• 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!

Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

Top Cat

Top Cat

He's the most tip top
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
32,996
Reaction score
14,642
Location
Near Seattle
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
PHILADELPHIA (AP) — A Pennsylvania couple who believe in faith-healing face 20 years or more in prison in the death of a second child who died without seeing a doctor.
Herbert and Catherine Schaible are being sentenced Wednesday in the death last year of their 8-month-old son, Brandon. At the time, they were under court orders to seek medical care for their children after their 2-year-old son, Kent, died of untreated pneumonia in 2009.
Click to expand...

Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

If only we could pray away the stupidity?
 
I just hope one day these intensely religious folks come to understand God can work through Doctors so praying the doctors can cure their sick child is alright by Him...
 
Child abuse, resulting in homicide.

60 yrs. in Federal Prison after sterilization.
 
It's about time, this is the second kid they've killed via prayer, there needs to be a national law prohibiting prayer as a defense in any criminal case. Talking to yourself doesn't solve problems, no matter how deluded you are. These people should have been put away for the rest of their lives as a lesson to the other idiotic god-botherers out there.
 
Their pastor, Nelson Clark, has said the Schaibles lost their sons because of a "spiritual lack" in their lives and insisted they would not seek medical care even if another child appeared near death.
Click to expand...

Fantastic. Bloody fantastic.

Religious fundamentalism means never having to say you're sorry.
 
Prayers don't kill anyone...faulty religious beliefs and whatever ailment the child has does
 
WCH said:
Prayers don't kill anyone...faulty religious beliefs and whatever ailment the child has does
Click to expand...

That argument works if you're making it before the invention of medicine.
 
Top Cat said:
Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

If only we could pray away the stupidity?
Click to expand...

A religious man is on top of a roof during a great flood. A man comes by in a boat and says "get in, get in!" The religous man replies, " no I have faith in God, he will grant me a miracle."

Later the water is up to his waist and another boat comes by and the guy tells him to get in again. He responds that he has faith in god and god will give him a miracle. With the water at about chest high, another boat comes to rescue him, but he turns down the offer again cause "God will grant him a miracle."

With the water at chin high, a helicopter throws down a ladder and they tell him to get in, mumbling with the water in his mouth, he again turns down the request for help for the faith of God. He arrives at the gates of heaven with broken faith and says to Peter, I thought God would grand me a miracle and I have been let down." St. Peter chuckles and responds, "I don't know what you're complaining about, we sent you three boats and a helicopter."

:sinking:
 
FederalRepublic said:
A religious man is on top of a roof during a great flood. A man comes by in a boat and says "get in, get in!" The religous man replies, " no I have faith in God, he will grant me a miracle."

Later the water is up to his waist and another boat comes by and the guy tells him to get in again. He responds that he has faith in god and god will give him a miracle. With the water at about chest high, another boat comes to rescue him, but he turns down the offer again cause "God will grant him a miracle."

With the water at chin high, a helicopter throws down a ladder and they tell him to get in, mumbling with the water in his mouth, he again turns down the request for help for the faith of God. He arrives at the gates of heaven with broken faith and says to Peter, I thought God would grand me a miracle and I have been let down." St. Peter chuckles and responds, "I don't know what you're complaining about, we sent you three boats and a helicopter."

:sinking:
Click to expand...

I was wondering when somebody would post that.
 
Top Cat said:
Pa. couple face prison after sons' prayer deaths

If only we could pray away the stupidity?
Click to expand...

I guess I am gona get jumped on this, but the way I see it, unless the children are old and able enough to declare emancipation of their own free will, the parents have the absolute right to determine what if any medical treatment is appropriate. It is neither your nor my nor the states place to make that determination. These are NOT YOUR children, these children are these parents and they have the burden of responsibility to make these decisions. Would you brook someone second guessing YOUR decisions. I most certainly do not. Especially from the state. The ultimate responsibility lies with the parents. They obviously have very solid belief if they have done this a second time. The family seems to support them and their belief. I don't see this as murder or child abuse, as this works both ways as the state has done far worse far more. Case in point, the case in Massachusetts with Boston medical. Given the choice between the state and the individual I choose the individual every time.

By the way I don't think the order by the court for the parents to seek medical care for their children is lawful as it violates first amendment protections.
 
