Posted on 01/23/2005 8:58:36 AM PST by Lindykim
The Christian Underground http://www.christian-underground.com READ IT - LEARN FROM IT - PRAY OVER IT - SHARE IT --- Witches Kill Baby January 21, 2005
Little girl had 40 puncture wounds and a snapped neck Pagan tattoos may match baby girl's wounds Photos of couple's religious markings studied in probe of toddler's death
Prosecutors have obtained photographs of a Springfield Township couple's neopagan tattoos in an effort to match the markings to puncture wounds on the woman's slain year-old daughter. Daniel Duffield and Vanessa McGlumphy are charged in connection with the neck-snapping death of McGlumphy's 13-month-old daughter Jacqueline Mae Cooper.
Aside from the fatal neck injury, the toddler's body was also riddled with more than 40 puncture wounds, 12 broken ribs and a lacerated liver. Prosecutors last week received permission from Summit County Common Pleas Judge Marvin Shapiro to photograph the couple to determine whether their religious tattoos match puncture wounds that appear on the toddler's feet.
According to court records, the child had puncture wounds on her foot in the shape of a Wicca or Celtic symbol.
In addition, prosecutors say that Duffield and McGlumphy told investigators that they wanted to raise the girl in their Wiccan faith, an earth-based religion sometimes called ``The Craft´´ or the ``The Craft of the Wise.´´
Duffield told investigators that he placed the Wiccan pentacle symbol on the girl's feet, prosecutors say. Photos of the couple's markings were taken last week at the Summit County Jail, where the two are being held. Duffield's tattoos include a skull and dagger, an anarchy symbol, a demon and a Celtic cross, prosecutors say. McGlumphy's include a goat head, Medusa and a she-devil.
Prosecutors say a needle containing the child's DNA was found near her crib around the time of her death. The child's puncture wounds, prosecutors contend, are evidence of abuse at the hands of Duffield and proof that McGlumphy ignored the girl's injuries. ``For (McGlumphy), Wicca is nothing but an appreciation and love of nature,´´ said defense lawyer Tom Adgate, who represents the woman. Adgate said his client ``didn´t notice -- and she didn´t condone´´ -- the symbol puncture wounds. ``And she doesn´t know when it was done.´´
Duffield's lawyers could not be reached for comment. Duffield, 32, is charged with murder, involuntary manslaughter, child endangering and felonious assault involving puncturing the girl's feet and face. McGlumphy, 25, is charged with involuntary manslaughter and child endangering. Each has pleaded not guilty.
Both are scheduled for trial Monday, but Duffield has asked for a delay to allow his lawyers more time to prepare for trial. Shapiro is expected to rule on the request in a hearing.
The toddler died Oct. 6 from either a dislocation at the top of the spine -- from blunt impact to the head -- or a ``hyperextension/hyperflexion´´ of the neck, according to autopsy reports.
On Tuesday, a juvenile court judge granted temporary custody of the girl's twin sister to McGlumphy's father. The arrangement was agreed to by the child's biological father.
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/m ld/myrtlebeachonl:ne/10569204.htm http://www.covenantnews.com/newswire/archives/009376.html moderator@christian-underground.com http://www.christian-underground.com/archive/read.php?sid=398 Posted to the CU: 2005-01-21 08:39:08 CST ======================================== We will Pray WHEN we want School - WHERE we want Work - The Street - The Mall - Persecute Us At Your Own Peril! The Christian Underground http://www.christian-underground.com ========================================
America was founded as a place free of religious persecution for all.
What you want would elevate one religion (Christianity) above the rest. Thus, those who do not follow Christianity would be relegated to a "secondary" status in the eyes of the government, and in the eyes of Christians. However, they would still have to pay taxes to support this religion.
Sorry, I can find NO justification for that in the Constitution. No American should ever be another's Dhimmi. I would resist that with all my might, and with other Constitutional rights.
And I wonder how many 'Wiccan' chaplins are there in the U.S. Armed Forces?
http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/psa/articles/usarmy.html
Actually, it is the Constitution which enumerates those religions rights to be free of censure, persecution, and abrigement by the government.
What OTHER rights do you feel we don't need?
That was also part of what I had learned.
I have always loved that period in European history (from 1000 to 1500+) and have loved reading about it. Obviously, recent experience with Islam is requiring me to rethink all I thought I knew...glad I didn't major in that stuff.
"We should be very hesitant to outlaw most religions."
I'll say! Our Constitution names no religion that one has the freedom to worship. None. Anyone may worship any religion they choose. Not only must we be "hesitant," we must NEVER outlaw any religion.
We may outlow, and have outlawed, certain practises that religions may employ. For example, plural marriage was once part of the Mormon religion. It is not any longer, and is illegal. Yet we have not outlawed the LDS church.
But...we may not, under our Constitution, outlaw a religion. The moment we do that, we cease to be a nation with freedom of religion.
For starters, the "right" to maim a baby as part of a "religious" right.
poing
That's the problem with debating religion, period. Invective is pretty much the pinacle of the debate. Few minds are ever changed. The older and wiser I become, the more I realize that if conversion is possible it has to come from love, not debate.
Isn't that a commercial for candy?
Having a religious belief in magic, psychic power or mysticism is not religion.
You say that our founding fathers never mentioned Christianity, but they never mentioned cannibalism either.
Would you defend with the same zeal the "religious" beliefs of the ancient Aztecs as much as you defend the "religious" beliefs of ancient Europeans?
There are religions that require human sacrifice---the gods require human beating hearts for example---should that be allowed to satisfy the freedom of religion?
And just as "clear" is your overt hostility towards "Christianity."
Bump.
"And I wonder how many 'Wiccan' chaplins are there in the U.S. Armed Forces?"
I don't know that there are any, however the Chaplain's Service includes instructions on Wicca, and any chaplain may be called upon to serve any wiccan he may encounter.
There are, however, Muslim chaplains in the U. S. Military, thanks. It's a religion followed by a fair number of U.S. military personnel.
Such activity is ALREADY illegal. Murder can and is proscribed by law, however, if a religion does NOT engage in such things, why should it be illegal?
No, and for simple reasons. You can't outlaw the belief, only the practice. Try as you may, you can't through force of legislation force your way into a man's conscience. His beliefs are his, and his alone.
Ah, yes...when encountering disagreement, whine about "anti-Christianity". Easier I guess, than arguing reasonably FOR removing people's rights.
Disagreement is NOT hostility. I thought only the PC Left claimed this.
"There are religions that require human sacrifice---the gods require human beating hearts for example---should that be allowed to satisfy the freedom of religion?
"
As far as I know, there are no current religions which require such, but those acts would be illegal in this country, just as illegal as the act allegedly performed by these wiccans.
As I said, plural marriage is not allowed, either, even though that was part of Mormonism.
The United States may outlaw practices of any religion, if they conflict with our laws. The religion itself may not be outlawed. Only actions may be against the law.
It's very simple. You can't kill or harm another human via your religion. You can't steal. You can't do a lot of things that are illegal for all citizens to do. Pretty much everything else is OK.
A good example is the animal sacrifices done by followers of Santeria. Some localities have attempted to make such sacrifices illegal. They have lost in court.
If people only knew just HOW many, they'd be shocked.
Luckily, the founders thought differently. They disagreed so strongly with your views that they took the trouble into proscribing the very view you described above in the Constitution itself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.