To: Abathar
The judge not allowing religion to be used as a defense is quite significant. It opens the door for all sorts of abuse of people of faith. While we can all agree that this baby's death is a terrible tragedy, I believe we should be concerned that this judge is denying the parents their right to refuse treatment on religious grounds.
Should Orthodox Jews or Muslims (or their children) be required to take medicines derived from swine? How many of us here would want a treatment developed from the body parts of aborted fetuses?
Hard cases make bad laws.
17 posted on
05/11/2005 6:40:36 AM PDT by
RebelBanker
(To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women!)
To: RebelBanker
My problem with these religious groups is that they draw the line depending on the issue.
I spent a lot of time with Christian Science folks when I was younger. I used to ask if they didn't believe in doctors, why didn't they have a problem with wearing glasses, hearing aids, etc. Why did they go to the dentist? They never had an answer.
19 posted on
05/11/2005 6:45:45 AM PDT by
bonfire
(dwindler)
To: RebelBanker
You have just given a pass to all the deaths committed in the name of Islam. 9-11 was defensible as in the minds of the perpetrators, their religion dictated these acts.
26 posted on
05/11/2005 7:09:24 AM PDT by
Dudoight
To: RebelBanker
The judge not allowing religion to be used as a defense is quite significant. It opens the door for all sorts of abuse of people of faith People don't see that part when they are using short term emotions to base laws and judgements.
This is a very dangerous slope to set precedent on.
To: RebelBanker
Should Orthodox Jews or Muslims (or their children) be required to take medicines derived from swine? How many of us here would want a treatment developed from the body parts of aborted fetuses? There are Freepers who refuse to vaccinate their children. Should they be prosecuted if their children die of a disease preventable by a vaccine?
So much knee-jerking in this thread, without considering all the ramifications.
If a court order had been obtained to force medical treatment on this child, the government might have been within its powers.
Nevertheless, prosecuting parents who refuse medical treatment for religious reasons and preventing such parents from defending themselves by explaining their rationale is tyrannical.
To: RebelBanker
Very good points. You mirror my sentiments.
139 posted on
05/13/2005 9:44:08 PM PDT by
sweetliberty
(Never argue with a fool. People might not know the difference.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson