those are civil cases. They are also monitored by medical doctors and lawyer as to what will be allowed as a case. Very tough cases to win and the doctors protect one another. Do we see the state prosecuting them for criminal neglect though? Unless it's Kevorkian. Or the right to practice certain procedures in the future? That would seem more comparable. Besides being secular and a service provided to the public.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 10:55 AM
In Jensen's defense, as a Christian you are to "judge" or basically use good discernment on who you choose to associate with. (1 Corinthians 5:9-13) On the other hand your right in that the heart or one thinking emotionally can be very dangerous because it can alter rational thinking. (Jeremiah 17:9) That is where you can fall into criticizing something or someone just because you don't understand. Again the folks involved are totally misguided about biblical truth but like yourself, I was trying to point out to Jensen that one needs to be careful when your quick to judge whats on the surface of others before taking a deep look at yourself first.

You do know that discernment and the type of judging that is going on here are two completely different issues, right?

The simple words: Judge not, lest ye be judged.

<TABLE cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=0 width=601 align=center border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle colSpan=2>Judging Others</TD></TR><TR><TD align=middle colSpan=2>Lk. 6.3738 (http://www.bartleby.com/108/42/6.html#37), 4142 (http://www.bartleby.com/108/42/6.html#41) </TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top align=right width="5%">1 </TD><TD vAlign=top width="95%">Judge not, that ye be not judged.
</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top align=right width="5%">2 </TD><TD vAlign=top width="95%">For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. Mk. 4.24 (http://www.bartleby.com/108/41/4.html#24)
</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top align=right width="5%">3 </TD><TD vAlign=top width="95%">And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top align=right width="5%">4 </TD><TD vAlign=top width="95%">Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top align=right width="5%">5 </TD><TD vAlign=top width="95%">Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top align=right width="5%">6 </TD><TD vAlign=top width="95%">¶ Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.


We all miss this one very frequently, I'm just of the opinion that Jenson is commenting in disgust rather than using what his faith is telling him to use.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

a1na2
03-28-2008, 10:59 AM
Put you on ignore, at the same time as calling you a coward and ignoring a direct question?

Seriously, that's hilarious.

He is not on ignore other than I reject his opinion as he does not reply to the topic but to the poster. He has no capacity to read beyond a1na2. Basically neither do you, if both of you could there wouldn't be the cheap shots where nobody can see them as well as addressing the topic of the thread rather than being excessively childish and calling names.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 11:02 AM
I'm not a religious person so it's tough for me to understand why the parents take this kind of action. Wouldn't the love for a child supersede everything else and cause a parent to take action on other means besides faith? I just can't fathom the love over a "spiritual" being over flesh and blood. If we're all made in God's image then why not love your child as God? Too many questions...

Are you a Christian or have some similar religious belief? ( Not being religious doesn't really cut it here, if you have no religious belief you aren't really able to understand what went on, if you do you are rejecting your belief for political expediency IMO.)

If you don't believe in something why would you offer it up to someone you loved?

Sure-Oz
03-28-2008, 11:03 AM
How about pray and take her to the dr, stupid ****s

DenverChief
03-28-2008, 11:08 AM
the doctors protect one another
and there is your answer why there are rarely criminal cases

a1na2
03-28-2008, 11:12 AM
How about pray and take her to the dr, stupid ****s

Their belief system did not allow or consider that.

My belief is that God put doctors here as tools for us all, but I am not in a position to question your personal beliefs about doctors, nor should you queston the beliefs of others that believe differently than you.

It's simple. In the USA we have the right to freedom of religion. If this were to go to the Supreme Court that freedom would most likely be subverted due to the need for someone other than you to determine what is best for you and your family. I'm sure that falls under at least a few of the popular "isms" that abound in this contry today.

Third Eye
03-28-2008, 11:12 AM
I her you now please quote Jesus when he says the only healing can come from me via your prayers.

The only healing can come from me via your prayers.

There you go.

Sure-Oz
03-28-2008, 11:13 AM
Their belief system did not allow or consider that.

My belief is that God put doctors here as tools for us all, but I am not in a position to question your personal beliefs about doctors, nor should you queston the beliefs of others that believe differently than you.

It's simple. In the USA we have the right to freedom of religion. If this were to go to the Supreme Court that freedom would most likely be subverted due to the need for someone other than you to determine what is best for you and your family. I'm sure that falls under at least a few of the popular "isms" that abound in this contry today.

I'd think common sense would show up somewhere in their brains no matter what they believe? If we didn't have dr's and medicines etc the pop. would be near zero

a1na2
03-28-2008, 11:21 AM
I'd think common sense would show up somewhere in their brains no matter what they believe? If we didn't have dr's and medicines etc the pop. would be near zero

Common sense is not the issue here.

If you believe that something wrong are you going to submit the child that you love to it? You are missing the belief and faith issue at hand.

Would you place your child in a pool of water if you felt that water was too deep and dangerous and would kill them? The family had a similar situation, in their religion doctors are not something you turn to for any reason.

chasedude
03-28-2008, 11:22 AM
Are you a Christian or have some similar religious belief? ( Not being religious doesn't really cut it here, if you have no religious belief you aren't really able to understand what went on, if you do you are rejecting your belief for political expediency IMO.)

If you don't believe in something why would you offer it up to someone you loved?

I'm not a christian nor am I affiliated with any organized religion. I find it a waste of time and mental energy.

Why would I have to have a religious belief to understand what's going on? Do you not think I'm intellectual enough to grasp that these people are putting a God that, obviously did nothing to help, above the welfare of their child.

We live in the 22 century, it pains me to see something as archaic like this still being practiced. Wake up to common sense, this is my point.

Sure-Oz
03-28-2008, 11:31 AM
Common sense is not the issue here.

If you believe that something wrong are you going to submit the child that you love to it? You are missing the belief and faith issue at hand.

Would you place your child in a pool of water if you felt that water was too deep and dangerous and would kill them? The family had a similar situation, in their religion doctors are not something you turn to for any reason.

That's fine and dandy in what they believe in but the child got no say or choice in weather they could be treated. This is negligence if anything...their child died because they didn't take proper action. Are you telling me you would be fine with your child dieing as well in this fashion if that was your religion. Even though you knew that they could possibly live doing this. I'd take a bullet for my child, makes me wonder if they could get that concept.

CosmicPal
03-28-2008, 11:38 AM
As much as I despise that religious-fanatic group from Topeka, I would think that even they would have the common sense to take one of their children to the doctor.

Sure-Oz
03-28-2008, 11:39 AM
As much as I despise that religious-fanatic group from Topeka, I would think that even they would have the common sense to take one of their children to the doctor.

Wonder if the last dr on earth was gay would they take the children then?:hmmm:

sedated
03-28-2008, 12:32 PM
If you believe that something wrong are you going to submit the child that you love to it? You are missing the belief and faith issue at hand.

and the parents believe that they sent their child to heaven, rather than prolonging life on earth while ending her chance to go to heaven in the end.

I (we) may think they are a couple of whack-jobs, but they feel better, and that's all that really matters I guess.



I've seen families torn apart because of religion. There's no reasoning with religious people. So just let them live their sideways life, and keep them from doing harm to you.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 01:13 PM
I'm not a christian nor am I affiliated with any organized religion. I find it a waste of time and mental energy.

Why would I have to have a religious belief to understand what's going on? Do you not think I'm intellectual enough to grasp that these people are putting a God that, obviously did nothing to help, above the welfare of their child.

We live in the 22 century, it pains me to see something as archaic like this still being practiced. Wake up to common sense, this is my point.

You do have to have a religious belief to understand what is going on with this, there is no way around it. All you can see is your side of the issue, which is purely secular. You do not have the concept other than your disdain for what has happened.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 01:17 PM
That's fine and dandy in what they believe in but the child got no say or choice in weather they could be treated. This is negligence if anything...their child died because they didn't take proper action. Are you telling me you would be fine with your child dieing as well in this fashion if that was your religion. Even though you knew that they could possibly live doing this. I'd take a bullet for my child, makes me wonder if they could get that concept.

You do not know that. How old was the kid? What would her age of accountability be? The proper action for them was to do as they did. Not put their child into the hands of a doctor in which they did not believe.

You live in a different space than that family and the other members of their church. You can't conceive of what happened because you do not understand where they are coming from. It's simple as that.

Sully
03-28-2008, 01:18 PM
He is not on ignore other than I reject his opinion as he does not reply to the topic but to the poster. He has no capacity to read beyond a1na2. Basically neither do you, if both of you could there wouldn't be the cheap shots where nobody can see them as well as addressing the topic of the thread rather than being excessively childish and calling names.

You ever hear the term, "You made the bed, now lie in it?"

It's bedtime.

It's amazing how quickly you can switch from "poor me, everyone attacks me without provocation" to saying, unprovoked, "You're a moron! You're an idiot!"

The humor that is your posting style, unintended, to be sure, is the highlight of being on this message board.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 01:19 PM
and the parents believe that they sent their child to heaven, rather than prolonging life on earth while ending her chance to go to heaven in the end.

I (we) may think they are a couple of whack-jobs, but they feel better, and that's all that really matters I guess.



I've seen families torn apart because of religion. There's no reasoning with religious people. So just let them live their sideways life, and keep them from doing harm to you.

Totally missed the point. Put the crack pipe down and move away from the discussion!

Tell me, have you ever seen religion do good in someone's life? Yes, it's a loaded question.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 01:21 PM
I have nothing to say because I don't understand what is going on, I just like attacking because of my personal hatred!

Fixed your post.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 01:23 PM
You ever hear the term, "You made the bed, now lie in it?"

It's amazing how quickly you can switch from "poor me, everyone attacks me without provocation" to saying, unprovoked, "You're a moron! You're an idiot!"



Dude, I don't care if you hate me, that's in your purview. The fact that you can only answer any post I make with name calling and insults leaves little for rebuttal but to return the favor.

Try getting a life and then participating in the discussion. If you can't do that just STFD and STFU!

CosmicPal
03-28-2008, 01:31 PM
The state of Wisconsin has some backwards law protecting the parents on this kind of neglect:

(Discovered this little gem from the book, When Prayers Fail)

State statute 948.03(6) provides an exemption from the law against failing to act to protect children from bodily harm for what is referred to as "Treatment through prayer." The statute says: "A person is not guilty of an offense under this section solely because he or she provides a child with treatment by spiritual means through prayer alone for healing in accordance with the religious method of healing ... in lieu of medical or surgical treatment."

...the statute drew some attention in 2003, when a two-year-old autistic child in Milwaukee was crushed to death during an attempted exorcism. The practitioner was convicted, albeit of a lesser offense than what some felt was appropriate. Afterwards, Milwaukee County District Attorney E. Michael McCann urged state lawmakers to remove this exemption, lest it lead to what he called "mischief." Wisconsin's do-little Legislature has not done so.

Peters, in an interview, says the Milwaukee case "illuminated the fact that the law was there." He suspects it found its way into the statute books through the efforts of Christian Scientists, as in other states with similar exemptions.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 01:36 PM
Common sense is not the issue here.


It absolutely is. These parents lack of common sense is why they have to bury their daughter. How can you defend this nonsense?

Sully
03-28-2008, 01:40 PM
Fixed your post.

I don't hate you, T om Cash.
I think you are funny.
When I see you have posted, I run to see what it was, because it almost ALWAYS makes me laugh.

MIAdragon
03-28-2008, 01:42 PM
There you go.


