Have a sick kid that needs basic Meds, NNAAA just pray that will work!!!

[GagHalfrunt]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Kalvin00

Originally posted by: moshquerade
i don't buy any justifications for this.

Sadly, in our legal system, there is.

There might be if they actually belonged to some church that subscribed to such anti-medical science beliefs.

I remain hopeful, however, that the DA will see through this pathetic alibi being used by the parents here.

Why does idiocy only come in large batches according to you? Ridiculous beliefs are ridiculous beliefs whether they're practiced individually or in large congregations. A religion with one adherent is just as valid as one with a million. After all, it's just faith, right? If these people had faith in their invisible man in the sky it's no different that you having faith in your invisible man in the sky.

What really amuses me in threads like this is that it's not just the atheists who pile on. The bible thumpers mock these people because their beliefs and practices are so screwy without ever grasping that that's exactly why we mock the bible thumpers.

 

[zach0624]

nm should have read through thread.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: pyonir

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
In all areas of the law, your children are effectively your property, so it's their call.

So i can go ahead and beat the shit out of my property whenever i want, right? After all, it's just my property. It's not against the law to break my TV and that's just property.


Sweet.

Or hump your bagels(warmed up in the microwave of course).

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: pyonir

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
In all areas of the law, your children are effectively your property, so it's their call.

So i can go ahead and beat the shit out of my property whenever i want, right? After all, it's just my property. It's not against the law to break my TV and that's just property.


Sweet.

This was just the kind of slippery slope I had hoped someone would offer me a ride on. Sweet!

You are EQUATING someone "beating the shit out of" their child, with someone who chooses not to utilize a set of services to help their child during an illness, but instead prays to their god because that is what they believe will offer the best help, when they are anything but EQUAL. The difference is intent.

If you think intent doesn't matter, then you can't distinguish between killing and murder, accident or purpose, guilt or innocence (presumed of course, lol oj).

"Free to do as we say is not free", which is why in these areas, we do not say.

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: zach0624
this reminds me of the religious joke thread we had here a while back, with the joke that went something like
A man whose house was being flooded refused to leave his house. A fireman came and told him the river was going to flood his house. the man replied god will save me. When the water's several feet deep and a acouple of men row up in a boat the man tells them god will save him. the water now is almost to his roof. A helicopter flies overhead but he tells the people in it god will save him. the next day he drowns and goes to heaven. when he gets there he asks god why he didn't save him. He answered "I tried, I sent you a fireman, a boat and a helicopter what else do you want me to do?
My point is that if you pray to be saved think about what the miracle might be. It be a simple medicine or a recovery from an untreatable illness.

if you would've RTFT you would've seen the joke posted twice

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Kalvin00

Originally posted by: moshquerade
i don't buy any justifications for this.

Sadly, in our legal system, there is.

There might be if they actually belonged to some church that subscribed to such anti-medical science beliefs.

I remain hopeful, however, that the DA will see through this pathetic alibi being used by the parents here.

Why does idiocy only come in large batches according to you? Ridiculous beliefs are ridiculous beliefs whether they're practiced individually or in large congregations. A religion with one adherent is just as valid as one with a million. After all, it's just faith, right? If these people had faith in their invisible man in the sky it's no different that you having faith in your invisible man in the sky.

What really amuses me in threads like this is that it's not just the atheists who pile on. The bible thumpers mock these people because their beliefs and practices are so screwy without ever grasping that that's exactly why we mock the bible thumpers.

One of these days I am going to figure out how you can misinterpret everything I post in the most ridiculous ways possible, spew it back out with nothing but vapid stupidity, and then call me an idiot.

I don't have any faith in any invisible man in the sky, moron. Nor am I a bible thumper just because I read it once so that I could argue against religion whereas all your arguments are from ignorance.

My point was that one can't use religion belief as a form of legal protection unless one actually belongs to a religion. That is clearly not the case here. But you're doing a great job here in demonstrating how you care so much more about bashing religion that you're willing to let child abusers go free.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: pyonir

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
In all areas of the law, your children are effectively your property, so it's their call.

So i can go ahead and beat the shit out of my property whenever i want, right? After all, it's just my property. It's not against the law to break my TV and that's just property.


Sweet.

This was just the kind of slippery slope I had hoped someone would offer me a ride on. Sweet!

You are EQUATING someone "beating the shit out of" their child, with someone who chooses not to utilize a set of services to help their child during an illness, but instead prays to their god because that is what they believe will offer the best help, when they are anything but EQUAL. The difference is intent.

If you think intent doesn't matter, then you can't distinguish between killing and murder, accident or purpose, guilt or innocence (presumed of course, lol oj).

"Free to do as we say is not free", which is why in these areas, we do not say.

You are wrong here. Children are not your property, and neglect is not an effective legal defense.

And that's what happened here BTW. Billy Bob spent the insulin money, let the kid die, and then mom goes, "Hey quick, tell 'em that's our religious belief!" Forget the fact that they don't go to church and she probably sees a doctor every time she gets sick, people on the internet will fall for it!

 

[pyonir]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: pyonir

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
In all areas of the law, your children are effectively your property, so it's their call.

So i can go ahead and beat the shit out of my property whenever i want, right? After all, it's just my property. It's not against the law to break my TV and that's just property.


Sweet.

This was just the kind of slippery slope I had hoped someone would offer me a ride on. Sweet!

You are EQUATING someone "beating the shit out of" their child, with someone who chooses not to utilize a set of services to help their child during an illness, but instead prays to their god because that is what they believe will offer the best help, when they are anything but EQUAL. The difference is intent.

If you think intent doesn't matter, then you can't distinguish between killing and murder, accident or purpose, guilt or innocence (presumed of course, lol oj).

"Free to do as we say is not free", which is why in these areas, we do not say.

Hey, you're the one that made a ridiculous generalization. Children are not property. In any sense of the word. If they were, they would have absolutely no rights. Which they do.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Children are treated as property in every sense of the word in law. Property with best interests.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Children are treated as property in every sense of the word in law. Property with best interests.

I hope you never become a child owner.

 

[ChaoZ]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
LAWL@YOUPEEPHOLE

Freedom of religion? Abuse how? They believe in their god and not modern medicine. In all areas of the law, your children are effectively your property, so it's their call.

So if I had kids I can beat them, starve em or shove them in a microwave right? They are my property after all.

 

[Jeff7]

"If you want to save your child from polio, you can pray or you can inoculate." - Carl Sagan

 

[mrSHEiK124]

My mom told me something very wise when I was trying to grasp the concept of prayer growing up: "God will only help you if you help yourself." It's not a fucking magical hotline, if you've got treatable diabetes then treat it damn it.

 

[Schfifty Five]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Children are treated as property in every sense of the word in law. Property with best interests.

I think you are confused about what the word "property" really means.

 

[thepd7]

Originally posted by: ScottyB
This is murder, plain and simple. If people want to forgo medical treatment because of their idiotic belief in a fairytale, let them. But when children are involved, the government needs to step in and stop pussing out to the religious morons in this country. Freedom of Religion means freedom from a set governmental religion, not complete disregard of standard decency, law, and logic in the name of religious freedom. It isn't the time of witches, demons, and mass murder in the name of a god anymore; we need to distinguish between logic and idiocy at some point.

So you would take away every Christian Scientists' in the US's kids because they won't allow doctors to help them if they are dying?

How about the people who aren't smart enough to realize if their child is sick? Do we take away their kids too?

How about people who are not horrible parents but bad parents?

How about people who feed their kids McDonalds every other day? They are setting up a life that will kill their kids eventually.


There is no law that says you must seek medical attention for a child, and what is logical and decent to you is not to them. I personally disagree with these people but they have every right to feel and act this way. On the other hand, I was a lifeguard. If some parent wouldn't let me help their dying child I would have punched them out and helped the kid, lawsuit be damned.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: thepd7

Originally posted by: ScottyB
This is murder, plain and simple. If people want to forgo medical treatment because of their idiotic belief in a fairytale, let them. But when children are involved, the government needs to step in and stop pussing out to the religious morons in this country. Freedom of Religion means freedom from a set governmental religion, not complete disregard of standard decency, law, and logic in the name of religious freedom. It isn't the time of witches, demons, and mass murder in the name of a god anymore; we need to distinguish between logic and idiocy at some point.

So you would take away every Christian Scientists' in the US's kids because they won't allow doctors to help them if they are dying?

How about the people who aren't smart enough to realize if their child is sick? Do we take away their kids too?

How about people who are not horrible parents but bad parents?

How about people who feed their kids McDonalds every other day? They are setting up a life that will kill their kids eventually.


There is no law that says you must seek medical attention for a child, and what is logical and decent to you is not to them. I personally disagree with these people but they have every right to feel and act this way. On the other hand, I was a lifeguard. If some parent wouldn't let me help their dying child I would have punched them out and helped the kid, lawsuit be damned.

Yes, take their kids away. As citizens, children must be protected by the state from their parents.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad

Originally posted by: Ryan
Why make them get medical attention? This is what is unique about the American experience: we allow you a fuck your own life up, and believe what the fuck you want, no matter how ludicrous.

its child abuse...

its religious freedom

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad

Originally posted by: Ryan
Why make them get medical attention? This is what is unique about the American experience: we allow you a fuck your own life up, and believe what the fuck you want, no matter how ludicrous.

its child abuse...

its religious freedom

Should terrorists be allowed to murder us because their religion tells them to?

 

[IEC]

Originally posted by: DnetMHZ
Dear lord, I pray that you will grant me 5 minutes alone with these 2 oh so loyal subjects as I think I can offer them some much needed "guidance" and can put them on a path to bring them much closer to you
Lord, I also pray for your blessing on this Louisville Slugger, broken whiskey bottle and rusty butter knife so that they may be used to bring your disciples home!

your friend,
DnetMHZ

I like your thinking, do you have a newsletter?

I can send you the broken whiskey bottle.

 

[IEC]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad

Originally posted by: Ryan
Why make them get medical attention? This is what is unique about the American experience: we allow you a fuck your own life up, and believe what the fuck you want, no matter how ludicrous.

its child abuse...

its religious freedom

I'm torn about this. In one respect it's religious "freedom", but at the same time is clearly interfering with the right of the child to LIVE.

Since I object to this on religious grounds as well (<-- Christian, and believe modern medicine is a wonderful thing) that gives me 2/3 reasons to be angry.

1. Child has basic human right to LIFE.
2. There is almost no valid religious reason to deny life-saving medical treatment IMO.
3. Sure it is "religious freedom", but I don't believe this reason can override #1.

 

[sdifox]

Religious freedom applies to individuals. A parent may not project his/her belief onto his/her child. End of the story.

 

[ShotgunSteven]

They mentioned on Paul Harvey that the parents blame themselves for her death due to not praying hard enough, and now they're hoping she will be resurrected.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Originally posted by: sdifox
Religious freedom applies to individuals. A parent may not project his/her belief onto his/her child. End of the story.

What world are you living in? If parents didn't project their beliefs onto their kids there wouldn't be religion in the first place. Parents have every legal right to project their fairy tales onto their kids and the ones protecting that right are the ones doing it to their own kids.

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt

Originally posted by: sdifox
Religious freedom applies to individuals. A parent may not project his/her belief onto his/her child. End of the story.

What world are you living in? If parents didn't project their beliefs onto their kids there wouldn't be religion in the first place. Parents have every legal right to project their fairy tales onto their kids and the ones protecting that right are the ones doing it to their own kids.

A parent can tell their kid whatever they want, but they may not decide for their kids what they should believe is what I am trying to say. Plenty of kids in catholic families don't follow their parents' footsteps, once they are old enough to decide for themselves.

The case at hand is happening everywhere. Maybe it's time to start a JW youth monitoring program.

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Yes, take their kids away. As citizens, children must be protected by the state from their parents.

Then what? And at what point determines a bad parent? You?
Sorry, I worked for social services before, and nobody there had the intelligence to determine that.