13 Year Old Boy Getting Chemo After All

[Tinktink]

More like 12. So you are not a fundie, but you sure sounded like one when you stated this - "If that's their decision, especially if based on religious principles, I think that needs to be honored."

If society adhired to that statement you made, religious cults would be granted the privledge to have sex with kids, considering religious principals need to be honored. Now that being said, this kid is 13, has a learning disability and can't read. Does he truly have the capacity to make a informed decision on his life, like you and I?

I think religion is important. I don't agree with the practices of all religions or approve of what everyone does, but I don't think it's fair to dictate to them that what they are doing is wrong. I understand where you're coming from, but you seem to be looking at an extreme and wanting to make rules based on that being normal. The way I see it at the other end (taking your position and running with it to extremes) there are those that would have us just hand over our children to state care when they're born. I think that scenario is pretty scary, but I can't imagine trying to make the rules as if that's what everyone on your side of the fence wanted.

I don't think that it is extreme at all to seek to protect children. I respect that people have religion, absolutely. But when it comes to something this extreme, as the boys life I will stand by with society stepping in to save it. Just as I would in the other scenerio I pointed out. Take for example the other recent case where a mother allowed her daughter to die because of religious reasons, by not taking her to the hospital for a shot of insulin. If that kid on her death bed knew that her life could have been saved by a simple shot, I think she mayd have pleaded for it. Society does have to step in to protect children from their parents, when their parents won't protect them. Finally, each and every person has a right to live or die. That right doesn't belong to their parents, it belongs to them. But under the influence of those said parents, the child truly doesn't have any rights. Give the kid Chemo, if he lives to be 21 and the cancer comes back, then give him the right to chose for himself.

 

[Agnapostate]

Tinkle, settle down.

 

[KittenKoder]

I think religion is important. I don't agree with the practices of all religions or approve of what everyone does, but I don't think it's fair to dictate to them that what they are doing is wrong. I understand where you're coming from, but you seem to be looking at an extreme and wanting to make rules based on that being normal. The way I see it at the other end (taking your position and running with it to extremes) there are those that would have us just hand over our children to state care when they're born. I think that scenario is pretty scary, but I can't imagine trying to make the rules as if that's what everyone on your side of the fence wanted.

I don't think that it is extreme at all to seek to protect children. I respect that people have religion, absolutely. But when it comes to something this extreme, as the boys life I will stand by with society stepping in to save it. Just as I would in the other scenerio I pointed out. Take for example the other recent case where a mother allowed her daughter to die because of religious reasons, by not taking her to the hospital for a shot of insulin. If that kid on her death bed knew that her life could have been saved by a simple shot, I think she mayd have pleaded for it. Society does have to step in to protect children from their parents, when their parents won't protect them. Finally, each and every person has a right to live or die. That right doesn't belong to their parents, it belongs to them. But under the influence of those said parents, the child truly doesn't have any rights. Give the kid Chemo, if he lives to be 21 and the cancer comes back, then give him the right to chose for himself.

However, since he is a minor the parents have the rights, and can choose to go with the child's decision or their own.

 

[Tinktink]

I think religion is important. I don't agree with the practices of all religions or approve of what everyone does, but I don't think it's fair to dictate to them that what they are doing is wrong. I understand where you're coming from, but you seem to be looking at an extreme and wanting to make rules based on that being normal. The way I see it at the other end (taking your position and running with it to extremes) there are those that would have us just hand over our children to state care when they're born. I think that scenario is pretty scary, but I can't imagine trying to make the rules as if that's what everyone on your side of the fence wanted.

I don't think that it is extreme at all to seek to protect children. I respect that people have religion, absolutely. But when it comes to something this extreme, as the boys life I will stand by with society stepping in to save it. Just as I would in the other scenerio I pointed out. Take for example the other recent case where a mother allowed her daughter to die because of religious reasons, by not taking her to the hospital for a shot of insulin. If that kid on her death bed knew that her life could have been saved by a simple shot, I think she mayd have pleaded for it. Society does have to step in to protect children from their parents, when their parents won't protect them. Finally, each and every person has a right to live or die. That right doesn't belong to their parents, it belongs to them. But under the influence of those said parents, the child truly doesn't have any rights. Give the kid Chemo, if he lives to be 21 and the cancer comes back, then give him the right to chose for himself.

However, since he is a minor the parents have the rights, and can choose to go with the child's decision or their own.

Thankfully, under the law, they can't.

 

[Tinktink]

Tinkle, settle down.

Debating a controversial subject excites me. So have to say my friend...

Request Denied.

 

[Avatar4321]

I don't think that it is extreme at all to seek to protect children. I respect that people have religion, absolutely. But when it comes to something this extreme, as the boys life I will stand by with society stepping in to save it. Just as I would in the other scenerio I pointed out. Take for example the other recent case where a mother allowed her daughter to die because of religious reasons, by not taking her to the hospital for a shot of insulin. If that kid on her death bed knew that her life could have been saved by a simple shot, I think she mayd have pleaded for it. Society does have to step in to protect children from their parents, when their parents won't protect them. Finally, each and every person has a right to live or die. That right doesn't belong to their parents, it belongs to them. But under the influence of those said parents, the child truly doesn't have any rights. Give the kid Chemo, if he lives to be 21 and the cancer comes back, then give him the right to chose for himself.

We are all talking about protecting children. Just from different problems. You want to protect them from some percieved harm of their choices. We are trying to save them from you.

Forcing unwanted medical treatment is akin to rape as far as Im concerned. I can't think of something more offensive and intrusive. It's amazing where we live in a society where a 13 year old girls right to kill her unborn child without parental consent is sacrosanct because it's "her body", yet a 13 year old isnt old enough to make his own decisions about his medical treatment despite it being his own body.

We think a 13 year old can face murder charges as an adult, yet cant make a decision concerning his own life and death. Sometimes to truely care about someone, you have to let them make bad choices, even if it does result in the end of their life. You can warn them all you want, but the decision is and should always be ultimately theirs.

 

[OneThunder]

But when it comes to something this extreme, as the boys life I will stand by with society stepping in to save it.

Clarify that it's the dominate society that steps in.

Let's say that the "natural healing" society was dominate. There would be no stepping in.