• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

"Religous Freedom" = Right to Abuse Kids

C

CriticalThought

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
19,657
Reaction score
8,454
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
She beat her son with a hanger — and said Indiana’s religious freedom law gave her the right
The 7-year-old boy had a total of 36 deep purple bruises across his back, on his arm and on his thigh.He had a loop mark on his ear that, court records say, was from the small hook of a plastic hanger that his mother had used to beat him.

When the boy’s elementary school teacher patted him on the back, he flinched. The state Department of Child Services was then called to the Indianapolis school.

According to a probable cause affidavit, the boy’s mother, Kin Park Thaing, hit the boy multiple times with a coat hanger after she became very angry with him one night.

Thaing, 30, has been charged with battery on a person less than 14 years old and neglect of a dependent, both of which are felonies. In August, a judge denied her request to dismiss the charges.

In July, Thaing had asked for the charges to be dismissed. Her reason: Indiana’s religious freedom law protects her from prosecution, she claimed.
Click to expand...


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/09/01/she-beat-her-son-with-a-hanger-and-said-indianas-religious-freedom-law-gives-her-the-right/

But...but...that law is so we can discriminate against the gays...why are child abusers using it to justify their physical abuse against children?
 
CriticalThought said:
She beat her son with a hanger — and said Indiana’s religious freedom law gave her the right



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/09/01/she-beat-her-son-with-a-hanger-and-said-indianas-religious-freedom-law-gives-her-the-right/

But...but...that law is so we can discriminate against the gays...why are child abusers using it to justify their physical abuse against children?
Click to expand...

The "freedom of religion" people never seem to understand the Law of Unintended Consequences.
We've warned that things like this might happen.
 
CriticalThought said:
She beat her son with a hanger — and said Indiana’s religious freedom law gave her the right



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/09/01/she-beat-her-son-with-a-hanger-and-said-indianas-religious-freedom-law-gives-her-the-right/

But...but...that law is so we can discriminate against the gays...why are child abusers using it to justify their physical abuse against children?
Click to expand...

You choose a username like criticalthought and can't see the difference between not participating in a ceremony that violates one's religious beliefs and child abuse? Clearly the law was never intended to allow people to physically harm others in the name of their deity or religion. For you to ignore this obvious fact implies you have a partisan agenda that you are trying to promote.
 
CriticalThought said:
She beat her son with a hanger — and said Indiana’s religious freedom law gave her the right



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/09/01/she-beat-her-son-with-a-hanger-and-said-indianas-religious-freedom-law-gives-her-the-right/

But...but...that law is so we can discriminate against the gays...why are child abusers using it to justify their physical abuse against children?
Click to expand...

Hooray for religious freedom!

You cite this verse:

Proverbs 23:13-14: “Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you strike him with a rod, he will not die. If you strike him with the rod, you will save his soul from Sheol.”
Click to expand...

...and you get to beat the **** out of your kids!

But seriously, this bitch is crazy. Beating your own children is just way over the line. I don't give a **** what your religious reasons are.

My own mother is a religious nut and put me through Hell, but at least she didn't decide to beat me with a clothes hanger.

Hopefully the charges that this woman is facing don't end up being dismissed.
 
Last edited:
ksu_aviator said:
You choose a username like criticalthought and can't see the difference between not participating in a ceremony that violates one's religious beliefs and child abuse? Clearly the law was never intended to allow people to physically harm others in the name of their deity or religion. For you to ignore this obvious fact implies you have a partisan agenda that you are trying to promote.
Click to expand...

How dare you!

Proverbs 23:13-14: “Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you strike him with a rod, he will not die. If you strike him with the rod, you will save his soul from Sheol.”

These are her SINCERELY HELD religious beliefs! She has every right to beat her child black and blue for showing his sister his peepee! She believes that is a SIN and he is not right with God for doing it. Why would you deny this poor woman the opportunity to save her son's soul? What interest is served by the state that ranks higher than saving the immortal soul of a child?
 
CriticalThought said:
How dare you!

Proverbs 23:13-14: “Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you strike him with a rod, he will not die. If you strike him with the rod, you will save his soul from Sheol.”

