Enema Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 http://news.aol.com/story/_a/teenager-from-faith-healing-family-dies/20080619095209990001 Cliffs: 16 year old boy refuses medical treatment because of his religious beliefs. Was a simple urinary tract blockage that could easily have been fixed with a catheter. His parents will plead not guilty on a couple of charges using a "religious freedom" defense. I'm assuming the type of nuts that rely on faith healing are a minority amongst religions.... do any of you guys know some personally? Link to post Share on other sites
Adamagnet Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Ironically people of this faith follow Darwinism more than they realize. It sure would be a horrid way to go... Do they even allow analgesics? Link to post Share on other sites
Dark-N-Romantic Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 http://news.aol.com/story/_a/teenager-from-faith-healing-family-dies/20080619095209990001 Cliffs: 16 year old boy refuses medical treatment because of his religious beliefs. Was a simple urinary tract blockage that could easily have been fixed with a catheter. His parents will plead not guilty on a couple of charges using a "religious freedom" defense. I'm assuming the type of nuts that rely on faith healing are a minority amongst religions.... do any of you guys know some personally? Are they wrong for following their faith? Even if they sent their child to the doctors, does that mean the boy would of still lived? No one has a crystal ball, no one can say what the next moment will bring, we ALL live on faith. We live on faith that the sun will rise tomorrow. We have faith that we will have great health for most of our lives. We have faith that when we get behind the wheel of a car that we will get place to place safely. We even believe our children will be safe in the schools and colleges they go to. Life is all about faith. But, when things go wrong and not the way we expect it, then we want to get mad and question and discount faith. Faith is NOT about everything going our way and everything being right. Unless there are ACTIVE signs of neglect and abuse is one thing, a person should be punished for wanton and intentional acts of neglect and abuse. But, if someone is operating out of faith, the government needs to back off. It is they who state that government and religion should not mix, and the need to stop being forked tongued like the devils they are and live up to that. This does not mean that religious groups should not be held accountable for criminal acts, but that does not mean the government have the right to impose upon them because they are operating out of faith either. DNR I really hope the religious group who had their children taken away, poked prodded, probably bad mouthed because of their faith, should sew the Texas and the US government. Link to post Share on other sites
Adamagnet Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Even if they sent their child to the doctors, does that mean the boy would of still lived? Yes he would have. While it's true that nothing is ever 100% certain, a probability close to 100% can be deemed as such. We live on faith that the sun will rise tomorrow. Ah, so the tree doesn't make a sound when it falls, eh? Link to post Share on other sites
J2FT1 Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 Yeah, it's pretty screwed up. Ah, when traditional thinking and modern thinking collide. Link to post Share on other sites
FleshNBones Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 http://news.aol.com/story/_a/teenager-from-faith-healing-family-dies/20080619095209990001 Cliffs: 16 year old boy refuses medical treatment because of his religious beliefs. Was a simple urinary tract blockage that could easily have been fixed with a catheter. His parents will plead not guilty on a couple of charges using a "religious freedom" defense. I'm assuming the type of nuts that rely on faith healing are a minority amongst religions.... do any of you guys know some personally?I consider Mormonism a cult. There are many extreme groups you can pass off as mainstream Christianity. Try the Manson family, or David Koresh. The hypocrisy is fanatics are passed off as mainstream Christians, and the atheist fanatics are also passed off as mainstream Christians. Too convenient in my opinion. Link to post Share on other sites
johan Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 God wanted him dead. That's why He gave the kid those parents. When God wants you dead, it won't matter whether anyone takes you to the hospital. Link to post Share on other sites
porter218 Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 Even if they sent their child to the doctors, does that mean the boy would of still lived? No one has a crystal ball I just can't beleive you said that. Are you serious? Yes the boy would have lived. Link to post Share on other sites
Jokerman Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 I think the problem is not with his faith, but with the law his maturity and the law there. When the law defines a boy be mature and experienced enough to decide about matters concerning his very life from the age of 14, it is only fair enough if he does do so. Sure you can ask, have to ask yourself what sort of parents are they? Bringing him up this way, making him make this decision. However, if he would've been 24 and have made the same decision, would you still condemn and render guilty his parents? You probably wouldn't, which is owing to us not agreeing over that he is in an situation where he could realise what's right out of himself. We deem him dependant on the beliefs of his parents, yet the law doesn't. For me that's sort of a dilemma - but yet it also is his very freedom to decide, you cannot force anybody to have this yet so simple threatment anyway, but what you can do is make people aware of different views - just like people do in some states to get abortion, they have to talk to advisers and satisfy they are aware of the consequences outside their own frame of thoughts. A pitty, simply.. Link to post Share on other sites
DutchGuy Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 Maybe, maybe not. I agree he should have had the treatment, but people die all the time from simple procedures. There was a person in our area who died after having a mole removed. Anesthesia isn't always predictable, or a person could have a reaction to the cure itself. Why do you agree he should have had the treatment then? You acknowledge what is wrong in this case yet choose to defend it. Link to post Share on other sites
DutchGuy Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 I say that he should have had the treatment, because children deserve every opportunity to live a healthy, normal, secure life. And do I know for sure the treatment would have worked, no I don't. I do know that some cases show that even minor treatments don't go the way they should. I don't defend the parents at all, and I certainly don't defend a state that allows a 16 to make a life altering decision. But do I know for sure a doctor could have saved him, no I don't. The fact that there is a small chance that the child would have died even with medical treatment is completely irrelevant then, so why make that point? Link to post Share on other sites
porter218 Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Maybe, maybe not. I agree he should have had the treatment, but people die all the time from simple procedures. There was a person in our area who died after having a mole removed. Anesthesia isn't always predictable, or a person could have a reaction to the cure itself. No anesthesia necessary for that procedure. Nobody on record has ever died from this procedure either. Link to post Share on other sites
mental_traveller Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Are they wrong for following their faith? Even if they sent their child to the doctors, does that mean the boy would of still lived? No one has a crystal ball, no one can say what the next moment will bring, we ALL live on faith. We live on faith that the sun will rise tomorrow. We have faith that we will have great health for most of our lives. We have faith that when we get behind the wheel of a car that we will get place to place safely. We even believe our children will be safe in the schools and colleges they go to. Life is all about faith. I don't have faith in any of those things. Faith is for the gullible. Letting your son needlessly die because you have stupid beliefs with no evidence to support them is an evil and heinous crime. In this case the kid was old enough to make his own decision - fair enough, he took the consequences and it's his right to be stupid. Link to post Share on other sites
J2FT1 Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Hello, allow me to introduce myself, BentnotBroken, Ms. Gulliable to you:D:D:D. The poor child had no evidence that the particular doctor in his case could perform the procedure without botching it up. But so many would rather he chose the doctor. Science is a great thing(God created it)but it's the humans that make mistakes. This is so silly. You bring up ridiculous risks that no one ever thinks about just for the sake of argument. It's kind of like saying "should I go out the front door today, someone might have dug a hole in front of it?" Secondly, why would God create something that could potentially disprove him, and already questions him? Link to post Share on other sites
Moai Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Wow. The child may have died anyway, we can't know for sure as some sort of defense for NOT going to the doctor? WTF???? The fact is that the boy's malady was not dangerous given proper medical treatment. He did not get that treatment because of religious faith. The chances of a doctor botching a catheter insertion and that resulting in a fatality are virtually zero. I doubt that you even CAN botch a catheter insertion. However, by not seeking medical treatment, the chance of the child dying is 100%. See the difference? Let's say that I have a very rare heart disorder that is not well understood at the moment. There is an experimental procedure, and said procedure is 35% effective. If I don't have the treatment, there is no doubt I will die. If I have the treatment, there is a 65% chance I will die. Should I have the procedure? Of course. A 35% chance is better than no chance at all. Things like this happen ALL THE TIME. And try as you might, there is no way that this fatality--ad all the others--lie directly at the feet of religious faith. Oh, and FYI--god did not invent science. Man did. Science has only existed for a fraction of the time man has been on Earth. Link to post Share on other sites
Moose Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 And try as you might, there is no way that this fatality--ad all the others--lie directly at the feet of religious faith.You're right....it's mainly the ignorance of people and how they interpret their selected sect....it's literally a cryin' shame..... Link to post Share on other sites
silktricks Posted June 27, 2008 Share Posted June 27, 2008 Nope, following God has nothing to do with not taking advantage of medical treatment. God expects us to use all the tools at our disposal to keep ourselves in good physical condition. Sheesh - have you been chatting with God lately? It's not that I think one shouldn't visit the dr. but don't you think that maybe you might be making some assumptions about knowing what God expects - or doesn't expect??? Link to post Share on other sites
Mahatma Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 sounds like bob marley. Link to post Share on other sites
tobefree Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 That boy is helplessly superstish!! We are living in 21st century!! how can we be so deluded like that? Link to post Share on other sites
tobefree Posted July 3, 2008 Share Posted July 3, 2008 You're right....it's mainly the ignorance of people and how they interpret their selected sect....it's literally a cryin' shame..... Yes Moose, i can't agree with you more. it is such a tragedy and disaster that some people can be such fanatic nuts! We must be rational! Link to post Share on other sites
kdark Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 God creates man> God gives man a functioning intelligent brain>man discovers things that God allows and creates what God deems necessary=God created science. I like that. I prefer to have more faith in my own species as a human than in some puppeteer controling all aspects of the direction that we as a species are developing into. The same god in your opinion who created the man, the brain in the man, and the science he uses to help better his life, also created the threat of nuclear war, genocide, and political corruption. What if the world is destroyed in nuclear war? It wasn't God who did it, it was us as humans. We as human beings are the ones in control of our destiny, and it is our job as human beings to take control and shape our existence into either the paradise we dream of, or the hell we fear. Anyone who relys on their faith in a religion over modern science for the healing of a physical malady is not right in the head. Praying, or what I like to call "Hoping," should be a last resort, when all possible solutions have been exhausted. Link to post Share on other sites
nleeh Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 Are they wrong for following their faith? Even if they sent their child to the doctors, does that mean the boy would of still lived? No one has a crystal ball, no one can say what the next moment will bring, we ALL live on faith. A child of 16, and at 16 one IS a child, he/she does not have the wisdom, the experience to make such a heady decision. This child did not refuse treatment, his parents refused! The parents so called faith determined the fate of that child, not the child, not God, not anyone else. Let the parent refuse treatment for themself if they want but they should not have the liberty to do so for a child. You said no one has a crystal ball, no one knows what the next moment will bring... but we can anticipate! We can prepare, we can strive to the best of our ability towards a good outcome. With the take on the crystal ball theory you presented, we may as well all lay down and wait for death. nleeh Link to post Share on other sites
nleeh Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 At 16 you are old enough to make the decision to drive, drink, have sex, steal, do drugs(not that I want them to do any of them including driving) A toddler can make decisions, but it doesn't mean they make wise ones. Nor do 16 year old kids who do some of the things you mentioned which proves the point. That's why children need responsible adults to guide them rather than make kids scape goats for the parents irresponsibility. nleeh Link to post Share on other sites
nleeh Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 bentnotbroken, of course some teenagers make better decisions than others. Not sure why you thought I meant otherwise but anyway, the operative word I used was helpful guidance from parents to make wise decisions. As far as God being the deciding factor in when we pass over from this life...well, I do not share that belief but it was nice to hear we agree on something...that the 16 years old kid should have had medical treatment. nleeh Link to post Share on other sites
A.G.Doren Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 God creates man> God gives man a functioning intelligent brain>man discovers things that God allows and creates what God deems necessary=God created science. I like that. Quoted for truth! Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts