Rate Thread
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Religious fervour
#41
Call it whatever you want....I just dont believe unless theres proof. Even ONE tiny shred, no matter how small. Its proof. Religions have none. Lots of made up ones, lots of phony ones, lots of religious tricksters/liars and magicians....but no real proof.

Glad you brought this up...
here's another example of no such thing as any kind of god....especially the one that these idiots worship...

Madeline Kara Neumann Prayer Death: Conviction Upheld For Parents Who Only Prayed For Sick Daughter
from this weeks AOL online news

MADISON, Wis. — A mother and father who prayed instead of seeking medical help as their daughter died were properly convicted of homicide, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Wednesday in a decision that dramatically limits legal immunity for parents who turn to God rather than science to heal their children.

The decision marks the first time a Wisconsin court has addressed criminal culpability in a prayer treatment case where a child died. The court ruled 6-1 that the state's immunity provisions for prayer treatment parents protect them from child abuse charges but nothing else, opening the door to a host of other counts.

"No one reading the treatment-through-prayer provision should expect protection from criminal liability under any other statute," Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson wrote for the majority.

Most states, including Wisconsin, created exemptions from child abuse charges for prayer-healing parents in the 1970s to meet federal requirements.

At least 303 children have died since 1975 after medical care was withheld on religious grounds, according to Rita Swan, director of the Iowa-based advocacy group Children's Healthcare is a Legal Duty. Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska and North Carolina have taken their exemptions off the books, Swan said.

The Wisconsin case revolves around an 11-year-old girl named Madeline Kara Neumann, known as Kara to family and friends. She died of undiagnosed diabetes on Easter Sunday in March 2008 at her home in Weston, a central Wisconsin village about 140 miles north of Madison.

Kara, who had been growing weak for several weeks leading up to her death, eventually became too sick to speak, eat, drink or walk. Her parents, Dale and Leilani Neumann, don't belong to any organized religion or church but identify themselves as Pentecostal Christians and believe visiting a doctor is akin to worshipping an idol, the Supreme Court opinion said.

As Kara's condition worsened, her parents resisted suggestions from her grandmother to take her to a doctor. Kara's grandfather suggested giving her Pedialyte, a supplement used to combat dehydration in children, but Leilani Neumann said that would take the glory away from God.

Dale Neumann testified that the possibility of death never entered their minds. After the girl died, Leilani Neumann told police God would raise Kara from the dead.


Doctors testified that Kara would have had a good chance of survival if she had received medical care before she stopped breathing.

Separate juries convicted the couple of second-degree reckless homicide in 2009. They faced up to 25 years in prison, but a judge instead ordered them to serve a month in jail every year for six years, with one parent serving every March and the other every September.

The couple's attorneys argued the immunity clause in Wisconsin's child abuse statutes protects parents from criminal liability through the point of creating a substantial risk of death. The reckless homicide statute says whoever creates a substantial risk of death is guilty of the charge. The attorneys contended the similar language makes it difficult to know when a situation has become so serious that parents who stay with prayer healing become criminally liable.

State attorneys said parents have a legal duty to seek care once they realize a child could die.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court found no ambiguity exists in state statutes.

"If the legislature intended a treatment-through-prayer provision to apply across the board to all criminal statutes, the legislature could have used different language or placed a treatment-through-prayer provision ... with other defenses to criminal liability," Abrahamson wrote.

Justice David Prosser, the lone dissenter, maintained it wasn't clear Kara was in danger of dying and insisted state law is murky on prayer treatment immunity.

"Failing to acknowledge these deficiencies will not advance the long-term administration of justice," Prosser said.

A spokeswoman for the state Justice Department, which defended the convictions, declined to comment.

Dale Neumann's attorney, Steven L. Miller, said the ruling effectively eliminates legal immunity for prayer treatment.

"If I was advising a parent on faith healing, I'd say there is no privilege," Miller said. "They pretty much gutted it."

A spokesman for the Christian Science church, a religious group that embraces faith healing, had no immediate comment.

Norm Fost, a professor of pediatrics and director of the University of Wisconsin-Madison's bioethics program, said it's unfortunate the Supreme Court didn't strike down the exemption completely. Still, he said the ruling sends a message that sticking with prayer treatment when children are obviously seriously ill can result in prosecution.

"The only recourse to deter families from behaving this way is prosecution," said Fost, who consults on child abuse cases and has tracked religious exemptions. "The state cannot tolerate decisions like this that result in serious disability or death of a child."

Rep. Terese Berceau, D-Madison, plans to introduce a bill eliminating the exemption. A similar measure from Berceau in 2009 never got a vote.