These are her SINCERELY HELD religious beliefs! She has every right to beat her child black and blue for showing his sister his peepee! She believes that is a SIN and he is not right with God for doing it. Why would you deny this poor woman the opportunity to save her son's soul? What interest is served by the state that ranks higher than saving the immortal soul of a child?
Click to expand...

Obviously she doesn't and you are just an anti-religious zealot. Why don't you and David Duke go start a club somewhere for bigots? Then the two of you can talk about your hatred for Jews, Christians and any other groups you just don't like.

SERIOUSLY...DO YOU NOT SEE YOUR OWN BIGOTRY HERE?
 
Staver said parents can cite Indiana’s religious freedom law as a basis for “reasonable corporal punishment.” Whether a punishment is reasonable is for a jury or a judge to determine.
Click to expand...

It will upset the religious that they will be judged by normal people.

It will be scary for the world that the normal people in question will be Americans with very odd ideas.
 
ksu_aviator said:
Obviously she doesn't and you are just an anti-religious zealot. Why don't you and David Duke go start a club somewhere for bigots? Then the two of you can talk about your hatred for Jews, Christians and any other groups you just don't like.

SERIOUSLY...DO YOU NOT SEE YOUR OWN BIGOTRY HERE?
Click to expand...

How is he being a bigot?
He never stated that all Christians abuse their kids.
Are you saying that no one has the right to criticize Christians when they do wrong?
 
ksu_aviator said:
You choose a username like criticalthought and can't see the difference between not participating in a ceremony that violates one's religious beliefs and child abuse? Clearly the law was never intended to allow people to physically harm others in the name of their deity or religion. For you to ignore this obvious fact implies you have a partisan agenda that you are trying to promote.
Click to expand...

It isn't about understanding the law. It is about trying to undermine people's faith because they don't believe what he believes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
ksu_aviator said:
Obviously she doesn't and you are just an anti-religious zealot. Why don't you and David Duke go start a club somewhere for bigots? Then the two of you can talk about your hatred for Jews, Christians and any other groups you just don't like.

SERIOUSLY...DO YOU NOT SEE YOUR OWN BIGOTRY HERE?
Click to expand...

I am pretty decent at arithmetic.

Number of people forced to participate in same sex ceremonies in Indiana = 0

Number of children in Indiana beaten in the name of "religous freedom" = 2
 
ksu_aviator said:
Obviously she doesn't and you are just an anti-religious zealot. Why don't you and David Duke go start a club somewhere for bigots? Then the two of you can talk about your hatred for Jews, Christians and any other groups you just don't like.

SERIOUSLY...DO YOU NOT SEE YOUR OWN BIGOTRY HERE?
Click to expand...

He is pointing out how you (the religious) deal with such stuff in geneeral. It's your(the religious) normal manner she is copying.

It's sometimes called satire.
 
CriticalThought said:
She beat her son with a hanger — and said Indiana’s religious freedom law gave her the right



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/09/01/she-beat-her-son-with-a-hanger-and-said-indianas-religious-freedom-law-gives-her-the-right/

But...but...that law is so we can discriminate against the gays...why are child abusers using it to justify their physical abuse against children?
Click to expand...

That is an interesting question there. Are parents allowed to use corporal punishment?
 
Verthaine said:
The "freedom of religion" people never seem to understand the Law of Unintended Consequences.
We've warned that things like this might happen.
Click to expand...

You don't impart the feeling that you understand the Constitution. That people would begin not to understand what the Constitution is about was always a danger of the liberals precedents of circumvention. And: Voilà! There you are and prove it. ;)
 
CriticalThought said:
How dare you!

Proverbs 23:13-14: “Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you strike him with a rod, he will not die. If you strike him with the rod, you will save his soul from Sheol.”

These are her SINCERELY HELD religious beliefs! She has every right to beat her child black and blue for showing his sister his peepee! She believes that is a SIN and he is not right with God for doing it. Why would you deny this poor woman the opportunity to save her son's soul? What interest is served by the state that ranks higher than saving the immortal soul of a child?
Click to expand...

Actually the history of not punishing children physically is relatively new and it is societal instrument that takes at least two and probably three to tell, what the consequences will be. This is especially exciting, as the change this means to traditional upbringing is fundamental and can be expected to modify almost every level of behavior.
 
Verthaine said:
The "freedom of religion" people never seem to understand the Law of Unintended Consequences.
We've warned that things like this might happen.
Click to expand...

So one person who came from a culture (not Christianity) where this is considered acceptable takes advantage of a badly written law and a crap understanding of the Bible and suddenly this about religious freedom??
 
TheGoverness said:
Hooray for religious freedom!

You cite this verse:



...and you get to beat the **** out of your kids!

But seriously, this bitch is crazy. Beating your own children is just way over the line. I don't give a **** what your religious reasons are.

My own mother is a religious nut and put me through Hell, but at least she didn't decide to beat me with a clothes hanger.

Hopefully the charges that this woman is facing don't end up being dismissed.
Click to expand...

While she might be trying to use an out of context passage from the Bible to justify her actions, I can pretty much guarantee you that this has far more to do with culture than religion. The family is from Burma, where this kind of punishment is the norm.
 
Verthaine said:
How is he being a bigot?
He never stated that all Christians abuse their kids.
Are you saying that no one has the right to criticize Christians when they do wrong?
Click to expand...

He's a bigot because he lumps all supporters of religious freedom together and then uses a SINGLE case to back up his claims. If he was a white supremacist who posted a picture of a black man with his shoes on the wrong feet, eating watermelon, while sitting on a curb in a poverty stricken neighborhood as justification for calling all blacks poor, ignorant, watermelon-eating slackers, you'd eat his lunch for it and rightfully so. But make it one lady doing something wrong and trying to justify it using an out of context verse from the Bible and suddenly he's just trying to make a point...
 
joG said:
You don't impart the feeling that you understand the Constitution. That people would begin not to understand what the Constitution is about was always a danger of the liberals precedents of circumvention. And: Voilà! There you are and prove it. ;)
Click to expand...
I'm not a Liberal.
I am very pro family.
I am very pro business
I am a gun owner.
I make a lot of money and I give back to the community.
Do you?

The 1st Amendment more than adequately protects the Religious.
There is nothing wrong with existing laws and no pressing need to create new ones.
Being discriminated against is painful and humiliating.That's not religious freedom,that's sadism.
There is a right to assembly,but not a right discriminate.
Religious Freedoms laws infringes on my right as an employer to fire an employee for insubordination and deriction of duties
Religous Freedom lawsare not about religious freedom.It is not just about prevent the government from punishing them.
It's about preventing lawsuits,critcism and boycotts.
Religious Freedom Laws puts and is an unfair advantage against me because I am an Atheist (though I fail to see how turning away good paying cutomers is a smart business strategy).
The Free Market and Social Media is doing a fine job of handling the situation better than the government would.
That's why you don't here any more stories about bakers or photographers being fine by the government.
In the culinary field,word of mouth is just as important as paid advertising.
Getting the reputation of discrimination loses customers.
 
Verthaine said:
How is he being a bigot?
He never stated that all Christians abuse their kids.
Are you saying that no one has the right to criticize Christians when they do wrong?
Click to expand...

Some christians are Social justice warriors, like some of the 76 gender people and 3rd wave feminists.

They call you bigot because they can't formulate an argument
 
faithful_servant said:
So one person who came from a culture (not Christianity) where this is considered acceptable takes advantage of a badly written law and a crap understanding of the Bible and suddenly this about religious freedom??
Click to expand...
Actually,it's about religious freedom LAWS.
From the article.
In July, Thaing had asked for the charges to be dismissed. Her reason: Indiana’s religious freedom law protects her from prosecution, she claimed.
Click to expand...
.
 
faithful_servant said:
He's a bigot because he lumps all supporters of religious freedom together and then uses a SINGLE case to back up his claims. If he was a white supremacist who posted a picture of a black man with his shoes on the wrong feet, eating watermelon, while sitting on a curb in a poverty stricken neighborhood as justification for calling all blacks poor, ignorant, watermelon-eating slackers, you'd eat his lunch for it and rightfully so. But make it one lady doing something wrong and trying to justify it using an out of context verse from the Bible and suddenly he's just trying to make a point...
Click to expand...

That's your opinion and I didn't see what you are claiming he did.
 
faithful_servant said:
From his second post...
Click to expand...

And that's wrong how?
We warned people that things like this would happen.
I already pointed numerous reasons why there is no need for "freedon of religion" laws.
No one has yet to point out where they are mistaken and wrong.
Including you,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom