Girl died as parents prayed instead of seeking help

Originally posted by Howie47
There have been several scientific studies on prayer. It has been found that it does have an effect. Exactly why some people are saved to have extended lives, here and now; while others die. Is somewhat of a mystery.
We must take it by faith and trust. That it all serves a grander scheme,
then we are capable of comprehending!
Even fundamentalist nuts get cancer and every other disease. They
all don't get healed. They are all dying. So your statement is just not true!

Yeah, those parents took it on faith and trust. Now their kid is dead. Faith-healing and using prayer to sickness is no different to using Voodoo. It's Christianity as a cult.

Hahaha, I am not laughing because of the the poor little girls death. That would be messed up, but this is a shining example of evolution.. These parents, if convicted and serve long sentences, will be too old to continue breeding. This will wipe out there end of the gene pool. It is the same for the people who stick metal butter knives into plugged in toasters, or anyone else who doesn't think first, or simply does not understand the basic concept of survival.

I once worked on an large corporate farm the summer between high school graduation and first year at college. We had to move a center pivot irrigation system so we could cut alfalfa underneath it. The irrigation system did not have power, so me and this other guy went to the road to check if the power was on at the fuse box. The system ran off of 3-phase 440v. The first thing I noticed was that the lid to the fuse box had been blown off and one of the three fuses was vaporized, leaving only the end caps. Now some of you may think that what I did next was a d#ck thing to do, I was thinking about the greater needs of humanity. Just before this guy reached into the fuse box, to what I could only assume was out of shear stupidity, I told him, "If you get electrocuted, I am not doing CPR on you." This made him stop, and think, maybe for the first time in his life that something he was about to do could have real consequences. He just backed away. A couple of weeks later he cut his work boot off with a high pressure steam power washer after being told not to point it at himself. If only I had not stopped him from reaching into that fuse box, he may have avoided the intense pain of removing flesh with high pressure steam.

reply to post by mother_jung


reminds me of a similar event i saw take place when I was young and working the fast-food circuit to pay for summer fun.. A guy dropped a chicken into a 600degree oil vat and reached in down to his elbow to grab it. Needless to say, the vat was turned off for a while.
------
The law of NATURE = you do as the will of the universe allows you to do. Medicine does not have to be administered and praying is a perfectly fine way of trying to combat an illness.
No punishment fits the crime of trying to cure your child by means of spiritual healing.
While I personally would have done something different, i wouldn't be in the same position as them anyway. If they kill themselves off then that is their choice and the natural law. This isn't a ill intended POV though.
b
Mother-jung below: stand-up comedy at it's best!

[edit on 29-3-2008 by Bspiracy]

[edit on 29-3-2008 by Bspiracy]

reply to post by Bspiracy


Isn't it funny that natural selection also kills those who do not believe it natural selection

[edit on 29-3-2008 by mother_jung]

This reminds me of a story my EMT instructor shared with us once.

2 guys out hiking, both EMT's, one of whom had a pretty extensive trauma kit with him (insofar as he could and still have all his camping/hiking supplies) and both of whom had suplimented thier training with backwoods training (how to make a stretcher from sticks and blankets etc) happened upon 2 parents praying over their child who had fallen off the edge of the cliff they were hiking along the bottom of.

these 2 guys offered to help but the parents refused saying they were praying for a miracle.

funny how we often think that a miracle is going to be something supernatural vs something mundane....like a pair of equipped EMT's standing in front of you....

now, i cant attest to the validity of the story as i was neither the parents or the emt nor was my instructor but it does illustrate the piont i think

Originally posted by Christian Voice
reply to post by xion329alpha

 

But this is pitting science against faith. Science has no absolute proof that prayer has no effect. I've heard several doctors informing their patients to pray. Not prayer in place of treatment, but to pray nontheless.

Science may have no proof that prayer doesn't have effect, but science does have proof that in this case medicine can work...


"And you should also be required by law to seek religious services and not allow your child to die a sinful eternal death for the sake of an oppositional belief. That should be required by law WAY ABOVE schooling, etc. If you choose to allow your child (i.e. future adult) to partake of something ENTIRELY sinful and without prayer, then decent people should kick in your door and take the suffering child to safety. Plain and simple."

The difference being not taking the child to the doctor resulted in the child's death. It is a 100% fact that the child is dead, this fact does not change from whatever religious or non-religious way you look at it.

Not taking a child to a church/mosque or whatever and letting that child commit a sinful act, is only sinful from that religious point of view.

See the difference?

To the poster above me, brilliant story!

[edit on 29-3-2008 by cleggy88]

[edit on 29-3-2008 by cleggy88]

reply to post by Jadette

Yes, we have laws against negligent homicide. We also have a Constitution that guarantees freedom of religion. I believe I remember it correctly: Congress shall make no law establishing a national religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Prayer is an exercise of religion.

As I have pointed out many times already, I do not condone what these parents did. I realize that this attitiude may be difficult for some to get their head around, so let me say it again: I do not condone the parents' actions.

My only concern (and I still believe it is justified) is that medicinal treatment in quite a few cases is far from a guaranteed cure. People must be free to choose, based on their own knowledge and beliefs, the proper way to treat an ailment; they must not have that decision made for them by others.

Oh, yes, for those who have already forgotten: I do not condone the actions of the parents.

Seems to be a bit of ADD happening here, maybe we should arrest people for not taking enough Ritalin...

TheRedneck

reply to post by cleggy88

Since you used my example...

The purpose of that particular choice of words was not intended to indicate a preferable course of action, but rather to demonstrate a similarity between a posted statement and one that would obviously be seen as unconscionable. Perhaps you missed that.

TheRedneck

Originally posted by TheRedneck
My only concern (and I still believe it is justified) is that medicinal treatment in quite a few cases is far from a guaranteed cure. People must be free to choose, based on their own knowledge and beliefs, the proper way to treat an ailment; they must not have that decision made for them by others.

Oh, yes, for those who have already forgotten: I do not condone the actions of the parents.

Seems to be a bit of ADD happening here, maybe we should arrest people for not taking enough Ritalin...

TheRedneck

I find it amusing that western medicine has such 'extreme fanatical' devotion regarding its 'infallibility.'

While medicine is a repository of great wisdom, it is nonetheless an art. Medicine is 'practiced' just like religion, no?

Well, you and I have both stated repeatedly that we do not agree with the action nor the reasoning behind the actions of the child's parents, but the extremists at the other end of the table are obsessed with a retaliatory approach to this event. Perhaps the reason they are so fervently (almost violently) inclined to judge and punish is precisely because they feel if they do not become the executors of a reckoning for this event there will be no reckoning for what happened. If you don't believe in a metaphysical reckoning (God, Karma, what have you) - but cannot shake the compulsion to have a balance of morality, you will be inclined to 'call for blood' - to see to it that 'justice is done.' in lieu of God. Food for thought.

reply to post by Maxmars

While medicine is a repository of great wisdom, it is nonetheless an art. Medicine is 'practiced' just like religion, no?

Yes. A brilliant observation, and a very true one.

As for the extremists you refer to, I see them as very sad, unenlightened individuals. I do not know what has caused them so much pain as to instill the need to lash out so violently, but I do hope they overcome it. They have my pity.

TheRedneck

Originally posted by Maxmars
I find it amusing that western medicine has such 'extreme fanatical' devotion regarding its 'infallibility.'

While medicine is a repository of great wisdom, it is nonetheless an art. Medicine is 'practiced' just like religion, no?

Comparing medicine to a religion is big big stretch. Certainly there are abuses of it. We all know about the dollar driven drug business and the plethora of drugs that are being given to children. But that is an abuse of medicine, not medicine itself. Medicine saves a lot of lives.

reply to post by TheRedneck


The practical and legal question is where do we draw the line between practicing a religion and committing negligent homicide?

I fear what happened with these poor parents is that their faith hardened into dangerous fanaticism.

The theological question is how far can one take prayer. What are its limits? At what point does it become irrational?

Thanks to you both for your input.

[edit on 29-3-2008 by rizla]

reply to post by rizla

Comparing medicine to a religion is big big stretch. Certainly there are abuses of it. We all know about the dollar driven drug business and the plethora of drugs that are being given to children. But that is an abuse of medicine, not medicine itself. Medicine saves a lot of lives.

(Emphasis mine)

Certainly there are abuses of religion. We all know about the Catholic priests abusing children, or the intolerance of certain evangelists. But that is an abuse of religion, not religion itself.

Hmmm... maybe not so big a stretch after all?

TheRedneck

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by rizla

Certainly there are abuses of religion. We all know about the Catholic priests abusing children, or the intolerance of certain evangelists. But that is an abuse of religion, not religion itself.

Hmmm... maybe not so big a stretch after all?

TheRedneck

I edited my above post.

I have not attacked yours or any other religion (well, maybe voodoo). I am not making a quality statement about religion. I am condemning fanaticism.

But regarding medicine=religion, no. It's a huge stretch. Sure, both are big business so in that sense you'll sadly find plenty of comparisons. But western medicine is I believe defined as a science.

There are huge differences between science and religion. For one thing, religion depends on a belief in things you cannot test in a laboratory

Hooray for religion!

Any money that when they survive "It's a miracle!!" yet when it fails it has nothing to do with god and god is still awesome and it's a shame but no reason to get angry at religion, despite the fact that she could have lived a long and happy life with some medical help.

Thanks religion, thanks.

Originally posted by TheRedneck

Certainly there are abuses of religion. We all know about the Catholic priests abusing children, or the intolerance of certain evangelists. But that is an abuse of religion, not religion itself.

Well then on that line of thought we need to make the further distinction between 'religion' and 'the church'.

the things that we would typically say was an abuse of religion, we could really say was an abuse of the church, and not the religion itself.

Originally posted by cleggy88

But this is pitting science against faith. Science has no absolute proof that prayer has no effect. I've heard several doctors informing their patients to pray. Not prayer in place of treatment, but to pray nontheless.

Science may have no proof that prayer doesn't have effect, but science does have proof that in this case medicine can work...

Did you guys both watch the video I posted near the start of the thread?

Why does God not heal amputees through prayer?

Why does God heal someones Cancer through prayer?

Why does God not save the starving kids in Africa through prayer?

Why does God give the job raise through prayer?

See where I am going with this? Actually there was a bunch of good posts about prayer earlier in this thread incase you guys missed it?

[edit on 043131p://30u59 by Lucid Lunacy]

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by cleggy88

 

Since you used my example...

The purpose of that particular choice of words was not intended to indicate a preferable course of action, but rather to demonstrate a similarity between a posted statement and one that would obviously be seen as unconscionable. Perhaps you missed that.

TheRedneck

I apologize for taking your quote out of context. I miss understood your point.

I am an atheist but if people wish to follow a religion that is their personal choice. I have a problem like in this case where people choose praying to something that may not even be there (hasn't been proved to be there) over going to a doctor and using something that has been proven to work.

If a similar situation were ever to happen to me and I prayed to the 'flying lump of cheese' (which I can tell you now is real, because he speaks to me every night and makes sure my fridge is always full of cheese) to cure my daughter. I would be sent straight to a mental asylum and would probably spend the rest of my life there, despite the fact I know he exists.

Because this happened in God's name, then it is acceptable.

One person sees and speaks to something that isn't there they are delusional, a group of people do and it's called religion?

How many people need to see the flying lump of cheese and to speak to him before it becomes accepted as religion and a reason to let our children die needlessly?

At the end of the day this child died because of their parents faith in something, just as would be the same as my faith in the flying lump of cheese, when there was no need to use 'faith' in something when just round the corner was something that has been proved could help.

Definitions of faith on the Web:

* religion: a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny

You don't have to have belief in insulin, it will work if you believe in it or not.



[edit on 30-3-2008 by cleggy88]

reply to post by rizla

I edited my above post.

I have not attacked yours or any other religion (well, maybe voodoo). I am not making a quality statement about religion. I am condemning fanaticism.

I was not attempting to attack you, sorry if it seemed that way. I simply noticed the similarity between your statement defending medicine and statements that have been made defending faith.

But regarding medicine=religion, no. It's a huge stretch. Sure, both are big business so in that sense you'll sadly find plenty of comparisons. But western medicine is I believe defined as a science.

You are correct, but it is still an imperfect science. That's why it fails (people die) every day. Never would I suggest that no one should ever see a doctor; but I will suggest that it is perhaps taken too seriously much of the time.

There are huge differences between science and religion. For one thing, religion depends on a belief in things you cannot test in a laboratory

True, but there is also some degree of faith in medicine. Each person has a different DNA. Yet medicinal treatments are not tested on each version of DNA before implemented for public use. Obviously, to do so would be impossible. However, there is evidence that a treatment may work for some, and not work for others. So there is some faith at work that the treatment will provide the desired result in a particular individual.

I see as many similarities, now that I am looking at the two practices in this new light, than I do differences.

TheRedneck

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

Well then on that line of thought we need to make the further distinction between 'religion' and 'the church'.

the things that we would typically say was an abuse of religion, we could really say was an abuse of the church, and not the religion itself.

Well said! I couldn't agree more. This case was obviously some measure of abuse of the religion; I believe the only difference between my stance and the stance of some others here is the degree of abuse we feel has taken place and the suggested repercussions.

TheRedneck

reply to post by cleggy88

I apologize for taking your quote out of context. I miss understood your point.

Perfectly fine. No hard feelings here.

I am an atheist but if people wish to follow a religion that is their personal choice. I have a problem like in this case where people choose praying to something that may not even be there (hasn't been proved to be there) over going to a doctor and using something that has been proven to work.

And it is your freedom to not follow any religion. Likewise, I can agree to a large extent on this case. But what if the procedure was experimental? Or if the procedure was 'accepted', but with a high failure rate? How high a failure rate is acceptable before we force parents to place their children at risk? Who decides what is acceptable, and who bears the true risks to their loved ones?

At the end of the day this child died because of their parents faith in something, just as would be the same as my faith in the flying lump of cheese, when there was no need to use 'faith' in something when just round the corner was something that has been proved could help.

Your explanation (which I edited for space) has some logistical merit. The only problem is that, as crazy as it sounds, what if the flying lump of cheese actually existed? No one has all the answers, as evidenced by the very existence of this forum. Are there really visiting aliens? I don't think so, based on my personal belief that any other species would have to be insane to come here with all the intelligent life supposedly in the universe. That does not mean there is proof that aliens do not visit earth, and should it be proved later to be fact, my present belief would then be the subject of ridicule.

No, the final decision on what to believe in must be left to the individual. Our founding fathers were wise to include that right. My opinion, of course.

TheRedneck