PirateMk1 said:
I guess I am gona get jumped on this, but the way I see it, unless the children are old and able enough to declare emancipation of their own free will, the parents have the absolute right to determine what if any medical treatment is appropriate. It is neither your nor my nor the states place to make that determination. These are NOT YOUR children, these children are these parents and they have the burden of responsibility to make these decisions. Would you brook someone second guessing YOUR decisions. I most certainly do not. Especially from the state. The ultimate responsibility lies with the parents. They obviously have very solid belief if they have done this a second time. The family seems to support them and their belief. I don't see this as murder or child abuse, as this works both ways as the state has done far worse far more. Case in point, the case in Massachusetts with Boston medical. Given the choice between the state and the individual I choose the individual every time.

By the way I don't think the order by the court for the parents to seek medical care for their children is lawful as it violates first amendment protections.
Click to expand...


Fortunately you don't get to decide.
 
Top Cat said:
Fortunately you don't get to decide.
Click to expand...

Its not your decision either. Its not the courts place to be deciding this as well, though it seems they took that liberty anyhow.
 
PirateMk1 said:
I guess I am gona get jumped on this, but the way I see it, unless the children are old and able enough to declare emancipation of their own free will, the parents have the absolute right to determine what if any medical treatment is appropriate. It is neither your nor my nor the states place to make that determination. These are NOT YOUR children, these children are these parents and they have the burden of responsibility to make these decisions. Would you brook someone second guessing YOUR decisions. I most certainly do not. Especially from the state. The ultimate responsibility lies with the parents. They obviously have very solid belief if they have done this a second time. The family seems to support them and their belief. I don't see this as murder or child abuse, as this works both ways as the state has done far worse far more. Case in point, the case in Massachusetts with Boston medical. Given the choice between the state and the individual I choose the individual every time.

By the way I don't think the order by the court for the parents to seek medical care for their children is lawful as it violates first amendment protections.
Click to expand...
Too bad these people didn't just abort the child. Then those on the left who suddenly care about the health of children would cheer that decision. But it is the role of the state to defend the rights of the individual, and as parents, they are the guardians of that childs rights until it becomes old enough to make such decisions for itself. Here, the parents clearly failed, and what is clearly neglect cannot be hidden behind faith. They failed in their responsibility to that child and should face the same neglect and endangerment and possibly wrongful death charges that anyone who fails to care for a child in their custody would face.
 
PirateMk1 said:
I guess I am gona get jumped on this, but the way I see it, unless the children are old and able enough to declare emancipation of their own free will, the parents have the absolute right to determine what if any medical treatment is appropriate. It is neither your nor my nor the states place to make that determination. These are NOT YOUR children, these children are these parents and they have the burden of responsibility to make these decisions. Would you brook someone second guessing YOUR decisions. I most certainly do not. Especially from the state. The ultimate responsibility lies with the parents. They obviously have very solid belief if they have done this a second time. The family seems to support them and their belief. I don't see this as murder or child abuse, as this works both ways as the state has done far worse far more. Case in point, the case in Massachusetts with Boston medical. Given the choice between the state and the individual I choose the individual every time.

By the way I don't think the order by the court for the parents to seek medical care for their children is lawful as it violates first amendment protections.
Click to expand...

I don't consider children to be the property of their parents. We have a moral, societal, and legal interest in seeing to the good health (read not dying) of children in this country. Just because a parent believes they are following the moral course of action with regards to their child doesn't mean they have an unlimited right to do it. 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. If this is trampling on certain protections in your eyes then so be it---trample away and do it as fast as you can.

Honestly your argument sounds more like a justification for a 30th trimester abortion than a First Amendment defense.
 
PirateMk1 said:
Its not your decision either.
Click to expand...

It's up to the courts. That is the way it works. Despite your feelings to the contrary. Some folks just should not breed. Are you one of those?
 
Fletch said:
Too bad these people didn't just abort the child.
Click to expand...

Actually it's too bad the grandparents didn't abort them.


Fletch said:
Then those on the left who suddenly care about the health of children would cheer that decision.
Click to expand...

WTF? A righty trying to pretend he gives a **** about the welfare of children? Oh wait, it only counts until they are born.

Keep em comin Shecky.
 
Top Cat said:
Actually it's too bad the grandparents didn't abort them.




WTF? A righty trying to pretend he gives a **** about the welfare of children? Oh wait, it only counts until they are born.

