Faith-healing parents charged in baby's death

[wclevinger]

I agree with Angel heart.

 

[Ravi]

it really is like pimp slapping a down syndrome kid.

Hey, why are you calling me a pimp?

 

[AllieBaba]

I have a good sense of humor. I don't see the humor in throwing insults which have no bearing on the subject at hand around (for example, I don't think calling me a bitch was particularly funny, because it wasn't meant in a funny way, and it had nothing to do with anything being discussed.) Nor do I see what's funny about impersonating the other side, spouting gibberish on a web site, then bragging about it...as if that somehow proves that the other side is just as twisted and without integrity as the person doing it.

Tell me something funny, I'll laugh. But humor has to have some intelligence to it.

 

[Ravi]

I have a good sense of humor. I don't see the humor in throwing insults which have no bearing on the subject at hand around (for example, I don't think calling me a bitch was particularly funny, because it wasn't meant in a funny way, and it had nothing to do with anything being discussed.) Nor do I see what's funny about impersonating the other side, spouting gibberish on a web site, then bragging about it...as if that somehow proves that the other side is just as twisted and without integrity as the person doing it.

Tell me something funny, I'll laugh. But humor has to have some intelligence to it.

I neither called you a bitch nor laughed at the fact that you were called a bitch.

Conservapedia is a very lame website but I'm honestly not surprised that you quote it as gospel.

 

[AllieBaba]

I never said you called me a bitch.

It never fails to amaze me that lefties can't get past the "who" to reach the "what". You guys just have no use for the truth.

The quotes are real quotes, owned by the people who made them. Quotes from CBS newsmen, Boston globe editor, etc. These are comments made by YOUR GUYS.

But go ahead and stick your fingers in your ears and yell "I CAN'T HEAR YOU I CAN'T HEAR YOU I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" if you like. It just makes you look dumber than usual.

 

[Shogun]

meh.. thats just not too convincing coming from a woman with the mind of a child.


but, im sure conservative wiki will ahve SOMETHING to say about bias that you should believe with every effort you can muster.

 

[AllieBaba]

These are real people, folks, who have been widely quoted. I just happened across all the quotes in one place. Each of the quotes had links to the original document/transcript/source.

Honestly, you guys think there's no liberal bias? How blind and pathetic of you.

 

[Shogun]

um, blind and pathetic enough to see the irony of crying about bias while citing conservawiki?

 

[AllieBaba]

It is sort of ironic. However, given the fact that the site actually states it's bias in it's NAME, I think we can give it a pass. That's what distinguishes it from CNN and CBS.

It's honest.

 

[Dr Grump]

I can't think of one mainstream outlet that would give a non-religious couple any leeway with regard to this stituation. What a crock. But, maybe a non-religious company would not do the same thing because they are non-religious...shrug..

 

[Ravi]

I never said you called me a bitch.

It never fails to amaze me that lefties can't get past the "who" to reach the "what". You guys just have no use for the truth.

The quotes are real quotes, owned by the people who made them. Quotes from CBS newsmen, Boston globe editor, etc. These are comments made by YOUR GUYS.

But go ahead and stick your fingers in your ears and yell "I CAN'T HEAR YOU I CAN'T HEAR YOU I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" if you like. It just makes you look dumber than usual.

Why did you bring it up then? The bitch part, I mean. It has nothing to do with the topic we were discussing.

The quotes have nothing to do with your lack of evidence to support your claim that the media only cares about dead kids if they are dead for religious reasons.

I guess you'll never make an honest attempt to back this up, will you?

 

[AllieBaba]

Dr Grump: What, exactly, is the situation? Do you know?

The liberal media doesn't care about dead kids unless they promote an agenda. And the quotes are the LEFT admitting that the LEFT liberal bias exists in spades. Are you going to say that those people didn't say those things? So I've already backed up my claim. It's redundant now to go around and get the same quotes from different sources, when all you have to do is follow the stupid links.

Regarding the "bitch part" we were talking about whether or not I had a sense of humor, and I used that as an example. Psssst...I get to do that. I don't have to limit myself to comments about you.

I love how there's always some nimrod willing to puff themselves up with righteous dismay and deny there's a liberal media bias and all claims to the contrary are part of a conservative plot. Even when the claims are made by liberal media moguls.

 

[Paulie]

It comes down to if you have the right to refuse care for a child. Does the child deserve to be protected until adulthood when they can make that choice for themselves?

What constitutes proper and adequate protection, though?

Someone can not be forced to see a licensed MD anymore than they can be forced to carry insurance to pay for it.

Prayer alone is not adequate, because there is 0 scientific proof that it will do anything more than NOTHING.

Alternate remedies independent of the established medical industry, that have been proven to treat specific ailments, are adequate because they have been proven to work.

 

[AllieBaba]

What complete nonsense.

Prayer has been "proven" to work.

It all depends on what you're willing to accept as proof. If you discount the testimony of the faithful, then I guess there will never be any adequate "proof" of the benefits of prayer.

As I said. If this couple was a couple of teachers, who thought they were doing a good thing by denying their child immunizations because they were afraid she'd become autistic, the press would be much more sympathetic.

It's all part and parcel of liberal bias. Educated liberal folks = GOOD. Poor Christian folks = BAD.

 

[jillian]

I'm sure prayer does work. But that could be for many reasons, including some placebo effect.

I also believe generally positive energy affects us whether its from us or others. And prayer certainly fits the defintion of positive energy.

 

[Diuretic]

I see. So basically, in your opinion, the parents are only held responsible for their children/children's actions, but have to authority to raise them as they see fit. That's so bullshit a double standard it's as obvious as day an not the least bit funny.

Who cares what the parents believe indeed.

What you're basically arguing is that you can dictate to people what you wish for them to believe. Way to go, Adolph.

No need to twist my argument. Parents are responsible for their children's wellbeing. They're also responsible for raising their children according to the law and accepted social standards. Where is the problem?

 

[Diuretic]

There is no difference. YOUR decision to make YOUR child a spineless pussy because YOU don't believe in violence killed him as dead as if you pulled the trigger yourself.

Now would you like to check out the probability of being the victim of a violent crime in this country -- statistics, not superstition?

Please tell me how your belief has not caused the death of your child anymore than the person's in the original article.

I'm ALL ears ....

You're over-reaching old son, stick with the argument, not your fevered analogies.

 

[Gunny]

No need to twist my argument. Parents are responsible for their children's wellbeing. They're also responsible for raising their children according to the law and accepted social standards. Where is the problem?

I'm not twisting your statement. I merely added the rest of the double-standard to the half-case you presented. Parents are held liable for what their children do and are responsible for what happens to their children; yet, they increasingly are robbed of the authority to make decisions in regard to their children and/or enforce rules with them.

The "problem" is obvious. There is no law I am aware of that REQUIRES one to take their child to the a hospital to see a Dr each and every time they are sick.

And that "accepted social standards" is a crock. You mean YOUR accepted social standards. I know plenty of people that use natural remedies for ailments. I do. I don't need to spend a fortune while some quack tries to figure out his ass from a hole in the ground -- that hole being the one he's worried about missing t-time for.

It has nothing to do with my religion that i have no faith in the medical system you consider "socially acceptable."

 

[Gunny]

You're over-reaching old son, stick with the argument, not your fevered analogies.

I'm not over-reaching at all. You're trying to question my "fevered analogies" is nothing more than a deflection.

The analogy is relevant, and valid.

 

[Diuretic]

I'm not twisting your statement. I merely added the rest of the double-standard to the half-case you presented. Parents are held liable for what their children do and are responsible for what happens to their children; yet, they increasingly are robbed of the authority to make decisions in regard to their children and/or enforce rules with them.

The "problem" is obvious. There is no law I am aware of that REQUIRES one to take their child to the a hospital to see a Dr each and every time they are sick.

And that "accepted social standards" is a crock. You mean YOUR accepted social standards. I know plenty of people that use natural remedies for ailments. I do. I don't need to spend a fortune while some quack tries to figure out his ass from a hole in the ground -- that hole being the one he's worried about missing t-time for.

It has nothing to do with my religion that i have no faith in the medical system you consider "socially acceptable."

I think you've misunderstood my point. Check the laws in your state. I would think the law requires parents to feed and clothe their children, to ensure they get an education and not to abuse them physically or mentally.
I would think those are all perfectly reasonable.

If a child needs medical attention then the child should get it. Shamans and charlatans aren't good for healing kids. If an adult wants to go along with that then that's their choice but a child should get proper medical attention.

Those are my points.