LMAO

Sully
03-28-2008, 01:43 PM
Dude, I don't care if you hate me, that's in your purview. The fact that you can only answer any post I make with name calling and insults leaves little for rebuttal but to return the favor.

Try getting a life and then participating in the discussion. If you can't do that just STFD and STFU!

I can't think of any times I've ever called you a name. If I have, it hasn't been more than one or two times, tops. I tend not to "call names." It's not all that creative.
And like I said, I don't hate you at all. I feel sorry for you from time to time. I certainly don't have a shred of respect for you. But your posts are great. they give me MANY laughs.

CosmicPal
03-28-2008, 01:47 PM
Here's my 2 cents, not that it really matters, but....

I can't answer for the parents, but I would bet you anything that if their daughter was riding down the street in her bicycle and some car came from out of nowhere and threw her off her bicycle that they would be taking their daughter to the nearest ER as fast as they could. Not a prayer in this world would've saved their daughter from the head-on collision with a moving car.

So, the fact that they used prayer as a means to heal their daughter's illness IS in fact, neglect.

However, the article did mention the diabetes was "undiagnosed." Therefore, it is possible they didn't know it was terminal. Which, of course, is neglect.

I have to wonder if the mother was such a religious fanatic that she wanted her daughter to make a complete recovery so she could run around telling everyone about her "Miracle" with prayer. She would've been so proud.

However, now that it obviously back-fired, does she still promote prayer as a healing mechanism? And is she now mad at her God for not listening?

a1na2
03-28-2008, 01:58 PM
It absolutely is. These parents lack of common sense is why they have to bury their daughter. How can you defend this nonsense?

How many times does it have to be said? Their belief system does not allow them to consult with doctors. It's not a common sense issue, it has 100% to do with their religious belief.

The defense of their belief is guaranteed in the US Constitution and it's amendments. It's pure and simple.

I would comment that you lack much life experience to understand the issue but I know people that are younger than you that fully understand the issue.

I would bet that you are one of those that stood up and complained about the Patriot Act because of the freedoms it devoided you of.

MIAdragon
03-28-2008, 02:01 PM
How many times does it have to be said? Their belief system does not allow them to consult with doctors
.

Where are you getting this from? In the posted article it says;

"believe in the Bible and that healing comes from God, but that they do not belong to an organized religion or faith, are not fanatics and have nothing against doctors."

Im not getting that they aren’t "allowed" to consult with them, they simply chose not too.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>

a1na2
03-28-2008, 02:07 PM
Here's my 2 cents, not that it really matters, but....

I can't answer for the parents, but I would bet you anything that if their daughter was riding down the street in her bicycle and some car came from out of nowhere and threw her off her bicycle that they would be taking their daughter to the nearest ER as fast as they could. Not a prayer in this world would've saved their daughter from the head-on collision with a moving car.

So, the fact that they used prayer as a means to heal their daughter's illness IS in fact, neglect.

However, the article did mention the diabetes was "undiagnosed." Therefore, it is possible they didn't know it was terminal. Which, of course, is neglect.

I have to wonder if the mother was such a religious fanatic that she wanted her daughter to make a complete recovery so she could run around telling everyone about her "Miracle" with prayer. She would've been so proud.

However, now that it obviously back-fired, does she still promote prayer as a healing mechanism? And is she now mad at her God for not listening?

You make valid points, but you assume that their religion allows them to use doctors, hospitals and other medical assets that we all take for granted.

Undiagnosed illness is not grounds for neglect if your faith system is not in medical science. One of my co-workers does not believe in doctors, medicines, even aspirin, or emergency services. If an event happens in their family they deal with it to the best of their ability.

As for your last comment. I would say that their feeling is that it was Gods will for the kid to pass when she did and although grieved they accepted the death just as you would if your kid died in an emergency room. Death does not necessarily change someone's faith. Those without faith have a hard time seeing that, even those that claim faith (Jenson) has trouble seeing that.

People do not understand that God has the last say in all situations (I know there are more non-believers here than believers - or it seems to be indicated by the number of "kill them" type replies) even for the unbelievers.

Like I've said numerous times here. I believe that God put physicians here as tools for us all, but every strain of religion does not share my belief. I'm standing on the preface that each religion has different views and those that are not affiliated with that particular faith cannot understand the whys and why nots associated with that faith.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 02:11 PM
Where are you getting this from? In the posted article it says;

"believe in the Bible and that healing comes from God, but that they do not belong to an organized religion or faith, are not fanatics and have nothing against doctors."

Im not getting that they aren’t "allowed" to consult with them, they simply chose not too.<O:p></O:p>
<O:p></O:p>

I base my comments on those that I know that belong to faiths that do not believe in doctors.

Also, what constitutes an organized religion? Nazarine, Baptist, Methodist, Quaker, Mennonite, etc? How about the home churches that are not sanctioned by any entity that is associated with mainstream doctrine? Are they considered in the story or is it that the story only recognizes mainstream religions and they do not subscribe to the small churches I've mentioned?

Leilani Neumann said she and her husband are not worried about the investigation because "our lives are in God's hands. We know we did not do anything criminal. We know we did the best for our daughter we knew how to do."

If you want to hang your hat on the way the story is written, so be it. What I see is a family that has faith in God and does not have a medical background and treated what they could with what they could.

Find fault in them if you must, I still stand on the faith system being just that ... the faith of those that are involved and not the faith of those outside.

MIAdragon
03-28-2008, 02:16 PM
I base my comments on those that I know that belong to faiths that do not believe in doctors.

Throw the link up again, please. I will re-read it to verify what you are saying.

Also, what constitutes an organized religion? Nazarine, Baptist, Methodist, Quaker, Mennonite, etc? How about the home churches that are not sanctioned by any entity that is associated with mainstream doctrine? Are they considered in the story or is it that the story only recognizes mainstream religions and they do not subscribe to the small churches I've mentioned?


