´óÏó´«Ã½

testing.....do comments in this thread work again now?

Is that 'you' ?

Poor child, sent to an early grave by her ignorant deluded parents.
Tragic.

It's sad, but shouldn't be illegal.

As I have only just been able to get on this thread, I offered my comment about this subject on the "Monstrosity" thread (#41):

"I don't agree with the title of the thread. It's not what they did which killed their daughter, but what they didn't do. It's called a "sin of omission". People can blame "prayer" if they like. As a Christian I see no conflict between prayer and medicine. And if "prayer" is something entirely useless, then it can hardly be so efficacious as to kill a child."

I would also like to add that suppose these parents relied on alternative medicine, which was actually harmless quackery, to heal their daughter rather than turn to the regular health system, would we have a thread called "Murdered by such-and-such...therapy"?

It seems to me that the title of this thread is deliberately designed to be inflammatory and prejudicial against those who believe in prayer - and, by implication, God. The abuse of something does not prove that it should be rejected, in just the same way that Darwinists would object to their opponents condemning their philosophy, because some people use the concept of natural selection as a justification for racial oppression or discrimination against the poor. If we had "Murder by Darwinism", I can just imagine what the reaction would be.

So I am not expecting anyone to agree with my view of reality. But some logical consistency and semblance of justice is not a lot to ask for.

One other thing... what if parents in the USA physically do not have the money to pay for health care for their dependents. Do they become murderers as well??

LSV- Would the incident have occurred had the parents not believed that prayer would be more effective than medicine?

#6 - John Wright -

Of course this incident occurred because the parents believed that prayer would be more effective than medicine.

However, the point I was making was that the girl was not "murdered by prayer". If we have to use the word "murder" then she was murdered by her parents' particular interpretation of prayer, which is not saying the same thing. Some people have been murdered by misguided interpretations of the Bible. But that is not the same as saying that they were "murdered by the Bible", since others may have a different interpretation.

These parents held to what I would call spiritual reductionism - everything is reduced to the spiritual. This is, in essence, no different from those who believe that everything is reducible to matter. Both are different forms of the same limited one-track methodology.

As far as I understand the Bible, Christianity affirms both the spiritual and the material, which come together in the incarnation. To reduce everything in life to the spiritual is anti-Christian, and in fact is consistent with the kind of Greek Platonist philosophy which was the bugbear of the Early Church in the New Testament. Therefore to believe that there should be no material aspect to healing is an application of a moral theology which is contrary to what I consider to be biblical theology.

As I say, this tragic case has more to do with Greek philosophy than biblical Christianity.

LSV- I agree that the potential for this to happen is no indictment upon Christianity in general, or even of pentecostal/charismatic theology (in which God is asked for healing); it is rather an indictment of the doctrine that God's plan is to heal everyone, as held by the word-faith movement typified by televangelists on the TBN network. A more sensible view of these things is that God is to be asked for healing because he may dispense it if he wills, though I must point out that even that kind of theology - the kind which sees God as a regular interventionist in the affairs of human beings - is fraught with issues.

You have to wonder if those parents have now lost their misguided faith as well as their daughter. Or do they chalk it up to "God's will," and claim they are being persecuted for their beliefs?

I don't know if it's a sin or not, that's for theologians to debate but in the United States it is a crime. The courts decided that a long time ago especially as it related to people who called themselves "Christian Scientists." They were "faith healers." They also believed prayer would cure illness and if someone died of disease, it was god's will. They would not allow vaccinations, transfusions, or any other medical procedure that would introduce any form of foreign animal substance into the human body. The courts knocked them down flat and right out of the box entirely. Legally this is a long dead issue here. Ultimately in the US you do not own your children, you cannot deny them medical care, a court can overrule you if you try, teachers, school administrators, social workers and others are required to report any suspected case of child abuse which not only includes medical neglect but now even includes a spanking. You cannot hit a child, even your own for bad behavior. And if you break the law....YOU WILL GO TO JAIL, YOU WILL GO DIRECTLY TO JAIL, YOU DO NOT PASS GO, YOU DO NOT COLLECT $200. And it is that way in every state in the country. What's more there are child advocacy organizations including in the government who are ready, willing, and eager to prosecute violators. Pregnant teenage girls do not have to get the consent or even advise their parents in many states to get an abortion. In a recent case, a boy with a malignant tumor in his neck fled with his mother because he did not want chemo-therapy and his parents didn't want to force it on him. There was a region wide manhunt and he was finally found and treated. By the time the got him, his tumor had grown huge and he was ready for treatment anyway. Last I heard, his tumor was shrinking.

BTW LSV, contrary to popular belief around the world, everyone gets medical care in the US including illegal aliens whether they can pay for it or not. The system of medical care is NOT broken here like it is in most other places. What is broken is the system of paying for it. If you've been following the news, you know there is another great debate going on right now among the public and in Congress. America does not want to copy Canada or the UK. We do not have rationing, we do not have waiting lists for anything (except acceptable organ doners) and the WHO's report notwithstanding, America really does have the best medical care in the world. According to one Canadian doctor who testified before Congress, when you take out deaths by murder and automobile accidents from the statistics, the US has the longest lifespan in the world in large part due to its medical care despite the fact most Americans live unhealthy lifestyles. There are three times as many MRI's per capita in the US as in Canada. If you have a serious illness such as cancer, your chances of surviving are four times greater in the US than in the UK. If there were easy answers to this dilemma, it would have been solved a long time ago.

Hi John,

"It's sad, but shouldn't be illegal."

