Posted on 03/07/2015 12:01:14 PM PST by EveningStar
In America, 43 of the 50 U.S. states confer some type of civil or criminal immunity on parents who injure their children by withholding medical care on religious grounds. If your child has diabetes or a severe infection, and you pray for her instead of giving her insulin or antibiotics, she’ll probably die, but you’re largely off the legal hook. But that immunity doesn’t apply if you injure your child by withholding medical care for nonreligious reasons; for that, you can be prosecuted for neglect, abuse, or even manslaughter. This privileging of religion is dangerous to children—and has killed many of them. In Idaho, for instance, parents are immunized against prosecution for involuntary manslaughter or negligent homicide when they let their kids die in the name of faith. In fact, parents there can’t be prosecuted for anything if they rely solely on faith healing.
(Excerpt) Read more at newrepublic.com ...
If the children do alright, should the magistrates
and judges be jailed, too?
Who goes to jail when the child is stolen from
the parents by the the state? (eg. Massachusetts
last 2 years)
Who goes to jail when murderous criminal illegals
are released, and then they murder again and again?
That’s ridiculous ... if parents decide not to buckle up their kids in a car and everything ends up okay, after a ride in the car, does that mean officials should be jailed?! ... LOL ...
How does your post relate to this topic?
It would be interesting to juxtapose the number of children who die every year due to “Faith Healing” vs. the number that die every year due to abortion.
Here is a report from the 1980’s:
http://cirp.org/library/ethics/AAP2/
From this article, it can be inferred that, in a space of 3 years, less than ten children died due to the parent’s decision to withhold medical care because of their religion. (One of them happened across the street from me in Boston, and is mentioned in this article.)FTR, all of us neighbors were outraged when that dear little boy died even as treatment for his bowel obstruction was readily available.
On the other hand:
http://www.all.org/nav/index/heading/OQ/cat/MzQ/id/NjA3OQ/
This site claims 3,288 abortions are performed in the USA every DAY.
However, if a parent refuses to treat their child for a communicable disease and someone else is infected and dies, the parents should be convicted of murder.
Parents acted in good faith. Not my kids.
Not my business.
Rand Paul was viewed on the news saying that parents have a right to refuse vaccinations for their children, since they own them and the government doesn’t.
Should those parents go to jail if their children die of a disease a vaccine would have prevented?
When we know from medical experience that if a kid doesn’t get a known and standard medical treatment for a medical condition ... and that the kid stands a high chance of dying ... THEN ... those parents must be held responsible for withholding that treatment. If the child dies, they should be charged with muder! If the child survives, they should be charged with child abuse!
The New Republic? That useless leftie rag? Why are you giving them hits?
Jesus is “The Lord and God The Father exists. That being said it is written “thou shalt not tempt the Lord Thy God.” People who want to rely on “Faith Healing” are tempting God and if the child dies they should be prosecuted. We have too many Goofy people influencing our society; tree huggers, faith healers, black activists, Muslim terrorists etc. etc.
Jesus is “The Lord and God The Father exists. That being said it is written “thou shalt not tempt the Lord Thy God.” People who want to rely on “Faith Healing” are tempting God and if the child dies they should be prosecuted. We have too many Goofy people influencing our society; tree huggers, faith healers, black activists, Muslim terrorists etc. etc.
Abortion = OK. Failed faith healing = jail.
I agree. Parents who withhold basic standard medical care for (what they claim are) religious reasons and let their kids die should be prosecuted. They can still practice their “religion” in prison.
Correct.
You can dislike intensely the results in this case of faith, but you have no grounds upon which to do anything but opine. Punishment isn't on the table, nor is it within your grasp.
As you were.
Thanks.
“I agree. Parents who withhold basic standard medical ‘
care........
..
So who decides what is “standard? Having medicine forced upon someone makes me uncomfortable,and I’m pro-medicine.
.
1. A parent who has the time and can remove his/her young child from the path of an oncoming car, but chooses not to.
2. A parent who can stop his/her young child from ingesting a deadly substance, but chooses not to.
3. A parent who can prevent his/her young child who cannot swim from playing near a pool without supervision, but chooses not to.
4. A parent who can allow medical care for a child with a potentially fatal illness (and likely will not spontaneously resolve) that has proven effective and relatively safe therapies, but chooses not to.
What is the parent’s culpability in these scenarios?
If the success rate of faith healing is 99% and the failure rate of modern medicine is 99%, some people still pick modern medicine for their treatment of choice.
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.