Religious Nuts Kill Own Daughter—Is Their Sentence Appropriate?

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

DrewDad wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
What is the difference between this case and abortion then?

Can you really not tell the difference between an eleven year old and an embryo?

So one second after birth, destroying the child is murder, and one second before it's not at all wrong? That doesn't seem like a very reasonable or credible idea.

Have I expressed such an idea? Perhaps you should investigate the meaning of the word "embryo".

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

I assumed that when you interjected in the discussion I was having, you had actually read the relevant posts. I suppose that was too much to have asked of you. My apologies. Please carry on with your being a dumbass.

It's a public forum, is it not? Perhaps you should conduct your private conversations in private. Speaking of being a dumbass....

0 Replies

@wandeljw,

As I said, Wande - if these people watched their child suffer and did nothing to alleviate that when they were aware that there was an easy end to it - such as a dose of insulin and an IV of fluid - they should suffer themselves.

But am I the one to pass judgment and wish suffering on people and children who have lost a sibling or child ?
N

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

<snip>
<snip snip>
<snip>
<snipity> <snip>

Geez ehBeth! What kind of idiots do you think people here are to fall for this type of hack job.

I suggest people read the whole site, rather than these cherry picked, out of context quotes. The argument they are making is that they didn't know that she had diabetes (they thought it was a flu) and they did take her to the hospital (admittedly too late) when they realized how serious it was.

Come on ehBeth, how about a little intellectual honesty!

3 Replies

@wandeljw,

As I said, Wande - if these people watched their child suffer and did nothing to alleviate that when they were aware that there was an easy end to it - such as a dose of insulin and an IV of fluid - they have something to answer for.

But am I the one to pass judgment and wish suffering on parents and children who have lost a child/sibling?
No, because I'm not a judge and I don't want to be. There is someone who has heard all the facts of this case. He's made a ruling. I wouldn't trade places with any of the players in this case if you paid me.

If you guys know what's what and what's always right and can say that you'd never ever make a mistake that cost your child his or her health or life - good for you. I prefer not to judge other people more harshly than I'd be judged - especially when I don't know all the facts- although as I've said - these people did not act in the same way I would - although I'd never have an abortion either and then cry when another of my children died.

2 Replies

@aidan,

Quote:

if these people watched their child suffer and did nothing to alleviate that when they were aware that there was an easy end to it - such as a dose of insulin and an IV of fluid - they have something to answer for.

Interesting, as with any witch hunt, the actual facts seem to be at odds with the arguments coming from the angry mob.

Read the press accounts. There was no diagnosis of diabetes and no evidence that the parents knew that insulin would alleviate their daughters illness.

This seems like would be an important point.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Sorry about the semi-double post. I must have pressed reply when I was halfway through, although I didn't type the whole thing again, so I don't know how the first half got reproduced. Anyway - the thought is the same.

0 Replies

There was no diagnosis of diabetes because these clowns didn't consult with doctors, and considered that "god's will" would determine not just one's health, but one's prospects for life or death. You're just tying your intellect in knots to attempt to defend these indefensible religious hillbillies.

0 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

I suggest people read the whole site, rather than these cherry picked, out of context quotes. The argument they are making is that they didn't know that she had diabetes (they thought it was a flu) and they did take her to the hospital (admittedly too late) when they realized how serious it was.

Are you sure you aren't confusing the other story they are comparing theirs to on that page? They say the stories are similar but they have some key differences.

0 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

ehBeth wrote:
<snip>
<snip snip>
<snip>
<snipity> <snip>

Geez ehBeth! What kind of idiots do you think people here are to fall for this type of hack job.

I suggest people read the whole site, rather than these cherry picked, out of context quotes. The argument they are making is that they didn't know that she had diabetes (they thought it was a flu) and they did take her to the hospital (admittedly too late) when they realized how serious it was.

So, are you just committed to making **** up, or what?

They didn't know that she had diabetes because they had never taken their child in for a checkup. That's not responsible behavior for parents to engage in. It is well-understood in modern society that, when you don't go to the doctor for years, you increase your chances of something preventable from happening tremendously.

They 'didn't know,' because they actively avoided their responsibility to care for the lives of their kids.

They also didn't 'take her to the hospital.' That's a lie on your part. From the news account:

Quote:

Prosecutors contended the Neumanns recklessly killed their youngest of four children by ignoring obvious symptoms of severe illness as she became too weak to speak, eat, drink or walk. They said the couple had a legal duty to take their daughter to a doctor but relied totally on prayer for healing. The girl, known as Kara, died on the floor of the family's rural Weston home as people surrounded her and prayed. Someone finally called the emergency services after she stopped breathing.

They called an ambulance after she was dead. They didn't 'take her to the hospital.' They killed her and then someone thought, maybe they'd better do something. Too late.

Quote:

Come on ehBeth, how about a little intellectual honesty!

Puh-leeze.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

I suggest people read the whole site, rather than these cherry picked, out of context quotes. The argument they are making is that they didn't know that she had diabetes (they thought it was a flu) and they did take her to the hospital (admittedly too late) when they realized how serious it was.

Come on ehBeth, how about a little intellectual honesty!

ebrown p wrote:

Read the press accounts. There was no diagnosis of diabetes and no evidence that the parents knew that insulin would alleviate their daughters illness.

This seems like would be an important point.

Quote:

Police were on the way to the Neumann's rural Wisconsin home to perform a welfare check on the girl, after the Marathon County Sheriff's Office got a call from Kara's aunt, Ariel Gomez of California, expressing concern about Kara.

Before they could even get to the home, a 911 call came from the Neumann house about a medical emergency.

Gomez called the sheriff's office three times Sunday about her niece's medical condition, according to the Marathon County Sheriff's Office. "My sister-in-law is, her daughter's severely, severely sick and she believes her daughter is in a coma," Gomez is heard telling the dispatcher in one of the 911 calls released by the sheriff's office. "And, she's very religious, so she's refusing to take [Kara] to the hospital, so I was hoping maybe somebody could go over there."

Gomez asks authorities to send an ambulance, and warns the dispatcher that Leilani Neumann will fight attempts to intervene. "We've been trying to get her to take [Kara] to the hospital for a week, a few days now," Gomez tells the dispatcher.

Source

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

I think ebrown was confusing their story with this one that they quote on their page:

Quote:

My little girl, Mary Kathryn, died yesterday...

She had been feeling droopy for about the last week. I thought that it was just the start of some kind of bug that was going around. But, by Saturday, she had gotten so weak that I took her to the ER. Come to find out she was a diabetic. It had come on suddenly and no one else in our family has diabetes. She had started drinking more, but I thought it was because she was just sick. They were never able to get her stabilized in the hospital and due to the fact that she was so dehydrated it caused her brain to swell and herniate. She became brain dead at that point and lost to us. My precious baby, Mary Kathryn Elizabeth, I don't know how I can make it without you!” The website this is from is here. Go there and read this story! The only difference is the Neumanns did not take Kara to the hospital because they believed the child only had a flu and because they believe what the Bible says about healing. Had they brought Kara to the hospital the Neumanns could have joined this mother in her grief!

And yes, the key difference is that the others took their child to the emergency room before the child stopped breathing. The Neumanns said they were, for reasons they can't explain, unconcerned when the child became limp and lifeless and only sought medical help when the child stopped breathing.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Yeah, I was initially confused by that as well, it wasn't until I noticed that all the names were different that it cleared up for me.

Peep WH's link above, where the Sister sez that they had been trying to get the girl to the doctor for a week; that sure doesn't seem like she 'suddenly took ill.'

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

One side of this debate is arguing that the parents "knew" that insulin would have cured their daughter.

There is no evidence that this is true.

There is a big difference between "not taking your child for a check up" and "denying your child insulin that you know she needs".

The facts matter.

4 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

One side of this debate is arguing that the parents "knew" that insulin would have cured their daughter.

There is no evidence that this is true.

Which side is that? It certainly isn't my side, I'm arguing that the people were idiots who aren't fit to raise kids.

Quote:

There is a big difference between "not taking your child for a check up" and "denying your child insulin that you know she needs".

The facts matter.

What would prompt you to write the last sentence? You've made several statements which clearly show that you are only loosely acquainted with the case, so it's a little ironic.

Not just 'not taking your kid in,' as if you missed an appointment, or it's been too long. Never taking your child in. That's what we are talking about. Not believing in medicine.

Look at this line from WH's link:

Quote:

"My sister-in-law is, her daughter's severely, severely sick and she believes her daughter is in a coma,"

She believed her daughter was in a coma.

Are you arguing that the parents didn't have access to the knowledge that going to see a doctor helps when you are sick? In this modern day and age it's a little ridiculous to make that argument. It's also clear that the girl didn't just suddenly fall sick, but was sick for several days if not a week - and the extended family of the girl was trying to intervene.

It's hard to have a conversation with you on this issue, when you are willing to straight make things up and twist other people's arguments, rather than respond to what was actually said. I think you chose a really bad position to defend in this thread, because you thought people were unfairly ganging up on Religious folks, and you consider yourself to be a Religious dude. I can understand that. But you should be able to look at the facts and see that this couple sacrificed their kid on the altar of their religious beliefs, and that's not something which should carry a 6-month sentence in jail.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

One side of this debate is arguing that the parents "knew" that insulin would have cured their daughter.

There is no evidence that this is true.

There is a big difference between "not taking your child for a check up" and "denying your child insulin that you know she needs".

The facts matter.

"Not taking your child for a check up" does not apply to this case. It is a question of whether the parents should have sought emergency medical help for a child who was unresponsive for days.

0 Replies

@ebrown p,

Quote:

One side of this debate is arguing that the parents "knew" that insulin would have cured their daughter.

There is no evidence that this is true.

Yeah, you're right. There is no evidence that people here are saying that insulin would have cured their daughter and they knew it. What people are saying is that their daughter needed medical attention, and they knew that.

0 Replies

@ebrown p,

That may be, but if you confused the stories with the ones about the flu, and the ones that actually did take their kid to the doctor it would be, you know, intellectually honest to admit as much.

I've seen nothing about this particular case being mistaken for a flu except in that they compare themselves to the other case they found. The girl's aunt says her mother thought the girl was in a coma, which is not really the same level of sick as a flu.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

That may be, but if you confused the stories with the ones about the flu, and the ones that actually did take their kid to the doctor it would be, you know, intellectually honest to admit as much.

Yes, I did confuse the stories (it pisses me off a bit that I let myself be suckered this way by their website).

The in-between truth gets muddier then; they didn't know it was diabetes... but apparently they did say she was "unresponsive". The coma thing does hurt their case.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

She believed her daughter was in a coma.

No, someone else claims that she believed that.

1 Reply

Religious Nuts Kill Own Daughter—Is Their Sentence Appropriate?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know