I assume you're talking about a situation where people refuse treatment for their own pressing medical condition, like a Jehovas Witness who is bleeding to death after a car crash and refuses a life-saving blood transfusion (overwhelmingly selfish in some cases btw, but that's a different discussion)? I hope you're not saying that the liberty of parents extends to letting their child die by refusing it what it needs to survive?

I suspect that the issue of the liberty of the parents may come up, and how their liberty to do what they want/don't want would be impeded if the state tells them what to do. If not ignore, if so, I would say the right of the child easily trumps the rights of dangerously nutty believing parents (or otherwise deadly nutty parents) to act/be idle in accordance with their beliefs.

Hyper pentecostal Nutters.

As a Christian I totally condemn this immoral behaviour.
This is the consequence of immoral indoctrination.

It is not the only case either a good friend of mine has seen a young girl die after she was taken of her medicine for epilepsy.
A money thief - or faith healer - (which ever you prefer), told her parents she was healed.

The little girl had a fit in the bath and drowned.

Wrong doctrine kills, and it is up to all Christians to stand against this insidious rubbish.

PK;

"I assume you're talking about a situation where people refuse treatment for their own pressing medical condition, like a Jehovas Witness who is bleeding to death after a car crash and refuses a life-saving blood transfusion"

That's also illegal in the United States. If there is sufficient time, a judge will issue a court order that the individual is not competent to act on his own behalf if he is in effect committing suicide by denying medical treatment for whatever reason including religious beliefs. In that case the court can order administering of medical treatment the doctors see fit to save his life. After he's saved, nobody can go home with him to see to it that he doesn't try to kill himself but he will not be released from a hospital until doctors certify that he is no longer a danger to himself. If he is suspected of being suicidal, someone will be with him to watch him every second of his life if necessary. His recovery may be extended to a stay in a psychiatric ward or psychiatric hospital for as long as it takes and that could be years. I know because I know someone it happened to but not for religious reasons.

"I hope you're not saying that the liberty of parents extends to letting their child die by refusing it what it needs to survive?"

No, I misread earlier, and I'm definitely not saying people should be allowed to refuse medical intervention for the life and death condition of a child. In this case, they didn't believe they were letting their child die, they thought they were using 'alternative' treatment in the form of prayer, but a court case should have been brought to interrupt the normal rights of the parents in this case to argue that that amounts to 'doing nothing' and the parents' rights should have been circumvented. Tough, though. They clearly thought what they were doing would save their kid, otherwise they would have done something else.

They were charged with 'Second-degree Reckless Homicide' which in Wisconsin is defined as 'reckless causing of the death of another human being' a class D felony (a fine of up to $100,000, or imprisonment of up to 25 years).

This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain.

I see a comment of yours has been referred too, Peter.

No doubt I would have deeply disagreed with it, you being a atheist an' all, but I would have liked the opportunity to be 'offended'. I won't be able to claim 'persecution' now!

All this disappearing posts shenanigans reminds me of The Two Ronnies, and the Phantom Raspberry Blower, one 'pllllllllllip', and they're gone!

This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain.

See what I mean, one 'pllllllllip', and they're gone.

Who is hitting the button on all these posts? This system sucks. A comment should remain until and unless it has been judged by a mod to break the asinine 'house rules'.

Hello petermorrow, John,

I'll split my post that was referred to the moderators. Maybe I'll learn which part of it was the offending bit that way.

I posted my email a couple of times so that those who might want to join up for the bloggers dinner in September could contact me. The email address was promptly edited out. So I posted some hints as to how people might find my email, not the email itself. One of those posts was removed. In all instances I was reminded that repeatedly breaking the house rules might result in action against my account. And now it seems I'm on pre-moderation.

This is where it gets very inconsistent. Post 16 was initially posted after moderation. Then it was removed. So a moderator read it and found it ok. Then someone complained. If it gets pulled permanently, it will be a sign of inconsistency in the moderation policy.

The other part of post 18 was more in line with the subject of this thread, i.e. turning to god rater than medical treatment to solve a medical problem. Have a look at the lunacy of these rabbies and other bizarre folk:



Making lots of noise on an airplane to fend of the swine flu??!! For FSMs sake. I would hope that atheist and believers of most flavours on this blog can agree that they represent insanity quite well. Suppose one of these guys were to sit on the committee that advises the government what to do about the epidemic. The guys on the plane presumably expect the flight with singing and screaming might well have some effect. Would he then propose that fewer vaccine doses need to be stocked? Crazy.

You agree these guys are nuts right?

Hi Peter,

Sorry to hear you are on pre-moderation.

I know that there's a rule about publishing email addresses, but, removing yours is odd given this:

/blogs/ni/2008/04/will_testament_bloggers_dinner.html

Somewhat inconsistent already I would say. (Yes, I'm still peeved)


Oh the particular issue of this thread, I can completely understand why you think the rabbis are "nuts" (that was Peter's word, not mine so I'd appreciate it if this comment wasn't complained against.)

I completely understand too why the parents were prosecuted. Refusing to call an ambulance was wrong.

The issue of praying, however is a bit more difficult to sort out. Obviously, as a Christian, I'm not against prayer, but, I suppose it depends on what we mean by prayer.

I'm not going to get into the details of what might be going on in these instances just now, but maybe it might make for an interesting conversation over the next while.

Agree that they're nuts, Peter, though not in an unprecedented way. Have you seen the statistics on the numbers of people who go to tarot card readers and psychics and who read horoscopes and who believe in "karma"? All of that challenges reason as much as religion. They're all nuts. The problem as a whole concerns me (ie. would that we had a much more skeptical, logical society in general) but the individual actions aren't particularly surprising.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.