Posted on 04/23/2013 10:36:56 AM PDT by OKRA2012
PHILADELPHIA (AP) — A couple serving probation for the 2009 death of their toddler after they turned to prayer instead of a doctor could face new charges now that another son has died.
Herbert and Catherine Schaible belong to a fundamentalist Christian church that believes in faith healing. They lost their 8-month-old son, Brandon, last week after he suffered from diarrhea and breathing problems for at least a week, and stopped eating. Four years ago, another son died from bacterial pneumonia.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Neglect is an active process, and through the action of neglect, these people killed two children. If I see a child walking around with a loaded gun and I do nothing to stop it, and the child then kills himself or another, would you say I’m responsible? Partially responsible? Would you say that I bear no responsibility whatsoever?
>> Three children died. If the Constitution can be invoked to
excuse this, then I’m for gutting it.
So say the gun grabbers.
Well I consider it murder for a parent to allow their child to die from an easily curable malady.
I DID PAY!
No, you didn’t!
“I read theological cousins of these two every day here on this forum.”
Speaking of theological cousins, I had some relatives that for religious reasons did not believe in modern medicine, but they did not subject their children to such a theology.
And yes, those who did not believe in modern medicine both died before they were 50.
“I read theological cousins of these two every day here on this forum.”
Ah yes, they don’t believe in using modern medicine, but they do believe in using the modern Internet.
Prior to modern medicine, many families had more children die than live, and if you they aren’t using any modern medicine... Of course, with so many of us vaccinated these days, I don’t think the odds are the same.
If you believe parents have a 100% right to direct their children’s upbringing with absolutely no interference, then do you believe you can force your daughter to marry some when she is 16 years of age?
I await your response.
I tend to think of people who shun modern medical help as the man sitting on the porch of his house as the flood waters are rising, praying to God to save him.
As the water approaches the porch, a man comes by in a row boat and yells to the man “Come on, Get in. The water is rising.” But the man refuses saying “God will save me.” So, the man in the boat rows away and the man on the porch keeps praying.
The water continues to rise and the man moves up to the second floor of his house as the first floor is flooding. Another man comes by in a motor boat and says to the stranded man, “Come on, get in. I’ll get you out of here.” but the man in the house says “No thanks, God will save me.”
The water keeps rising and finally the praying man ends up on the roof of his house. A man in a helicopter comes by and lowers his ladder. He pleads with the man on the roof to climb the ladder, but the praying man says “No thank you. God will save me.”
Well, the water covers the roof and the praying man drowns. When he gets to Heaven, he asks God, “I prayed and prayed for your help. Why didn’t you save me?”
And God replied, “I sent two boats and a helicopter. What more did you want!”
Ack
Well that’s what I get for posting without reading the other posts first!! :-)
It’s omission, and a sin. You’d be responsible.
Neglect is still inaction.
the wack-a-loons give all Christians a bad name
You already did go off an a semantic jag.
They made a choice. The verb you are looking for is, past tense, ‘chose’.
They chose to neglect. They could have chosen to allow the hospital to render aid.
They chose to be inactive with respect to their child. Worse, they were ignorant of the Scripture, and as such doomed their child to death.
There used to be an inscription on Catholic Bibles, one I didn’t particularly agree with in general, but it was printed there nonetheless:
“Leave not the reading of the Scriptures to the ignorant, lest they rest their own destruction.”
It may apply here, in the specific, but in general I don’t agree with it.
Again, generally, I think the problem we have in this country is that we get theocracy mixed up with religion. Islam, for example, is a system of government more than it is a religion. Maybe Christian Science blurs that boundary too, in that the parents have extended their creed beyond their own personal locus, and now their boy is dead.
Jefferson said, “It neither breaks my back, nor picks my pocket what another many believes . . . “
This is probably the most effective test of the 1st amendment I can find. Islam fails it. Jizya and dhimmitude violate Jefferson’s test. Women have an even better argument.
Anyway, the overt act here is that they chose, and they now should bear the cost of that choice, maybe both before the law and before God, or their God.
The Book of James is, if I recall, part of the Canon of Scripture that Christian Scientists recognize as sacred.
Really. I have never heard of a Christian church that teaches not to get medical care, but just to believe. I heard of “name it and claim it” and believe and you’ll get what you want, but never heard of medical care being withheld. Really sad.
Really? What is dad is a pedofile and mom beats them to a bloody pulp?
RE: “Leave not the reading of the Scriptures to the ignorant, lest they rest their own destruction.”
Curious because I have our family Bibles for three generations, and I have never seen that quote, I pasted it into a google search.
Guess what! Google does not know anything about it either.
Where did you get your information?
Keep reading my posts. ;-)
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.