Murder by prayer: When is enough, enough?

I certainly wouldn't assume that. He dismisses all scientific discoveries as due, not to science, but to the intelligence that god gave to humans. To be consistent, he'd have to claim that medical science doesn't save lives, just god-given intelligence.

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson

​

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

​

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

​

...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

First of all, they did not treat their child medically, second they did neglect to use all options available to them that could have saved their child. Yes, I am of the opinion that life is valuable enough to try every option. They were able to get medical aide if they had so wished, nobody prevented them from doing so but themselves. I will say that the policy should also be gone after. They did omit a doctor with a cure for the ailment. Those are the natural remedies. No. Those are supernatural remedies. But they don't kill people by neglect. I want them to not let their child die. If this is so horrible to them, then yes, I don't understand them. Yes, that's my problem too. Exactly. Since they failed to do so, and listen to god, they are guilty of neglect. Absolutely, since it is the same thing I am saying. I just don't use god in my explanations, but that is a "Chiristian" way of putting it, I guess. If nothing else, they should at least also prosecute the "church", yes. I agree. The problem is that they probably will make a 1st amendment case out of it. I am not an expert at law, especially not US law, but I think the government has precious little to say about what is preached in a church.

Hi Coyote,I think that's overly harsh. There was nothing wrong with these kids that a quick trip to a local clinic wouldn't have cured. There's no reason to believe there is any genetic defect here, only a memetic defect, namely a crazed and cultic version of Christianity.There's a reason why they don't give Darwin Awards to kids.Mutate and Survive

---

"A curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understands it." - Jacques Monod

okay i have a little bit of time so i will do a general reply this time: not all the voices are evil. people do hear God actually speaking to them. one way to tell that they are not listenign to God is when their actions sin. it is but some people do not do what God said to do and that is 'test the spirits' and He gave a test to use to help find the true voice. not looking for an excuse, just defending their rights. read my 4 points posted earlier, please. here we will differ on technicalities and the mitgating circumstances should be considered. don't do eisegesis with my words or just take a small portion out of context. the point is they probably could not make the decisions you want them to make, there is too much involved here to just make a blanket judgment. good point to discuss further and we should but suffice it to say those nazi officers faced death if they didn't obey. of course you are placing your brand of morality upon them knowing that the american soldiers have done the exact same thing and been rewarded. following orders is a justification depending upon which side of the fence you sit. and christians have millions of actual successful faith healings to fall back on. moot point. please do not equate faith healing with rejection. they wanted their child and they wanted God to heal her with a miracle. i am sure your emotions would affect many of your decisions when someone you love is hurting. this is why i say the prosecutors have a case against the church leaders and the policy and they can prove thatthat policy is not of God thus it is wrong and the church leaders can be punished. the supernatural doesn't fit your 'data' scheme, sorry. disagree with me if you want but i am just pointing you in the right direction to give the credit to. science does nothing if it wasn't for the God given intellect each scientists has. i think we have gone over this enough and i willdisagree withyou as you rely on medicine they relied upon God. i am not going to keep arguing the same point. yes they could have BUT it is their child and it is their choice not yours. you would not want an evangelical telling you how to raise your kids so do not do it to the religious. no those are artificial ones. the natural ones are found in plants, roots, spices, berries etc. yes they do you just do not want to admit it. they didn't want it either no i would not go that strong for they did provide medical attention just not the kind you accept. i would go for the church leaders for they had the power and authority to change the policy and had it for decades as i read this is not their first death via their methods. it is not just 1st ammendment but also the 4th i think. i hope you realize that i am not defending those people's church or their policy. i am defending the parent's rights to faith healing but i totally disagree with the policy they were forced to follow. remove it and those children would have lived.let me say this as well, faith healing does not restrict going to doctors, because it still takes faith to trust that the doctors got the diagnosis right, the medicine right and so on.for the believer their faith will allow God to direct them to the correct place to go for help. healing isn't always going to be a miracle like Jesus and the disciples did in the Gospels; unfortnately too many misguided, and mislead people do not understand this.

Hi Subbie, Actually, that's fine with me. I am quite happy to accept (for the sake of argument only of course) that God works through doctors. If Archy wants to argue that doctors are vessels of God's will or something that actually weakens his position. If God sometimes works through doctors, then by refusing to even consider medical care, the parents are potentially defying God, putting their judgement above his. So yeah, bring it on! Of course, Archy would have to drop the whole wounded act and answer me if he's going to make that argument...Mutate and Survive

---

"A curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understands it." - Jacques Monod

Hi Archy, You are promoting the parents' "rights" to pursue a religious agenda that even you describe as errant.You are doing this at the expense of the child's right to life.The child's right to life trumps any other right involved in this case. As you say, these kids would have lived if they had received medical care, but the parents chose instead to place their right to religious freedom over that child's right to life. That is inexcusable.Mutate and SurvivePS; Not even gonna try and provide any evidence for the existence of faith healing? No? Not even an anecdote? Can't say I'm surprised.Edited by Granny Magda, : Add PS.

---

"A curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understands it." - Jacques Monod

Exactly. Medicine is medical treatment. God is not. Exactly, they made the choice, they are responsible for the outcome of that choice (the death of their child). I'm not telling them how to raise their kid, I am telling them they should not let it die needlesly, and that if they do, they are responsible for that. Yes, and the medicine doctors use is derived from them. Ok, some might, and they should be prosecuted to the fullest. Just like these parents. They have a strange of of not letting their child die then, since, well, it died because they neglected an option. No, they didn't, they also didn't provide it with all the options available to them. Yes, I agree. Again, I'm not an expert in law, but the 4th is about unreasonable searches and stuff connected to that (if I recall correctly), so not sure how that ties in with this case. Oh no, you clearly said the church should be dealt with, don;t worry. And yes, I agree, I am not against faith healing, I am against not using every option available. But again, I think the constitution prevents the government from doing anything about it (not faith healing, but the church leaders in this case telling the parents they can't use medical aide). I agree. Though perhaps a different level of faith. Again, I agree.

well at least we agree on some things. i will list the ones we do not: here i am not as hard as you i do not think they were free enough to make the decision they could have and they will be haunted by this for the rest of their lives, whichis worse than being prosecuted for it. but again that is your opinion. maybe it wouldn't be needlessly if the parents were freed from that church. medical doctors use chemical combinations not natural medicines. some of those chemicals bring side effects far worse than the disease a patient has.http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/...ion-drug-side-effects.htmi like this: i do not think the parents should be prosecuted. they didn't neglect, they weren't allowed to choose it--big difference. sorry i was thinking of the freedom to practice one's religion but i see that is included in the 1st with free speech. then they shouldn't be able to prosecute the parents either.

Sure, no reason to go "I agree" over and over again. Perhaps, but that does not absolve them of the responsibility they had. Perhaps. But the situation is that they weren't seperated from the church, and they're responsible for the choices they made. I can tell you right now, that no matter what my beliefs, I will do whatever it takes would a child of mine fall ill, yes, I would probably even pray, as long as it gets better. Now my personal belief is that praying will do absolutely no good, but that doesn't mean I will not try it to save the life of my child. Yes, that's what "derived" means. Perhaps, but medicine has proven itself to work. Why not? They are responsible for their actions, are they not? Nobody was stopping them, if they had wanted to go to a doctor, they could have. Just like I can pray if I want to. Yeah. Why not? Free exercise of religion is overruled by the right to life.

It is the parents whose genes are not being passed down because of their actions. The kids are the victims.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

I do see where you're coming from and you may even be right. I just think, that you are jumping the gun a little. I agree that the kids are the innocent victims in this, but I don't see any reason to suppose that the parents had any defective genes, including any putative gene for dumbassery.I expect that these parents are nothing special. They are probably just ordinary, unexceptional folks, maybe not the sharpest tools in the box, but not unusually stupid. They just got caught up, for whatever reasons, in a crazy cult.I think it's important to remember that religion is as dangerous as it is for precisely this reason; you don't have to be dumb to fall for it. You don't have to be egregiously gullible or genetically damaged to fall prey. It can get its claws into almost anyone. That's what makes it so dangerous. It causes reasonable people to do unreasonable, even unconscionable things.Mutate and Survive

Hi Archy, Natural herbs are combinations of chemicals. That's why herbs work; they contain chemicals, in combination. A great many drugs are simply derived from natural substances.You are committing the Naturalistic Fallacy. Here you seem to be arguing that religious belief should be considered some kind of diminished responsibility, legally akin to mental impairment or insanity.That's a terrible thing to imply Archy! Even if you and I might consider a particular religious edict to be absurd and crazy, that doesn't make the believer any less in command of their own actions.Why do you hate religious people so much?Mutate and Survive

---

"A curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understands it." - Jacques Monod

It is quite strange that you don't mention "mistakes" when it comes to insulin. Surely there have been batches of insulin that have either been contaminated or ineffective which have lead to deaths. Even more, there have probably been pharmacists who have given customers the wrong drug or the wrong concentration which has also led to deaths. So why are you suddenly so quiet when it comes to "mistakes"? In the cases being discussed in this thread God has commanded people to withhold medical treatment that then led to the deaths of children. You are saying that this is fine. We disagree.

Hi Taq, In fairness, I'm not quite sure that is what Archy is saying. I think his position is more that the parents in these cases have been led astray from the genuine commands of God by false teachings. At least I think that's what he's trying to say. It's a bit hard to tell since he's having a big sulk with me and won't respond. Of course, how we are supposed to tell the difference between the genuine honest-to-God God and the fakes, I'm not sure.Mutate and SurviveEdited by Granny Magda, : No reason given.

I know!!! I know!!!Get Archie's opinion, and it will always agree with the Real God (TM)!