Its the 4th sentence in the first post.

Lets save "what constitutes an organized religion" for another time. Its really not an issue in this case IMO.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 02:29 PM
How many times does it have to be said? Their belief system does not allow them to consult with doctors. It's not a common sense issue, it has 100% to do with their religious belief.
Yes it is! Common sense does not fit in with their religion apparently. That's fine. That doesn't mean their children have to die now because of that. Their children need to be taken away as soon as possible. They can live with this "religion" in their prison cell. If they get gangrene, then they can decide "Now I will sit and pray for God's help to cure me"

Third Eye
03-28-2008, 02:37 PM
Without trying to sound like an ass, if there are criminal charges brought against them, does the family hire a lawyer, or do they represent themselves and put it in god's hands?

a1na2
03-28-2008, 02:38 PM
Its the 4th sentence in the first post.

Lets save "what constitutes an organized religion" for another time. Its really not an issue in this case IMO.

I disagree:

Leilani Neumann, said that she and her family believe in the Bible and that healing comes from God, but that they do not belong to an organized religion or faith, ...

That one statement tells me quite a bit. They are not bound by any doctrine of what we all might consider established churches.

At the end of the day I feel there is going to be a degradation of our freedoms based on the interferrence of government and other outside sources in cases like this.

I still maintain that we are guaranteed a freedom of religion. That means practicing our faith as we please. This is all inclusive, atheists (if that is considered a religion), wicca, buddist, muslim, etc.

The basic thought process with everyone here seems to be that religion is bad and that nobody should be involved beyond being able to say that you have a religion and some even argue that point.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 02:40 PM
Without trying to sound like an ass, if there are criminal charges brought against them, does the family hire a lawyer, or do they represent themselves and put it in God's hands?

Look them up in the phone book and ask them.

What kind of question is that?

To prove neglect in this case some slick lawyer is going to have to prove that the family knew that she was diabetic (undiagnosed per the story) and that they intentionally withheld a trip to the doctor. I can't see them going down for it.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 02:43 PM
Yes it is! Common sense does not fit in with their religion apparently. That's fine. That doesn't mean their children have to die now because of that. Their children need to be taken away as soon as possible. They can live with this "religion" in their prison cell. If they get gangrene, then they can decide "Now I will sit and pray for God's help to cure me"

You are suggesting that the children be placed in foster care, a system that has seen far more children die from neglect than single family situations such as this.

Your judgement of the family should be toned down a bit, what goes around comes around. Remember - Judge not, lest ye be judged? It's coming around your way.

You need to study more about what you should do and less about what you feel emotionally.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 02:45 PM
You are suggesting that the children be placed in foster care, a system that has seen far more children die from neglect than single family situations such as this.

After reading the article, it sounds like there was a relative that cared for the child.

sedated
03-28-2008, 02:49 PM
It's not a common sense issue, it has 100% to do with their religious belief.

If beliefs contradict common sense, then both are the issue.

I, for one, hope religious zealots avoid doctors. Eventually the population will be a smarter place. (that thing called natural selection)

Third Eye
03-28-2008, 02:49 PM
Look them up in the phone book and ask them.

What kind of question is that?

To prove neglect in this case some slick lawyer is going to have to prove that the family knew that she was diabetic (undiagnosed per the story) and that they intentionally withheld a trip to the doctor. I can't see them going down for it.

What kind of question is it? A very serious one. You wouldn't find it hypocritical if they did?

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 02:49 PM
To prove neglect in this case some slick lawyer is going to have to prove that the family knew that she was diabetic (undiagnosed per the story) and that they intentionally withheld a trip to the doctor. I can't see them going down for it.

That's not true. If this girl really did have diabetic ketoacidosis, she suffered harsh conditions for a while. Any nurse can tell you that. Any diabetic specialist will tell you all the details.

I asked my mom last night. She's a diabetic specialist. She said the article's list of symptoms were spot on:

She had probably been ill for about a month, suffering symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, excessive thirst, loss of appetite and weakness, the chief said Wednesday, noting that he expects to complete the investigation by Friday and forward the results to the district attorney.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 02:54 PM
That's not true. If this girl really did have diabetic ketoacidosis, she suffered harsh conditions for a while. Any nurse can tell you that. Any diabetic specialist will tell you all the details.

I asked my mom last night. She's a diabetic specialist. She said the article's list of symptoms were spot on:

She had probably been ill for about a month, suffering symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, excessive thirst, loss of appetite and weakness, the chief said Wednesday, noting that he expects to complete the investigation by Friday and forward the results to the district attorney.

Again, you are asserting your values on someone else. You can't do that, you don't have the right.

What "any nurse" lived in the house with the Neumans?

Where was your Mom when this child was in the beginning stages of sickness?

Where were you when this was going on? I think you are solely responsible for not impressing on Mrs. Neuman that she needed to take this kid to the doctor.
You were negligent in protecting the life of this child. You need to be prosecuted for being negligent.

Ask Mrs. Neuman if she is a diabetic specialist. I doubt that she is, so there were no symptoms that made her feel it was diabetes.

Have you ever been feeling crappy and just didn't go to the doctor? If you say no, I'll call you a liar. Nobody goes to the doctor for every little complaint. How many people do you think may have died because they didn't know they were ill?

Your assertions are good for you, but you do not get to make that choice in other people's lives, especially when you have no clue as to what was going on other than a story in on the internet.

Third Eye
03-28-2008, 02:58 PM
Again, you are asserting your values on someone else. You can't do that, you don't have the right.




And there it is, isn't it? Kinda like when some whackjob asserts their values on their underage daughter.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 03:02 PM
Again, you are asserting your values on someone else. You can't do that, you don't have the right.

Ask Mrs. Neuman if she is a diabetic specialist. I doubt that she is, so there were no symptoms that made her feel it was diabetes.

Have you ever been feeling crappy and just didn't go to the doctor? If you say no, I'll call you a liar. Nobody goes to the doctor for every little complaint. How many people do you think may have died because they didn't know they were ill?

Your assertions are good for you, but you do not get to make that choice in other people's lives, especially when you have no clue as to what was going on other than a story in on the internet.

She didn't have to think it was diabetes. She just had to know there was something wrong. She obviously did because she prayed to God instead of using her damn brain and getting her to the doctor.

Having excessive thirst and hunger for weeks is not "feeling crappy." Throwing up for weeks is not "feeling crappy." YOUR ****ING SENSE TELLS YOU SOMETHING IS WRONG AND IF YOU DON'T DO SOMETHING ABOU IT, THAT IS NEGLECT.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 03:04 PM
What "any nurse" lived in the house with the Neumans?

Where was your Mom when this child was in the beginning stages of sickness?

Where were you when this was going on? I think you are solely responsible for not impressing on Mrs. Neuman that she needed to take this kid to the doctor.
You were negligent in protecting the life of this child. You need to be prosecuted for being negligent.

Oh.....kaaayyy.

Hydrae
03-28-2008, 03:18 PM
So, for all the Christians out there, how strong is your faith? Do you believe God could have cured this little girl if it was in his plan? Do you think if he wanted her to live to adulthood he could have given her to different parents? At what point did God lose control of this situation which led to her death?

Matthew 10:

29Are not two sparrows sold for a penny[d]? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. 30And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31So don't be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.

So God knew what was going on and did nothing to stop it from happening. In my book that would mean that this was part of God's will.

How about Matthew 17:

20He replied, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you."

Have you ever seen a mustard seed? Pretty darned small but if you have that little bit of faith you can literally move mountains. My guess would be that you could cure a disease or two as well.

http://www.heronfarm.co.uk/070_-_Mustard_Seed.jpg

So I guess what I am saying is that to me, those of you who claim christianity but think these people are crazy are hypocritical. Do you also believe that "God helps those who help themselves?" Because I sure never learned that in Sunday School. I think people should actually praise these folks who have such an abiding believe in their god that they would allow this to happen. In their world, this was all part of God's plan even if we don't understand it.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 03:22 PM
And there it is, isn't it? Kinda like when some whackjob asserts their values on their underage daughter.

Apples and oranges dude.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 03:23 PM
She didn't have to think it was diabetes. She just had to know there was something wrong. She obviously did because she prayed to God instead of using her damn brain and getting her to the doctor.

Having excessive thirst and hunger for weeks is not "feeling crappy." Throwing up for weeks is not "feeling crappy." YOUR ****ING SENSE TELLS YOU SOMETHING IS WRONG AND IF YOU DON'T DO SOMETHING ABOU IT, THAT IS NEGLECT.

That is purely your opinion based on what you feel and has no bearing on the Neuman family. Sorry dude.

Brock
03-28-2008, 03:25 PM
So I guess what I am saying is that to me, those of you who claim christianity but think these people are crazy are hypocritical. Do you also believe that "God helps those who help themselves?" Because I sure never learned that in Sunday School. I think people should actually praise these folks who have such an abiding believe in their god that they would allow this to happen. In their world, this was all part of God's plan even if we don't understand it.


God gave them brains enough to be aware that doctors can easily cure what ailed their daughter.

Some people think God tells them to lock their children in a cage in the basement without food or water. Bless them too?

a1na2
03-28-2008, 03:26 PM
So, for all the Christians out there, how strong is your faith? Do you believe God could have cured this little girl if it was in his plan? Do you think if he wanted her to live to adulthood he could have given her to different parents? At what point did God lose control of this situation which led to her death?

Matthew 10:

29Are not two sparrows sold for a penny[d]? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. 30And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31So don't be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.

So God knew what was going on and did nothing to stop it from happening. In my book that would mean that this was part of God's will.

How about Matthew 17:

20He replied, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you."

Have you ever seen a mustard seed? Pretty darned small but if you have that little bit of faith you can literally move mountains. My guess would be that you could cure a disease or two as well.

http://www.heronfarm.co.uk/070_-_Mustard_Seed.jpg

So I guess what I am saying is that to me, those of you who claim christianity but think these people are crazy are hypocritical. Do you also believe that "God helps those who help themselves?" Because I sure never learned that in Sunday School. I think people should actually praise these folks who have such an abiding believe in their god that they would allow this to happen. In their world, this was all part of God's plan even if we don't understand it.

There is nothing new under the sun.

Jesus said: "these things that I do, you shall do and greater."

So, can God heal through people? Yes. Does he have to heal through preachers? No.

What is it that fulfills the healing? Faith? Yes.

Some will understand and most here, it seems, cannot fathom what you said.

Sure-Oz
03-28-2008, 03:29 PM
God gave them brains enough to be aware that doctors can easily cure what ailed their daughter.

Some people think God tells them to lock their children in a cage in the basement without food or water. Bless them too?

No shit...

BucEyedPea
03-28-2008, 03:37 PM
It absolutely is. These parents lack of common sense is why they have to bury their daughter. How can you defend this nonsense?

How? Because you want to substitute what you think is sensible for what is a spiritual belief which a religious person considers sensible for spiritual salvation. Some religions feel the soul is more important even just to enter heaven. In fact, at one time the RCC, allowed the mother to die in a difficult birth in order to save the child because a soul was being saved. It's weird to us in a secular society but that is a religious belief. But they are both opinions. One is secular one is religious.

And where do we draw the line?

There's now forced vaccinations when there's been congressional hearings that they have bad side effects. We have parents being threatened with abuse if they don't put their child on Ritalin. If children are not the property of parents, then why does the state consider them their property? They're not anybody's property but the parent has traditionally been the caretaker of developing the child including in values and religion.