Keep em comin Shecky.
Click to expand...
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
 
Ironically, this couple has come full circle and is simple embracing the next step in the pro-choice movement:

After-Birth Abortion.
 
Fletch said:
Too bad these people didn't just abort the child. Then those on the left who suddenly care about the health of children would cheer that decision. But it is the role of the state to defend the rights of the individual, and as parents, they are the guardians of that childs rights until it becomes old enough to make such decisions for itself. Here, the parents clearly failed, and what is clearly neglect cannot be hidden behind faith. They failed in their responsibility to that child and should face the same neglect and endangerment and possibly wrongful death charges that anyone who fails to care for a child in their custody would face.
Click to expand...

I am NOT by any means a religious man, in fact I am rather irreligious, I am content with the fact when I die I cease to exist. That said this couple BELIEVE so much in their religion that they eschew medical intervention for themselves and their children. By all accounts they are besides that belief very good parents. This country is founded on religious freedom, the freedom to believe as one wishes. They have not wronged anyone. Even the children that died. The children died of natural causes and not neglect. The children were well cared for, and what medical attention that was allowed by their religion was used. This cannot be construed as neglect. The parents in their duties as guardians performed their duties diligently within the proscriptions of their beliefs. This is a question of religious freedom pure and simple. The court in my opinion oversteps its bounds.
 
PirateMk1 said:
Its not your decision either. Its not the courts place to be deciding this as well, though it seems they took that liberty anyhow.
Click to expand...

The law prevents you from abusing, torturing, starving and neglecting your children. End of story.
 
PirateMk1 said:
I guess I am gona get jumped on this, but the way I see it, unless the children are old and able enough to declare emancipation of their own free will, the parents have the absolute right to determine what if any medical treatment is appropriate. It is neither your nor my nor the states place to make that determination. These are NOT YOUR children, these children are these parents and they have the burden of responsibility to make these decisions. Would you brook someone second guessing YOUR decisions. I most certainly do not. Especially from the state. The ultimate responsibility lies with the parents. They obviously have very solid belief if they have done this a second time. The family seems to support them and their belief. I don't see this as murder or child abuse, as this works both ways as the state has done far worse far more. Case in point, the case in Massachusetts with Boston medical. Given the choice between the state and the individual I choose the individual every time.

By the way I don't think the order by the court for the parents to seek medical care for their children is lawful as it violates first amendment protections.
Click to expand...

Just want to ask because I want to understand your stance on this...

Are you pro-life or pro-choice? The reason I ask is often the pro-life position is predicated on the notion that a child is incapable of defending their own rights, and as such the state has a duty to step in and protect it's right to life if the parent is neglecting said right.

In this instance, the parent is clearly neglecting the right the child has to life by disallowing the child to seek medical treatment for a life threatening disease.
 
PirateMk1 said:
I am NOT by any means a religious man, in fact I am rather irreligious, I am content with the fact when I die I cease to exist. That said this couple BELIEVE so much in their religion that they eschew medical intervention for themselves and their children. By all accounts they are besides that belief very good parents. This country is founded on religious freedom, the freedom to believe as one wishes. They have not wronged anyone. Even the children that died. The children died of natural causes and not neglect. The children were well cared for, and what medical attention that was allowed by their religion was used. This cannot be construed as neglect. The parents in their duties as guardians performed their duties diligently within the proscriptions of their beliefs. This is a question of religious freedom pure and simple. The court in my opinion oversteps its bounds.
Click to expand...

WTF? they died from neglect. They were denied medical treatment that would have saved their lives. You're wacky.
 
Sherman123 said:
I don't consider children to be the property of their parents. We have a moral, societal, and legal interest in seeing to the good health (read not dying) of children in this country. Just because a parent believes they are following the moral course of action with regards to their child doesn't mean they have an unlimited right to do it. 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. If this is trampling on certain protections in your eyes then so be it---trample away and do it as fast as you can.

Honestly your argument sounds more like a justification for a 30th trimester abortion than a First Amendment defense.
Click to expand...

I believe that children until they are either of age or emancipated are property for legal purposes similar to having livestock or pets. That said unless there is an obvious case of abuse which there is not in this particular case the parents should have full leeway and control. People are equating the restriction of medical care as abuse. Over use of medical facilities can be construed as abuse as well. I am of the opinion that unless abuse is blatant and provable it is not our or the states business to interfere. The children in both cases died of natural causes, not neglect. Neglect cannot be proven in this case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom