Quote# 139681

[On whether or not it should be fully legal for parent do deny their children medical care for faith based reasons ]

I don't think people realize how dangerous it is to start saying that the government should regulate religious freedom.

I believe that modern medicine has its place and can be very effective, but why should a parent be forced to involve their children in something they do not agree with? Why should parents not have a right to protect and care for their children in whatever way they see is best?

What if I disagreed with the type of medicine you used on your children? What if thousands or even millions of people disagreed with your idea of healthcare for your children? Does that mean that the government should step in and stop you from creating for your child the way you wish to?

Just because you disagree with a parent's decision, that does not give you the right to intervene.

I agree that life is sacred and that parents cannot be allowed to kill their children, but if they attempt to heal their sick child in their own way, but the child dies regardless of the parent's car, there is no one at fault here. Unless the parent truly has malicious intent of course, and their intent is to be neglectful or to administer poison or something, but this is not usually the case.

And we can't just say that the parents were wrong because their care didn't result in a full recovery, otherwise we could place the same blame on every modern medical procedure that didn't ultimately result in a full recovery.

Doctor's patients die too. Drugs/medicine are often incorrectly prescribed. Surgeries often cause more damage than they solve.

Yes, modern medicine can be beneficial. But there are risks. Why should parents be forced to choose the risks of modern medicine over the risks of their own choice of healthcare

Because faith healing is not health care

And why should they be forced to subscribe to what YOU think is adequate care?

If an adult chooses to not treat their own illness and dies, fine. But the parent is responsible for the child. If their child is bleeding to death and the parents believe that praying is the best "healthcare" and the child dies, the parents should be prosecuted.

So should a doctor be prosecuted when a child dies in their care regardless of the treatment the doctor gave or prescribed?

No, because not believing/trusting medical treatment is no defense and just stupid. If a parent's view is the other way around and believes it is better to pray then seeking medical treatment because they think medicine is bad and just watches his child bleed to death, then that parent is an idiot and should be punished.

And that parent might be thinking the same thing about you while your child is being given the wrong prescription by some doctor that has wrongly diagnosed the problem.My point is that they have just as much of a right to cater for their child as you do for yours.
And besides, your argument only has validity if we assume that prayer and faith healing is completely ineffective, but in reality, that can't be the assumption. And just because you say so doesn't make that assumption true.

pthor14, r/DebateReligion 2 Comments [8/10/2018 9:28:28 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 | bottom


The parents chose the religion. If they choose to suffer for that faith, that's OK with me, but ther is no moral high ground in making someone else suffer for YOUR faith, especially not the child for which you are supposed to care.

8/10/2018 10:17:33 AM

People are dying because faith healing. Also funny how you want gov't to reign in non Christian religions. Or your ilk frequently does

8/10/2018 11:13:38 AM

1 | top: comments page