Don't get me wrong, I can argue this one both ways because it's a tough one.
I thought, however, that 3/4's of the states had exemptions for healing with prayer.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2008, 03:41 PM
Lets save "what constitutes an organized religion" for another time. Its really not an issue in this case IMO.
Of course it's an issue, it touches on what is a religion—something the state also has no right to define. It's a matter of conscience.

Hydrae
03-28-2008, 03:42 PM
God gave them brains enough to be aware that doctors can easily cure what ailed their daughter.

Some people think God tells them to lock their children in a cage in the basement without food or water. Bless them too?

Do they have a way to back that up from the Bible? No, there are crazy people who think God talks to them directly. Acting on those impulses are not in the same neighborhood as having a deep abiding faith that God will look out for those who profess their belief in him.

My father stops whatever he is doing whenever he hears a siren and prays that God watch over those involved. He does this because he sincerely believes God will listen and answer that prayer. Sometimes those people still die or whatever but he sees those as being part of God's will. We can't understand why God allows the things he does but that does not make them wrong, just beyond our feeble understanding.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2008, 03:43 PM
and there is your answer why there are rarely criminal cases
Guess I don't see it. If there aren't criminal suits, unless a Kevorkian-type scene, then there's nothing to protect. They protect themselves in the civil suits by covering for one another.

Pitt Gorilla
03-28-2008, 03:43 PM
I'm not sure where you got that, but what I'm saying is that we AS AMERICANS, have some undeniable rights and one of those rights is to practice our religion as we see fit. This has nothing to do with the religion part of the equation but the freedoms that we enjoy as Americans.That isn't true. If your religion tells you to molest your kids, it will still be against the law. Similarly, even if your religion requires you to sacrifice one of your family members, you'll probably still go to jail. I'm not sure you've thought this through.

Sure-Oz
03-28-2008, 03:46 PM
That isn't true. If your religion tells you to molest your kids, it will still be against the law. Similarly, even if your religion requires you to sacrifice one of your family members, you'll probably still go to jail. I'm not sure you've thought this through.

But but common sense wasn't part of those people's religions....:rolleyes:

Brock
03-28-2008, 03:46 PM
My father stops whatever he is doing whenever he hears a siren and prays that God watch over those involved. He does this because he sincerely believes God will listen and answer that prayer. .

That is fine as long as he doesn't stop in the middle of the freeway to do it. It isn't God's will that you cause a 50 car pileup on 435.

Hydrae
03-28-2008, 03:48 PM
I do want to be clear, this is not something I would allow to happen to my children and I do not even agree with their stance. However I also do not think that they should be prosecuted for their belief system which is what the OP was advocating.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 03:48 PM
That isn't true. If your religion tells you to molest your kids, it will still be against the law. Similarly, even if your religion requires you to sacrifice one of your family members, you'll probably still go to jail. I'm not sure you've thought this through.

If your religion tells you that you are not practicing a religion but a cult.

My religion does not say that in the slightest. You are twisting words just to be a pain in the ass. All you have to do to be that pain is to post on any thread on this board.

I suspect that you don't subscribe to any religion, mainstream or other because the Bible tells us that we have to obey the laws of the land. "Give unto Caesar what is Caesars".

That tells me that I have to obey the laws of the land that I reside in, but I still have the freedom to exercise my religion as I see fit.

This thread is more about trying to put criminal charges against a family that broke no written law regarding their child. I'm guessing that you have totally overlooked the premise of the thread.

Care to try again?

Brock
03-28-2008, 03:52 PM
I do want to be clear, this is not something I would allow to happen to my children and I do not even agree with their stance. However I also do not think that they should be prosecuted for their belief system which is what the OP was advocating.

Their "belief system" caused harm to an innocent person. They sure as hell should be prosecuted for child abuse.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2008, 03:54 PM
Their "belief system" caused harm to an innocent person. They sure as hell should be prosecuted for child abuse.

What about those who belief system support abortion, particularly in the last trimester or even partial birth. Wonder how many folks in this thread who would condemn these people's beliefs are in that camp?

BucEyedPea
03-28-2008, 03:55 PM
But but common sense wasn't part of those people's religions....:rolleyes:

In your opinion.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 03:55 PM
And where do we draw the line?


When an eleven year old girl is now dead because the parents refused to get her medical help, some line has been crossed.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2008, 03:56 PM
That isn't true. If your religion tells you to molest your kids, it will still be against the law. Similarly, even if your religion requires you to sacrifice one of your family members, you'll probably still go to jail. I'm not sure you've thought this through.

Those are acts of commission on another. One is a an assault defined under law. The other is an act of physical aggression. This is an act of omission or not doing something.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2008, 03:58 PM
When an eleven year old girl is now dead because the parents refused to get her medical help, some line has been crossed.
Where that line crosses is an opinion. It may be an agreed upon opinion by the group but it is still an opinion.

Hydrae
03-28-2008, 03:58 PM
When an eleven year old girl is now dead because the parents refused to get her medical help, some line has been crossed.

So you do not believe that God could have saved her and cured her if it was his will?

a1na2
03-28-2008, 03:59 PM
When an eleven year old girl is now dead because the parents refused to get her medical help, some line has been crossed.

Again, that is your opinion based on your emotions.

Wait and see if the courts even touch this.

Is it bad that the girl died? Yes it is.

Were the parents criminally negligent? No, I don't think so.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 04:01 PM
So you do not believe that God could have saved her and cured her if it was his will?

Jenson cannot answer that right now. His emotions are overriding his common sense and even his Catholic faith.

What gets me about his opinion is that he can condone partial birth abortions but crys out for the blood of the parents here.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 04:02 PM
This thread is more about trying to put criminal charges against a family that broke no written law regarding their child. I'm guessing that you have totally overlooked the premise of the thread.

Care to try again?

You don't think endangering the life of a child is against the law?

Sure-Oz
03-28-2008, 04:04 PM
In your opinion.

So if your religion called upon not seeing dr's etc, you would go ahead and tell little billy that god wants him to die cause there is nothing else that can be done and thats his will? In reality there was...

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 04:05 PM
So you do not believe that God could have saved her and cured her if it was his will?

That isn't entirely relevant to this story, but like other issues in the thread, I will answer this.

My short answer is that, I believe there is nothing God cannot do.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 04:06 PM
What gets me about his opinion is that he can condone partial birth abortions but crys out for the blood of the parents here.

What makes you say that?

Brock
03-28-2008, 04:08 PM
So you do not believe that God could have saved her and cured her if it was his will?

He gave them everything they needed to cure their daughter. Waiting for god to do things that you can do for yourself is for fools.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2008, 04:12 PM
So if your religion called upon not seeing dr's etc, you would go ahead and tell little billy that god wants him to die cause there is nothing else that can be done and thats his will? In reality there was...

Well you're coloring things by saying telling little billy god wants him to die. That's not what these types do, they believe god will intervene to heal.I guess they also believe it's god's will too if they die. But religious folks believe life on earth is temporary and eternal life exists afterwards. Which is why this is a religious pov. I wouldn't do it.

The more I think about this though, it is really more a state issue. But I believe most states also have freedom of religion in their constitutions.

tiptap
03-28-2008, 04:20 PM
Physicians often petition the courts to intervene on the part of minors. Christian Scientists, Jehovah's Witnesses and other religious groups are often compelled under community standard of care concerns to submit minors for treatment that go against religious practice.

Hydrae
03-28-2008, 04:21 PM
That isn't entirely relevant to this story, but like other issues in the thread, I will answer this.

My short answer is that, I believe there is nothing God cannot do.

So they were not wrong to believe God could take care of this. It is just our human fallibility that leads us to believe that we must go to the doctor because he is the only tool God has to heal us. That is actually putting humans above God in some ways.

I would love to stay and be involved in this interesting discussion but work calls. I hope to be able to at least poke back in to this thread in the next day or so.

God bless! :D

a1na2
03-28-2008, 04:23 PM
What makes you say that?

I see you crying for blood of the parents here but you have never mentioned the wrongness of intentionally taking a life under the guise of birth control.

I'm looking for any kind of moral outrage equal to that you have levied against the parents of the 11 year old girl.

My religion tells me that killing indiscriminately is wrong, what about yours?

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 04:30 PM
So they were not wrong to believe God could take care of this.

Nope. The part they got wrong was when they did not get medical help for their daughter for (allegedly) an entire month while she showed symptoms.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 04:33 PM
I see you crying for blood of the parents here but you have never mentioned the wrongness of intentionally taking a life under the guise of birth control.

So you think that because you have never seen a post of mine saying abortion is wrong, I must condone partial-birth abortions?

a1na2
03-28-2008, 04:36 PM
Nope. The part they got wrong was when they did not get medical help to for their daughter for (allegedly) an entire month while she showed symptoms.

Considering they were not doctors themselves, the symptoms did not present themselves to the parents as life threatening. So your argument is void. I've seen people that looked like they were going to die and did nothing more than vomit.

What galls me is that you have such moral outrage without even having a clue about what happened other than a 4 paragraph story on the internet.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 04:40 PM
Considering they were not doctors themselves, the symptoms did not present themselves to the parents as life threatening. So your argument is void. I've seen people that looked like they were going to die and did nothing more than vomit.

Let's just say the article is correct in its reporting.

"She had probably been ill for about a month, suffering symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, excessive thirst, loss of appetite and weakness"

Do you really think only a doctor can tell that this is a problem?

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 04:42 PM
What galls me is that you have such moral outrage without even having a clue about what happened other than a 4 paragraph story on the internet.

You've spent a lot of time defending these righteous, God-fearing, Bible-loving parents based on nothing more than what you've read from this article, no?

a1na2
03-28-2008, 04:44 PM
So you think that because you have never seen a post of mine saying abortion is wrong, I must condone partial-birth abortions?

I searched your login and reviewed some threads that you posted in and saw nothing that would lead me to think you felt, or even cared, that it is wrong to kill babies yet you are 100% gung ho to have the parents of this girl rot in jail - with gangreen IIRC - and die a painful death while praying for healing.

I just see your stance as extremely hypocritical as well as unjustifiably judgmental.

With my broaching the subject, if you actually felt abortion was wrong you should have gone off like a Smith & Wesson .357 like you have been all day long but you didn't, and causes me to consider that you are less worried about the intentional killing of the unborn than you are about kids that fall ill at home.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 04:46 PM
You've spent a lot of time defending these righteous, God-fearing, Bible-loving parents based on nothing more than what you've read from this article, no?

No, I defended the premise of their faith based on my life experiences and what I've read in the bible and what we have as religious freedom as stated in the Constitution of the U.S.

You have spent a lot of time being self righteous here, no?

BucEyedPea
03-28-2008, 04:48 PM
Physicians often petition the courts to intervene on the part of minors. Christian Scientists, Jehovah's Witnesses and other religious groups are often compelled under community standard of care concerns to submit minors for treatment that go against religious practice.

Some of those get overturned too.

There was a case with the Amish who believe in apprenticeship by age 15 or so instead of enrollment in school...and the state even went after them for that. It was overturned later.

You can get a religious exemption ( and in some states a philosophical exemption) from vaccinations....depends on the state.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 04:50 PM
I searched your login and reviewed some threads that you posted in and saw nothing that would lead me to think you felt, or even cared, that it is wrong to kill babies

Interesting; I'll play, although I suspect you just want to change the subject. Do an advanced titles search for Jenson71 with the word "abortion." You will find three entries. The last one you might consider particularly interesting.

Duck Dog
03-28-2008, 04:50 PM
No, I defended the premise of their faith based on my life experiences and what I've read in the bible and what we have as religious freedom as stated in the Constitution of the U.S.

You have spent a lot of time being self righteous here, no?

If this is true, perhaps you should spend more time reading medical journals.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 04:54 PM
Let's just say the article is correct in its reporting.

"She had probably been ill for about a month, suffering symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, excessive thirst, loss of appetite and weakness"

Do you really think only a doctor can tell that this is a problem?

I seems to have bypassed your level of understanding that the parents did not see these as life threatening symptoms. They have other kids, do you think they are all dead because the parents did not take them to the doctor when those symptoms may have been displayed by the others? Those symptoms are NOT exclusive to diabetes. I have diabetes and I do not exhibit those symptoms yet I have had episodes of passing out, vomiting, loss of appetite and weakness that were not related to diabetes. I've had those very same symptoms from the flu, form sinus infections and viral infections.

Which part of the fact that these people are not and were not doctors has gotten by you? You have a parent that is a diabetic specialist ( you say ) so you have some insight into what those symptoms are. I have been qualified as an EMT and have some clue as to what the symptoms are but neither of our experiences count toward what the parents know or knew.

Your whole argument is mostly based on emotion and outrage for a situation that you actually know very little about.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 04:55 PM
If this is true, perhaps you should spend more time reading medical journals.


Why would I have to spend time in medical journals? I use doctors as needed and stay within the confines of my faith.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 04:55 PM
You have spent a lot of time being self righteous here, no?

You could say that. I am very confident that what these fools did was wrong and should be punished; I don't feel bad at all for my intolerance of their "beliefs" that it's okay to let your child die.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 04:57 PM
Interesting; I'll play, although I suspect you just want to change the subject. Do an advanced titles search for Jenson71 with the word "abortion." You will find three entries. The last one you might consider particularly interesting.

No I don't want to change the subject. I want to see your moral outrage in the same vehement level that you have levied against the family in question. I also want you to defend your stance of being this pissed about one girl and so passive about the millions that have been aborted since Roe V Wade.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 04:59 PM
You could say that. I am very confident that what these fools did was wrong and should be punished; I don't feel bad at all for my intolerance of their "beliefs" that it's okay to let your child die.

Who said they said it's OK for their child to die? YOU, how dare you make that assumption! Your intolerance is something that will serve you well in the future, good luck with that. The total ignorance of the matter is what is more troubling to me than anything. As a young person you are going to be living in this world longer than many of the rest here and that attitude gives me concern for the future of this country.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 05:01 PM
I seems to have bypassed your level of understanding that the parents did not see these as life threatening symptoms.

I would consider that a lack of common sense and a danger for their remaining children, to the extent that they should be punished and their remaining children should be taken away.

They have other kids, do you think they are all dead because the parents did not take them to the doctor when those symptoms may have been displayed by the others?

Their other children obviously never had diabetic ketoacidosis.


Which part of the fact that these people are not and were not doctors has gotten by you?


Nothing. I fully understand that they were not doctors nor ever were nor ever will be.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2008, 05:02 PM
The thing that I see that could hurt them is that they said they also had nothing against doctors and even used on before.

Pestilence
03-28-2008, 05:03 PM
If your religion tells you that you are not practicing a religion but a cult.



Who are you to determine that someone's belief in something is a cult and not religion? You don't have that power.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 05:04 PM
No I don't want to change the subject. I want to see your moral outrage in the same vehement level that you have levied against the family in question. I also want you to defend your stance of being this pissed about one girl and so passive about the millions that have been aborted since Roe V Wade.

You read the links right? That's just in threads where the title mentioned abortion. I assume I've talked about it in other threads that may not have had the word in the thread title, but I can't remember any specifically as of now.

Jenson71
03-28-2008, 05:05 PM
Who said they said it's OK for their child to die? YOU, how dare you make that assumption! Your intolerance is something that will serve you well in the future, good luck with that. The total ignorance of the matter is what is more troubling to me than anything. As a young person you are going to be living in this world longer than many of the rest here and that attitude gives me concern for the future of this country.

Yes, I will defend a child's right to life and get medical care, and not feel bad about that or how horrible that will make the future of this country.

a1na2
03-28-2008, 05:10 PM
Their other children obviously never had diabetic ketoacidosis.

Nothing. I fully understand that they were not doctors nor ever were nor ever will be.

You do not know that the other kids were not diabetic and had the same symptoms. If this girl had type I diabetes there is a very good chance that the other three did as well and if they did, or any one of them did, who is to say that they had the same symptoms and recovered? In that light what would a prudent parent do if they saw the same symptoms in a second child? They would have done what worked before, prayer and treating them as they did the first child. This is speculation but it bears something to think about. Did the other kids have diabetes and did they show those same symptoms?

You understand that they were not doctors yet you still blame them for not recognizing the symptoms that could have been many other other problems? I find that amazing to say the least.

Also, are you aware that diabetes is generally inherited from the parents? My mothers side of the family almost all had adult onset/type II in their lives. My mother dies of complications from diabetes, should I be criminally liable and in jail for not getting her to the doctor when she had symptoms? I had been trained as an EMT at the time of her death.

The other three kids had

a1na2
03-28-2008, 05:12 PM
Yes, I will defend a child's right to life and get medical care, and not feel bad about that or how horrible that will make the future of this country.

Right now you are fighting a war of words and are not gaining any ground because you do not have all the facts and are working on emotions. It seems as if you do not have any concern for what is actually right and what is needed. You are young, I wish you luck when you reach an age that you can realize that your youthful outrage is nothing more than misapplied emotional stress brought on by a situation that you do not understand fully.