Page 13 of 22 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 217

Thread: Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

  1. #121
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherman123 View Post
    I may think my kid should play sports, hell I may think exercise is a holy pursuit, it doesn't mean I have the right to send my child on a death march and see if he comes out the other side as a religious test.
    Do I have a right to step forward and remove your children from your custody if I see you permitting them to go swimming? There is some risk of death during swimming. Sure, it's a minor risk, but it's still a risk. So, how much risk should I, an outsider, tolerate with respect to your parenting of your children before my ludicrous attempt to remove your children from your care is no longer ludicrous but not becomes justified? What if you and I can't agree on a risk threshold? What if you think that it's none of my business how much risk you allow your children to undertake? At what point does it become my business to the point that I can override your best judgment with respect to what you see as tolerable risk levels for your own children?

    Now does anything change if you're really Mark Spitz and you've trained your children yourself and you know that they can swim through river rapids and through mountainous surf and survive. That is, your specific knowledge is superior to my general knowledge where I simply point to drowning statistics and such.

    Lastly, if you are Mark Spitz and you've trained your children to Olympic standards and seen then perform, thus validating your assessment against reality and you dismiss my concerns for the welfare of your children, and they do in fact drown, how do you determine if my risk assessment was accurate or if I was just lucky (and your kids were unlucky) in making my claim?

  2. #122
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

    I think this infringes on the couple's religious freedom and a really hope there is an appeal coming.

    Would you force a Jehovas Witness to take a blood transfusion? Would you force Jewish kids to eat pork? There has to be some degree of religious freedom in this country and progressive activists should not legally be able to force people to conform to THEIR standards.

  3. #123
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,045

    Re: Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by PirateMk1 View Post
    You are hanging your hat on the fact there was neglect.
    The law and non-insane human beings are hanging their hats on the fact that this was neglect.

    Quote Originally Posted by PirateMk1 View Post
    There is no hook for which your hat can hang. There was no neglect. it cannot be proven. Medicine is known as a the practice of such, for a reason. It improves your odds of recovering sometimes significantly. It can also decrease your odds of survival too. Its a double edge sword, very much unlike what is being presented by other posters and yourself.
    Idiocy.


    Neglect
    Neglect is frequently defined as the failure of a parent or other
    person with responsibility for the child to provide needed food,
    clothing, shelter, medical care, or supervision to the degree
    that the child’s health, safety, and well-being are threatened
    with harm. Approximately 24 States, the District of Columbia,
    American Samoa, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands include
    failure to educate the child as required by law in their definition
    of neglect.6
    Seven States specifically define medical neglect
    as failing to provide any special medical treatment or mental
    health care needed by the child.7
    In addition, four States define
    medical neglect as the withholding of medical treatment or
    nutrition from disabled infants with life-threatening conditions.8
    https://www.childwelfare.gov/systemw...age=2&view=Fit
    Last edited by Cardinal; 02-26-14 at 07:35 AM.

  4. #124
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,419

    Re: Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    I think this infringes on the couple's religious freedom and a really hope there is an appeal coming.

    Would you force a Jehovas Witness to take a blood transfusion? Would you force Jewish kids to eat pork? There has to be some degree of religious freedom in this country and progressive activists should not legally be able to force people to conform to THEIR standards.
    No one, no one, no one... is saying that an adult Jehovah's Witness should be forced to take a blood transfusion. No one, no one, no one... is saying that an adult Christian Scientist should be forced to accept medical care when they believe that prayer is all the care they need. In both cases if they are conscious adults, then they can consent to care or not.

    However, a child of a Jehovah's Witness or Christian Scientist cannot consent. A young child cannot state "I am a Jehovah's Witness, so I refuse a blood transfusion even though it will mean my certain death, and I am fully aware of the consequences of my decision." Because a child is the not the physical property of their parents (because human beings are never property), that child's parents cannot make such a decision for a child. This is a simple legal concept, I am not sure why it is so difficult for a few people on here to comprehend.

    Denying a child life saving care because of your religious beliefs would be no different than starving a child to death because of your religious beliefs.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  5. #125
    Sage
    WCH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The Lone Star State.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    22,209

    Re: Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Nope. Singular personal testimonial is singular personal testimonial not carefully screened for cross-contamination of interpretation. It has to be scientific.
    I can produce many others who will testify.
    32 “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.
    Matt. 10:32-33

  6. #126
    Sage
    WCH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The Lone Star State.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    22,209

    Re: Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by Kobie View Post
    I can't believe anyone is actually defending these people.

    The idea that children are property like livestock is laughable to the point of absurdity. For starters, you can sell or eat your livestock.
    I don't agree with the parents in this case but, the 'courts' have made it legal to do away with the unborn at will so, it seems disingenuous for them to take action against these parents.
    32 “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.
    Matt. 10:32-33

  7. #127
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    No one, no one, no one... is saying that an adult Jehovah's Witness should be forced to take a blood transfusion. No one, no one, no one... is saying that an adult Christian Scientist should be forced to accept medical care when they believe that prayer is all the care they need. In both cases if they are conscious adults, then they can consent to care or not.

    However, a child of a Jehovah's Witness or Christian Scientist cannot consent. A young child cannot state "I am a Jehovah's Witness, so I refuse a blood transfusion even though it will mean my certain death, and I am fully aware of the consequences of my decision." Because a child is the not the physical property of their parents (because human beings are never property), that child's parents cannot make such a decision for a child. This is a simple legal concept, I am not sure why it is so difficult for a few people on here to comprehend.

    Denying a child life saving care because of your religious beliefs would be no different than starving a child to death because of your religious beliefs.

    A child is in the care of his parents, not the state. If the law disagrees with me, then I disagree with the law. That's how it should be.

  8. #128
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,419

    Re: Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    A child is in the care of his parents, not the state. If the law disagrees with me, then I disagree with the law. That's how it should be.
    So then by your argument, a parent can abuse their child or neglect them because they are in the sole care and responsibility of the parents. Its a ridiculous argument you are making.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  9. #129
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,045

    Re: Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    A child is in the care of his parents, not the state. If the law disagrees with me, then I disagree with the law. That's how it should be.
    Neither religious freedom nor the simple state of being a parent is carte blanche to do anything you want with your child. Disagree with the law all you want, but if you abuse or neglect your child, expect a confrontation with your local law enforcement.

  10. #130
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Over the edge...
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,206

    Re: Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    So, how much risk should I
    The test is: "what would a reasonable person do?" It is reasonable for children to go swimming but it is not reasonable to do so without supervision. The vast majority of people, by far, would NOT allow a child to die.

Page 13 of 22 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •