TheSkepticChristian Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 In Idaho the law protects faith healing parents that refuse to take their children to the doctor because they think prayer is more effective. Should we defend that?
Jeanne Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 (edited) 4 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: In Idaho the law protects faith healing parents that refuse to take their children to the doctor because they think prayer is more effective. Should we defend that? No. God would surely help but only if we help ourselves. Would we defend those who fly airplanes into towers? Edited January 22, 2016 by Jeanne
thesometimesaint Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 10 minutes ago, Jeanne said: No. God would surely help but only if we help ourselves. Would we defend those who fly airplanes into towers? You can believe anything you want. What you do is another question.
thesometimesaint Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 16 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: In Idaho the law protects faith healing parents that refuse to take their children to the doctor because they think prayer is more effective. Should we defend that? We don't have the right to foist our religion on anyone else. 1
Alan Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 21 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: In Idaho the law protects faith healing parents that refuse to take their children to the doctor because they think prayer is more effective. Should we defend that? Yes, this should be defended. 1
Popular Post bluebell Posted January 22, 2016 Popular Post Posted January 22, 2016 I think that extra care has to be taken with minors in this kind of situation. It's one thing for someone to shun medical intervention for themselves, but the lines blur when we start talking about someone shunning medical intervention on behalf of another who has no say or power to do anything for themselves. 9
Daniel2 Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Alan said: Yes, this should be defended. Wow. I am surprised to see this. There is NO way the law should justify using religion as an excuse to neglect children's needs. The Department of Child and Family Services takes children away from parents all the time because of abuse or neglect. If a religion allows child sacrifice, does the law protect that?! Adults may choose to decline to seek medical attention, but the law does not allow them to neglect, beat, maim, abuse, or murder their children (or their spouse, or anyone else) in the name of God. Edited January 22, 2016 by Daniel2 2
Ahab Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 3 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: In Idaho the law protects faith healing parents that refuse to take their children to the doctor because they think prayer is more effective. Should we defend that? Should we defend Idaho law, you mean? If we do decide to be anarchist against a law upheld by a State government just how far do you think we should go? How do you propose that we decide whose laws we should obey, or decide what is right? I think at some point we each have to make up our own mind and stand up for whatever we believe to be right. May the best man win, which of course He will. 1
The Nehor Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 3 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: In Idaho the law protects faith healing parents that refuse to take their children to the doctor because they think prayer is more effective. Should we defend that? Hell no. I used to be in favor of parents having the unconditional right to make medical decisions for their children. Then I saw parents claiming vaccines cause autism and they seem to want to bring back polio with their children as the test subjects. This makes them either too stupid or too morally reprehensible to be be allowed to make medical decisions for another human being and probably for themselves as well. 3
Storm Rider Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 This can easily evolve into a very slippery slope where an elite, enlightened group then thinks only they know the right way we should raise children and govern ourselves. However, I don't think that one's faith should manage the medical welfare of children. Laws that allow this should be reviewed to allow for a timely review in situations of emergency care to allow for children to receive care and then allow for parents and the same authority to review future health treatments that respect the desires of parents without creating a mortal danger to children. 1
Teancum Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 4 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: In Idaho the law protects faith healing parents that refuse to take their children to the doctor because they think prayer is more effective. Should we defend that? No. No and no. Not if it puts the child's life at risk.
Raingirl Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 As a mother, I simply cannot imagine standing by and not using medical treatment on my child. As others have said, if an adult wants to make that decision for themselves, go for it (there are certain situations under which I would decline treatment for myself). One of the several cases that I have encountered over the years involved parents refusing to treat their child's diabetes. Makes no damn sense to me. My daughter was born with several birth defects. Had I chosen to forego medical care, she would not have been able to walk. I cannot fathom a parent doing that. 1
Recommended Posts