Murder by faith

Is there justice?

  • Prison. It's a crime. Send them to prison.

    Votes: 12 50.0%
  • Hospital. They're obviously sick.

    Votes: 3 12.5%
  • Justice? What do you mean? It's their right. Freedom of religion.

    Votes: 2 8.3%
  • There is no justice for something like this.

    Votes: 1 4.2%
  • Justice is fiction. Why worry about what doesn't exist?

    Votes: 1 4.2%
  • Other (_____)

    Votes: 5 20.8%

  • Total voters
    24
The problem is, defining "neglect"; you keep saying neglect, they weren't neglecting the child. They did take action, they prayed for her.

If one of them (parents) gets really sick, they should be denied medical treatments. Let someone pray for them!
 
I would have no control over it; however, I would try to stop them BUT I WOULD NOT VIEW THEM AS CRIMINALS, because they ARE trying to do the best thing [for them] for the child

They were trying to do the best thing for their child?

Hmmmm... I guess sitting by and praying while a child lapses into a coma after being ill for several days, and not calling for help (not once), is the best thing.. Is it?

If that is the case, why did the father attempt CPR when she died? After all, if they had done their best up to that point and God simply failed to cure her, why then attempt to circumvent God's wishes and try CPR, when they had refused to call a doctor or take their child to the hospital before then?

I do view them as criminals. Do you know why? Because they completely neglected their daughters essential needs.. primarily her health.. since she was three years of age. When the child fell ill, they still neglected to seek medical help for the child. I wonder, if the family had not contacted the authorities, when would they have called them? Right upon her death? A few hours later? A day? A couple of days? Would they have bothered to call them at all? Here is the thing Norsefire, when you have a child, it is your responsibility to care and nurture that child. If the child falls ill, it is the parent(s) responsibility to seek medical help for that child. They were not living in the back and beyond, where medical help was not available. Medical help was readily available and they shunned it for their own religious purposes, because they wanted God to cure her, because they did not want to take her to a doctor. Their selfishness cost their daughter her life and for that, they are criminals, because they neglected their child.
 
So, to you, the world is nothing more than money, drugs, media... and religion? And, without religion, all you'd have left is the money, the drugs, the media and the etc.?

The world is nothing more than these things; these things, politics, money, work, media, crime, it's just so concrete, dull, and simply, without value

Whereas with faith, it gives each indvidual a better feeling; it gives each individual hope and connection. Money doesn't do that. Politics don't do that.



I could never agree to faith in the supernatural having any value whatsoever. Faith is slavery and oppression. That is a fact.

Your statement above demonstrates that your life is little more than money, drugs, media and religion, with a smattering of etc. - and you imagine a life without religion as your life is now with religion.

Doesn't that tell you something?

It has value because it enhances society; it gives people a connection, a common social identity, a brothership; it gives people hope and can even give them happiness.
 
They were trying to do the best thing for their child?

Hmmmm... I guess sitting by and praying while a child lapses into a coma after being ill for several days, and not calling for help (not once), is the best thing.. Is it?

If that is the case, why did the father attempt CPR when she died? After all, if they had done their best up to that point and God simply failed to cure her, why then attempt to circumvent God's wishes and try CPR, when they had refused to call a doctor or take their child to the hospital before then?

I do view them as criminals. Do you know why? Because they completely neglected their daughters essential needs.. primarily her health.. since she was three years of age. When the child fell ill, they still neglected to seek medical help for the child. I wonder, if the family had not contacted the authorities, when would they have called them? Right upon her death? A few hours later? A day? A couple of days? Would they have bothered to call them at all? Here is the thing Norsefire, when you have a child, it is your responsibility to care and nurture that child. If the child falls ill, it is the parent(s) responsibility to seek medical help for that child. They were not living in the back and beyond, where medical help was not available. Medical help was readily available and they shunned it for their own religious purposes, because they wanted God to cure her, because they did not want to take her to a doctor. Their selfishness cost their daughter her life and for that, they are criminals, because they neglected their child.

No they did not; they prayed for her.

Again, you are assuming medical treatment was the only option. It wasn't. They DID do something for the child, whether you believe in prayer or not; they do, and that's what they applied.

Therefore, they did not neglect their daughter.
 
Let me clarify: you cannot say they neglected her, because that would mean they ignored her. They did not. They prayed for her [being very religious people]. This is no different than a doctor acting on what he knows best; they are acting on what they know best, what they understand.

Can we arrest a doctor for not praying for his patient? Again, if not, then these people are not criminals.
 
I think they did ignore the fact that she was sick for Quote:

"She had probably been ill for about a month, suffering symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, excessive thirst, loss of appetite and weakness."

That is ignoring that fact that she is seriously ill and needs medical attention. By not getting her some is NEGLECT.
 
Again, if there is a God and those were His intentions, we can do nothing about it; likewise, we can praise God for bringing HER to paradise.

And we can praise the parents for a quick, painful death, too.

It is rather interesting to note a theists attitude to a child's death when the topic of a god is introduced. They make it sound like a good thing.

Everyone clap your hands together and pray with me now! God is great! Let us help him fill heaven with young souls that we might show our gratitude and bask in his glorious dead toddler fetish.

Of course, this is under the assumption such a being exists (and it is still up for debate)

Yeah, up for debate. And, we'll all act on those assumptions, shall we? By killing little kids? We'll worry about proving his existence later. Much later.

No, I cannot.

Then, stop claiming he exists.

I don't act insanely in his name........and those who do, they do so in belief, not in His name. The belief in His name.

It's called insanity. I'll mail you the bill.
 
And we can praise the parents for a quick, painful death, too.

It is rather interesting to note a theists attitude to a child's death when the topic of a god is introduced. They make it sound like a good thing.

Everyone clap your hands together and pray with me now! God is great! Let us help him fill heaven with young souls that we might show our gratitude and bask in his glorious dead toddler fetish.

You are thinking in the "here and now"; how do you know that, if there is a God, he did not decide her time was up but now rewards her in heaven until her parents shall join her?

Just because people die wouldn't mean that, if there is a God, he is bad.



Yeah, up for debate. And, we'll all act on those assumptions, shall we? By killing little kids?







No, I cannot. Nor can you disprove him. We both believe, or have a lack of it, but it is NOT knowledge; it is not fact.

I don't act insanely in his name........and those who do, they do so in belief, not in His name. The belief in His name.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
 
Me either. My youngest was vomitting up everything (baby forumla) at 6 weeks old. I took him to the doctor and they told me that maybe he had the flu and to give it a couple days. I knew something wasn't right, and it was no flu. Later on that night I took him to the hospital. They took him in right away because he was dehydrated and he had already lost some weight. He had to have a simple surgery done to thin out out a muscle that was causing him to throw up. The doctor at the hospital said it was a good thing I didn't wait a couple days and brought him in when I did. It was heart wrenching to see him hooked up to IV's and stuff. I would have gladly took his place.

If I would have depended on God for another week or so, he probably would have died. As serious as it seemed at the time a week later at home he was right back to his normal healthy self. He is 7 now and I couldn't imagine life without him. I feel sorry for the little girl, whose life ended because of stupid ppl.

It says she has 3 older siblings. I wonder how old they are. I wonder if the parents if faced with this sort of thing again would follow the same practice again!

That's the thing isn't it? As a parent, you know when something is not 'normal'. If a child suddenly begins to behave strangely or is not looking well.. as in something has become drastically different and there is no reason that it should be so, then it is a fair bet that there is something wrong. When our over active toddler suddenly began to stop wanting to play, became lethargic and very cranky and irritable, something that was completely out of the ordinary for him, we took him in for a check up, just in case and it was found he was anemic. After 2 days, thinking he might be coming down with something, he did not get better or worse as one does with the flue or a cold, he just stayed the same. It could not be ignored or explained away and because he was behaving in a manner that was so abnormal to him, we took him to the doctors.

As a parent, you recognised that his constant throwing up went beyond what is normal reflux. Weight loss in a newborn baby is a clear indication that there was something else wrong and you were right.

That is what I don't understand. How could these parents have ignored all signs that indicated that it was something that was uncharacteristic and abnormal for her? You'd notice the loss of appetite and increased thirst. You'd notice the flu like symptoms that simply weren't going away. They definitely noticed when she lapsed into a coma, because they called their relatives and informed them of it. And they still did not call for help.
 
I think they did ignore the fact that she was sick for Quote:

"She had probably been ill for about a month, suffering symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, excessive thirst, loss of appetite and weakness."

That is ignoring that fact that she is seriously ill and needs medical attention. By not getting her some is NEGLECT.

No, I am quite sure they were aware that she was ill; again, they did respond: they prayed for her.

Therefore, no neglect. Neglect would be doing nothing whatsoever about the situation, if not even straight-out not acknowledging that the child was sick.

They did acknowledge that she was sick and acted.
No neglect.

Again, you are saying medical attention is the right course of action; I believe it is, but that is a BELIEF.
 
You are thinking in the "here and now"; how do you know that, if there is a God, he did not decide her time was up but now rewards her in heaven until her parents shall join her?

That is the typical theist outlook on "life." In other words, life is pointless, only death matters to gain a reward. I can never understand why theists want to live when their rewards are waiting for them.

Just because people die wouldn't mean that, if there is a God, he is bad.

And just because good things happen doesn't mean a god is good, or even exists.
 
When did I claim God exists? It is you who, on numerous actions, has claimed that God does not exist!

I am taking the logical road here: I do not know.

If you don't know, how can you even make the assumption? What evidence do you have to even formulate the assumption?
 
Does anybody here think that Child Services should step in and look into these ppl keeping their other children? (although it doesn't state their ages)
 
No they did not; they prayed for her.

Again, you are assuming medical treatment was the only option. It wasn't. They DID do something for the child, whether you believe in prayer or not; they do, and that's what they applied.

Therefore, they did not neglect their daughter.

What options were available to her? Hmmm... lets see.. they could have taken her to a doctor or the hospital, prayed for her or done absolutely nothing. They selected to pray for her. She got worse and then she died. Now, which option would have been best for her? Lets see, doctors maybe? Seeing that praying for her and doing nothing can be placed in the same basket, since you know, praying failed, the child died and all, one can safely say that they did next to nothing for her. They neglected their child's health by denying her medical treatment when she needed it.

At the end of the day, they could have prayed for her all they wanted, and I believe they did. But had they not denied their child medical treatment, we would not be having this discussion. But they did deny her medical treatment when she was sick, even when she lapsed into a coma. They steadfastly refused to seek medical help. And that is classified as neglect.

Let me ask you a question. Say a child is denied food when it is hungry, the parents instead preferring to pray to God that God makes their child not hungry, even though food is readily available for them to feed it to the child. The child ultimately dies. Would you classify that as neglect? After all, they were doing something, they were praying to God to make their child not be hungry.
 
Back
Top