1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Parents on their way to prison for not providing medical care for child.

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by David1967, Jul 10, 2018.

  1. Mox

    Mox Dr Green Fingers

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    534
    Ratings:
    +316
    Religion:
    Panentheistic Gnostic
    18813361_1471700172872738_8883819979960240840_n.jpg
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. Skwim

    Skwim Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    25,343
    Ratings:
    +9,681
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    I say, forget the slap on the wrists: six years in prison. Kill the parents, and yesterday no less. Ba Da Bing! Ba Da Bang! :oldman: :gun::oldwoman::gun: You're dead. :skull::skull:

    .
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  3. Quintessence

    Quintessence Tale Weaver
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    19,480
    Ratings:
    +12,339
    Religion:
    Druidry


    Obviously.

    It's probably a good time to point out I didn't read the article (don't really consider MSN a reputable news source). My frame of reference in my responses is "not providing medical care," not "parent cause physical harm to children." If you want to continue to respond a position that isn't mine and stuff I didn't say, well... okay.

    In any case, I don't consider humans, children or otherwise, to be the most in need organisms on this planet by a very, very, very, very long shot. I really can't get interested in issues like this when humans are responsible for a sixth mass extinction and doing very little to make amends for that.
     
  4. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Not banned yet.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    144,333
    Ratings:
    +39,604
    Religion:
    Bokononism
    So you think that might be my intention, eh.
    If there's miscommunication, it's better to
    clarify things than to imply a straw man.
    This is a separate issue, & one I've held forth upon (advocating
    population control for the sake of both people and critters.)
     
    #24 Revoltingest, Jul 10, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2018
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Quintessence

    Quintessence Tale Weaver
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    19,480
    Ratings:
    +12,339
    Religion:
    Druidry

    I don't know. It just seemed there was some disconnect between what I meant to communicate and what was understood. Which is, of course, at least partially my bad. I think the intersection between religious freedom and health care is complicated. I'm having a crotchety moment with it. Am I too young to be crotchety? *laughs*



    I have a hard time seeing them as separate since efforts to prolong human lives increase population numbers in very direct ways.
     
  6. Bob the Unbeliever

    Bob the Unbeliever Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2017
    Messages:
    5,295
    Ratings:
    +3,184
    Religion:
    unbeliever
    However, as a Society, we do retain the right to limit Religious Freedom.

    For starters, you cannot impose your religion onto other folk, against their will.

    And it's a very fine line, when parents are forcing Bronze Age "Medicine" onto children who are unequipped to make an informed consent.

    Moreover? Not all religion is Respected Equally.

    In the not too distant past, there were Religions that taught the First Born had to be Sacrificed (killed) as an offering to the Main God.

    Such Belief would not be respected, nor granted Freedom To Practice.

    In this instance, Freedom Of Religion is ECLIPSED by a Prohibition To Murder, and in the Eyes of the Law, killing a firstborn is seen as Murder.

    By the same principle, withholding Life Saving Medical Treatment, is akin to Murder-- although that's not the actual intent, it is the consequence.

    So, Freedom Of Religion is Stopped: Cold, if there are actual Lives On The Line.

    This is as it should be, I would think.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Not banned yet.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    144,333
    Ratings:
    +39,604
    Religion:
    Bokononism
    It's a libertarian thing.
    Government's greatest role is ensuring civil liberties.
    Regarding the infant in the OP's link, it died because
    the parents denied it proper medical care.
    If we're ever to address population control, it most
    definitely won't thru allowing wrongful death.
    Hence their being separate issues.
     
    #27 Revoltingest, Jul 10, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2018
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  8. stvdv

    stvdv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2018
    Messages:
    3,841
    Ratings:
    +2,051
    Religion:
    Sanathana Dharma [The Eternal Religion]
    I believe that we should follow the Law of the Country. But I do not agree with all the Laws.

    I believe that sometimes hospitals do a bad job
    1) Asking very much money; Big Pharma is a bit maffia like. Not good for spiritual person IMO
    2) In nature very weak will die. Where does Big Pharma playing for God stop?

    And what is Truth, what is Right?
    There is no Truth, Right for everyone. 1 country different from other country.
    What if costs are very high, and parents go bankrupt. If state pays okay, if not then not okay IMO
    What is the effect if you force parents to pay such bills. Is it natural, is it God's will? How you know for sure?
    Maybe the parents go crazy, and then all other 4 kids get also in trouble

    State wanting to control too much is not so good IMO. And when they do it because of control/power/money it's really bad IMO.
     
    • Creative Creative x 1
  9. Bob the Unbeliever

    Bob the Unbeliever Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2017
    Messages:
    5,295
    Ratings:
    +3,184
    Religion:
    unbeliever
    Hear! Hear!

    It is one of the Dichotomies of our modern society, that we should (I believe) do our best to help keep alive, those who are most vulnerable among us; naturally children automatically fall into this category.

    Yet, we also recognize that there are simply too many humans on Earth-- and we ought to be taking some form of positive steps to remedy that. One, naturally, is quality sex-education, with easy access to preventatives. This is an easy step to make, and keeps things (more or less) voluntary.

    Educated people naturally have fewer offspring.

    Alas, the negative side-effect of this? Is that un-educated people keep popping out spawn that they cannot possibly care for properly...

    ... and we are back to my point one: We then become Obligated to Care for these Unwanteds.

    *le sigh*
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. dawny0826

    dawny0826 Mother Heathen

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    14,065
    Ratings:
    +2,161
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational Christian
    Oregon has a State Children's Health Insurance Program. States are required at least until 2019 not to make cuts to their CHIPs as per the Affordable Health Care Act. The largest percentage of children without access to health care are those that would typically qualify for CHIP or Medicaid. Most, if not all states have programs in place to support families with reaching positive outcomes in situations of existing or potential neglect or abuse.

    Most States have resource to justify enforcement of child welfare and endangerment laws.

    The ethical challenge here is that a newborn baby can't provide its consent to the cultural practices of its parents. We're not talking about engaging a newborn in cultural or religious activities. We're talking about a newborn dying because its parents neglected to seek medical care. Should cultural or religious practice be given priority over the rights and/or autonomy of an individual to health and safety?
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. Hubert Farnsworth

    Hubert Farnsworth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2016
    Messages:
    2,381
    Ratings:
    +1,636
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    No one should be allowed to deny their child any potentially life-saving medical procedure.
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
  12. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    12,517
    Ratings:
    +8,514
    Religion:
    None
    Refusing treatment for a suffering child is child abuse.

    Refusing treatment that would save a childs life and that child dies is premeditated murder.
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
  13. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Not banned yet.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    144,333
    Ratings:
    +39,604
    Religion:
    Bokononism
    Contrary to popular myth, crotchetiness doesn't always get worse with age.
    May you escape it's grip...crotchetiness that is, not old age.
    The latter is useful (considering the alternative).
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  14. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Not banned yet.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    144,333
    Ratings:
    +39,604
    Religion:
    Bokononism
    I wouldn't call it "murder" if the intent, however misguided, was life.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    21,671
    Ratings:
    +7,961
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    Well the couple doesn't appear to be very mentally sound. The mother was found cradling her dead newborn around praying family and friends because they didn't want to go to the hospital for the birth.

    I can only guess and imagine they were laying on the hands, speaking in tongues and all that for a resurrection of some sort to occur like Lazarus if the behavior of Pentecostals give a clue.

    It's their surviving child that was refused treatment by the parents oblivious apparently to the fact they already had one dead newborn on their hands which should have rang a bell and raise the red flag that Faith isn't what people romantically envisioned it to be.

    There's nothing pretty about hard reality when it comes to things like this.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  16. Mox

    Mox Dr Green Fingers

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    534
    Ratings:
    +316
    Religion:
    Panentheistic Gnostic
    Not a particulary rational line of reasoning that.
    That's like saying I don't care about Blue Whales because Gorillas are more endangered.

    Also it's not as if human children bear any responsibility whatsoever for the wilfully indifferent ecosystem wrecking antics of SOME human adults.

    PS If you are disinterested in human welfare, then why respond to this topic in the first place?

    Puzzling.
     
    #36 Mox, Jul 10, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2018
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Robert Vincelette

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2015
    Messages:
    87
    Ratings:
    +26
    Religion:
    agnostic tend towards Zarathustra
    Because the kind of faith that withholds medical treatment comes from the delusion that one can know that God conforms to some fanciful model of something nobody can know, such clinging to ignorance is without the right to have the community or the state to use whatever physical force is necessary to defend the child against the parents irresponsible act of murder. A civil penalty such is prison is on order for parents who are so unfit that they choose to make-believe and act on a lethal make-believe magical thinking process.
    But a belief by faith without claim to certainty does not give the parents the right to obey a god they made themselves believe requires them to kill their innocent child.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    3,707
    Ratings:
    +1,011
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    When you say we, I am assuming you mean the Law.
    The law has the right to make laws, and enforce them. It doesn't have the right to break them - although some nations do.

    Can you give an example of
    Can you give an example of
    Whether a religion is respected equally or not, is beside the point, imo. Religion is religion. All are not the same - they vary.

    There are laws against various things - murder, rape...
    If a religion is carrying out illegal activities, then the law is within its rights to enforce the law.

    Withholding life saving medicine is subject to opinion.
    For example, doctors do not agree on what is 'life saving medicine'.
    Doctors practices are not all the same. Thank God.

    Freedom of religion cannot be stooped cold, unless that applies to all religion - which would require a reversal of the law.
    The law is within its right to act against a violation of law - not religious freedom - unless as I said it reverses that law with - no more freedom of religion.
     
  19. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    12,517
    Ratings:
    +8,514
    Religion:
    None
    If you know that denying medication will cause death then i cannot see it any other way.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Mox

    Mox Dr Green Fingers

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    534
    Ratings:
    +316
    Religion:
    Panentheistic Gnostic
    I wonder if you would whistle that tune whilst you were lying in your sick bed, pumped full of antibiotics and analgesics. :rolleyes:
     
Loading...