It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
This is a horrible thing that happened but that is their choice on how to live.
they missed the point of a miracle: that it is used when God sees it necessary in his plan for an individual or a group or company of persons. Diabetes is something easily treated, and it is very selfish, if not rude, to ask god to make her better when the parents are fully capable to drive her to the local hospital. it would be like asking, "dear God, could you pass the gravy?" when it is right next to you.
Originally posted by YoungStalin
This is a horrible thing that happened but that is their choice on how to live. The mainstream media is not exactly jumping all over the stories on when things like this go right.
Originally posted by YoungStalin
This is a horrible thing that happened but that is their choice on how to live. The mainstream media is not exactly jumping all over the stories on when things like this go right. You only hear about the people who die you will never see a news story on how prayer or any unconventional medical treatments worked. You should check out Psychopolitics, it was a manual for psychiatrists on how to run their practices. The only things it said should be attacked and commited were people who did not agree with psychiatry and those who practicing Christian Science and Dianetics. With all the drug companies paying large sums of money to the networks (ever notice how there seems to be at LEAST one anti-depressant add every comercial break) is it any wonder on why stories like this are put up for everyone to see?
Originally posted by TruthParadox
reply to post by muzzleflash
It's not about the parents, it's about the child.
Freedom of religion should not extend the choice to drastically decrease someone's chances of living.
Yay parents have the right to be dumbasses - but what about their children?
Once it crosses that line it should be dealt with.
Originally posted by YoungStalin
I think the parents should be protected under the freedom of religion.
Originally posted by mystiq
...The child was not their property. ...
Originally posted by sir_chancealot
Originally posted by mystiq
...The child was not their property. ...
***YOU*** know better than Thomas Jefferson on when the government should be allowed to interfere with the parent/child relationship, right? You know better than the man that helped form this country, and it's guiding principles, right?
“I have examined all the known superstitions of the word, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half of the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth.”
“Reason and persuasion are the only practicable instruments. To make way for these free inquiry must be indulged; how can we wish others to indulge it while we refuse ourselves? But every state, says an inquisitor, has established some religion. No two, say I, have established the same. Is this a proof of the infallibility of establishments?”
Originally posted by zysin5
Originally posted by sir_chancealot
Originally posted by mystiq
...The child was not their property. ...
***YOU*** know better than Thomas Jefferson on when the government should be allowed to interfere with the parent/child relationship, right? You know better than the man that helped form this country, and it's guiding principles, right?
Bringing up Jefferson? He was not a fan of religion. They made damn sure that state and church where to be seperate..( But its not..)
...