Yet another case of religious murder

In Ohio, a couple of vegans were charged with child endangerment and had their children taken away by CFS because they (the children) showed classic, chronic malnutrition. The state has on more than one occasion taken a child from parents in order to assure that the child gets decent medical care. In Canada, a child of "First Nations" parents has been taken, against his own will, so that he can be given cancer treatments which, in someone his age and with his condition, lead to remission in 90% of cases.

I think that as time goes on, we will see more of this sort of thing, of the state stepping in to intervene when somebody's wacky superstition or superstitiously held beliefs (like the vegans) threaten their children's health or their very lives. This is, to my mind, an example of the state using its power responsibly, because the harm already done, or the harm which potentially could arise from the idiocy of the parents is demonstrable.

It really is too bad that we live at the dawn of the age in which religious superstition is being shown for the true evil which it is.

0 Replies

@shewolfnm,

shewolfnm wrote:

you are one angry bastard.

ebrown?
****?

will you get a grip and be able to have a conversation instead of a heart attack for once ?

part of the conversation is discussing the laws, reactions, and beliefs.

I think a few more people need to get angry, and maybe there'd be a few less dead children.

0 Replies

I think a few more people need to get angry, and maybe there'd be a few less dead children.

And what can you say to that?

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

I think a few more people need to get angry, and maybe there'd be a few less dead children.

And what can you say to that?

I guess I can't say anything-- since apparently disagreeing with you makes me a murderer.

2 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

Quote:
I think a few more people need to get angry, and maybe there'd be a few less dead children.

And what can you say to that?

I guess I can't say anything-- since apparently disagreeing with you makes me a murderer.

Have you ever killed anyone?

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

ebrown p wrote:

Quote:
I think a few more people need to get angry, and maybe there'd be a few less dead children.

And what can you say to that?

I guess I can't say anything-- since apparently disagreeing with you makes me a murderer.

Have you ever killed anyone?

By withholding medical care?

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

Quote:

I guess I can't say anything-- since apparently disagreeing with you makes me a murderer

Id never noticed before how you seem to go for hyperbole. Nowehere has anyone accused YOU of being a murderer, you are just using that silly reference to apparently gather sympathy. Try to stick with making your arguments from the information presented.

Thats about the 3rd time in this thread alone that youve used inaccurate representations of the others positions. Whats with you?
I never expect to change anyones mind but I would hope others , not invested with the positions that you v WIlso and I have taken, to be able to see accurate expressions of the facts behind our respective positions.
K?

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

Have you ever killed anyone?

By withholding medical care?

A correct representation of E's position is that witholding medical halp had nothing to do with this homicide, and it was therefore just an "Act of God"?

0 Replies

People try to use faith to justify all manner of crimes by omission. That might have been justifiable in the dim past, but not in an age where medicine and knowledge of medicine abounds.

0 Replies

Wilso wrote:

It's ******* murder you ****, and you're just as guilty by being part of the group that enables this behaviour.

Farmerman wrote:

I pretty much support this , with the exception of the "****" part. E. is a dude.

Farmerman wrote:

Id never noticed before how you seem to go for hyperbole. Nowehere has anyone accused YOU of being a murderer, you are just using that silly reference to apparently gather sympathy. Try to stick with making your arguments from the information presented.

Farmerman wrote:

We punish orthodox Mormons for Sodomy, we punish Hutterites for " enhanced punishments" and we should severely punish "Christian SCientists" for practicing their Mideival rituals while knowing full well of the consequences that their "pray to cure" will have

Farmerman wrote:

Now Ill bet your gonna sic Roe v Wade on me as your territory of argument spreads further from the origin.(Lessee , Im a racist, bigot , so I guess Ill have to live with "baby killer" . WAIT A MINIT, Im on the other side of baby killer. OHHH FRABJUS DAY, Ive attained a degree of high morel standing.

Farmerman wrote:

Spare me the drama puhhhleeeeze.

1 Reply

What sort of cheese would be appropriate to serve with E_Brown's whine?

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

What , are you highlighting the parts of my posts that you dont understand?

the cheese, whay a nice ripe DAFFINOIS. Thats one silly cheese.The perfect accompaniment for any whine.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Yes farmerman-- and that even wasn't an exhaustive list.

We have largely stopped enforcing anti-sodomy laws (which I think is a good thing) --- do you still think we should be punishing orthodox Mormons?

2 Replies

premeditated murder while they were at the same time admittedly perfectly (and idiotically) ignorant? strange idea, in my opinion. shameful, stupid, criminal, sure. responsible for death, sure.
semantics can sometimes get you an electric chair and semantics sometimes starts wars. it is important, again, in my opinion.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

I am not whining Set.... I am laughing out loud (and having a harder time keeping my composure each time I open this silly thread).

1 Reply

Setanta wrote:

It really is too bad that we live at the dawn of the age in which religious superstition is being shown for the true evil which it is.

This is what is all about-- a misguided attempt to rid our society of evil religious superstition. Sorry Setanta, it ain't going to happen.

Religion, like it or not, is a sociological phenomenon. It is part of culture, ethnicity and identity for millions of Americans (and others)... and it is part of human nature.

This is why you can't stamp out religious "superstition" in a free, diverse society. Societies that didn't have pesky constitutional protections in the way have tried -- and failed.

Now look. I have never argued that these parents shouldn't be held accountable for the death of their child. I have pointed out that this is not murder, but I haven't gone any farther than that. I am simply saying that this isn't murder.

But the real issue that keeps me in this ridiculous thread is the obvious bigotry against the religious.

These parents shouldn't be treated more harshly, under the law, then any other negligent parents. Their religion shouldn't be held against them.

The epithets in this thread against religious people clear examples of prejudice.

I am not religious-- I trust science. I use medicine. I don't pray. I don't go to church and I don't plan on existing after I die. This argument is about prejudice-- and making sure that someone isn't treated more harshly based on their beliefs. (Now please take a deep breath and read the part above where I say these parents should be held accountable for the death of their child).

I am only asking for a reasonable response rather than the knee-jerk overreaction you see here.

2 Replies

@ebrown p,

By Orthodox Mormons you mean the cults that married 13/14 years old girls to 40 plus year old men?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Ask Farmerman-- his little rant included the phrase "We punish orthodox Mormons for Sodomy", I was just playing with him.

0 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

Now look. I have never argued that these parents shouldn't be held accountable for the death of their child. I have pointed out that this is not murder, but I haven't gone any farther than that. I am simply saying that this isn't murder.

But the real issue that keeps me in this ridiculous thread is the obvious bigotry against the religious.

These parents shouldn't be treated more harshly, under the law, then any other negligent parents. Their religion shouldn't be held against them.

I have found over the years that 'Religious' parents who kill their children are often treated much better in the court system that parents who starve or beat their children to death. They seem to get less time or lesser sentences.

I fail to see the difference, I'd imagine dying from diabetes would be no walk in the park. I'd say this was premeditated. It would take a few weeks/months of the little girl getting progressively sicker to the point where she couldn't walk, talk or see. This didn't happen overnight. This child suffered while there idiots watched and prayed - for what? The End!
Very, very sad. They should have the rest of their kids taken away too. If one child presents with diabetes, there is a good chance others will as well.

I am a religious bigot. I freely admit it. I have a big problem with giving children the shaft all for the sake of the seating arrangements in a church. So many kids have been victims to churches, their leaders, their programs or institutions. I think it's time that religions/beliefs, at least in the courts, was never used as an excuse for abuse . Ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law!!!

I think these parents should get the entire prayer group over for a session right before they are jailed. They should be forced to see how futile those prayers are when applied to their freedom.
Mind you, I think the whole prayer group should be up on charges too. As accessories to the crime in question.

Didn't this group of pricks have any brain cells between them???

0 Replies

@ebrown p,

Quote:

Quote:
These parents shouldn't be treated more harshly, under the law, then any other negligent parents. Their religion shouldn't be held against them.

The problem is that many and most are treated LESS harshly under the law. The standards of proof seem to favor the parents civil rights (MY main point that youve apparently avoided0. As far as removing Sodomy from the table, I dont buy it, since there are two cases pending in Texas and Utah.
Chances are that, despite the jury's findings that this homicide determination was to carry a sentence, you wanna bet that she stands a good chance of skipping with a mere wrist slap (anything 5 years or time served and 5 is a wrist slap).
If you wish to call my post a rant, then you are just a senseless provacateur who isnt even consistent with your points.

RELIGION must never be an excuse to condone criminal acts. Several other of the sects I mentioned have all accomodated themselves to the modern world, the cult in this thread must also pay recognition that its skating within the realm of CAESER. Witholding routine medical attention for a simple chronic condition and, by doing so, turn the chronic condition into an acute, and fatal one. That is depraved indifference and hence MURDER.

Your attempt at conflating what Ive said with bigotry, racism, and whatever else youve attempted to throw up against the wall, is an act of desparation. I dont understand why you are stooping so low, its only a debate in which you disagree that a word "MURDER" is inapropriate to the case. SO far youve not handled that case too well. Youve called names and made references about my bigotry and racist and hateful tones. Im actually sitting here smiling at you.

If its not murder by legal terminology, it SHOULD BE so included in the legal lexicon.
How have the girls civil rights been guranteed under the 1st amendment? Doesnt her freedom of (and from) religion have equal standing? You are so steadfast in protecting the rights of the cukt that you have written off the kids violated rights. (LEt alone the murder that was committed),

0 Replies

Yet another case of religious murder

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know