"It is a parent's responsibility to ensure the health of their children and, as this case so tragically demonstrates, to set aside their own personal convictions in order to save the life of their child," Berceau said in a statement.
Reply

#42
Ive seen HUNDREDS of these such stories since high school.


And these kinds of people blame their god for letting their babies and kids die.
"Oh, it was gods will".

REALLY? What sick FUCK would allow a little kid to be born, then have it die a long horrible death at the hands of some fucking brainless dickheads that should have been sterilized at birth????




But to answer your question(s)........

MONEY and POWER. Simple as that.

Take a fairy tale that scares kids into behaving, then change it up to fit the adult world...call it a "god" instead of a "monster", then create terrifying stories of what can happen if you are "bad". And in the mean time, if you dont give money to them, you will burn in a pit/lake of fire after youre dead.
Reply

#43
Shame they didn't get a full sentence. Would have given them less chance to have more kids. They're in for a rude awakening when God doesn't bring their kid back.
Reply

#44
Bowyn Aerrow Wrote:The reality is that modern Christianity is actually Paulian (Paul/Saul of the NT). His teachings contradict Christs, such as the abolishing of the Law. Which Christ didn't Abolish but Paul taught that Christ did.

Paul is a 'sinister character' in my books. He was anti-christian and a persecutor who made the claim he 'found Jesus' and turned over a new leaf - however his actions, his writings hint at a purposeful plan to corrupt the word - which he obviously succeeded in as the Reformed Church adopted his writings over dozens of other witnesses for the majority of the New Testament.

In my mind the Church hijacked a religious movement, under the orders of Constantine who 'found salvation' after a long hard life of what amounts to a hella sinning. Rome was in dire straights and Constantine set up a secondary political power to keep the Roman Empire together. That worked, for about a century.

The Reformed Church wasn't really about saving souls, it was about saving the political power of Rome.

And about 2000 years later we have the huge mess that Christianity is today.

...Paul was basically the first Allen Chambers, wasn't he? Irony.

princealbertofb Wrote:So Jesus is still the good guy?

I don't think there is anything wrong with what Jesus preached, I think the problem lies in illiteracy and partial understanding.

Reminds me of something my brother said once:

"Jesus is like the Einstein of hippies; he wasn't the first to have the idea, but he got his shit published."
Reply

#45
I have yet to see anyone define what the word 'GOD' means satisfactorily. Until that happens, I will not claim any 'belief' in the term 'GOD'. To claim belief in a signifier without knowing its signified is the same as saying one likes what a square looks like without having ever seeing a square.
Reply

#46
Miles Wrote:I have yet to see anyone define what the word 'GOD' means satisfactorily. Until that happens, I will not claim any 'belief' in the term 'GOD'. To claim belief in a signifier without knowing its signified is the same as saying one likes what a square looks like without having ever seeing a square.
Then I think that makes you an Ignostic Atheist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignostic
Reply

#47
A couple of years ago, one of the charismatic groups here (It might even have been Rhema, but I'm uncertain) was challenged by world renowned professor Prof Harry Sethewil (Whom I have met by the way), to prove "faith healing"

It was a blind test the subject's medical condition was pre-known to Prof.

Long story short, after the last halalula, get up and walk you are healed, the poor guy got up (with great difficulty), put one foot in front and then fell over.

He walked the "pastor" cried

On the ensuing radio interview, Prof tore them apart....

Trial by error
Reply

#48
Hmmm...First of all, I do believe in "God" but that belief is not of some white haired, bearded guy looking down upon us from the sky. My God is much more complex than that.

Having said that, it seems like a lot of people who don't believe in God have an issue with the aspect of "Faith" or "Belief" without any factual basis. Although I don't want to challenge anyone's religious convictions, or lack thereof, I think that when we start questioning what is "factual" we get into a very uncomfortable paradox.

What do I mean? Simply this: ALL "facts" are actually "beliefs". Eventually, at their core, everything we know to be a fact is somehow reduced to what we can evaluate with our own senses. We then apply our own belief systems to create what we call "facts". The limitation here is the very tools we use to define our world- our senses.

Using the "Apple example", might be more helpful. The apple is placed in front of you. But what if you had none of your senses? If you couldn't see, smell, taste, or touch the apple, would the apple still exist? In actuality, it might, but more importantly, to you, unable to perceive the apple, it would not exist. Theories of matter in quantum physics actually say that the apple exists in multiple forms, many of which are simply undetectable to us in our current state with our limited senses.

My point is this: All advancements in science, which we all find very easy to accept, are based upon previously accepted "facts". The scientific method is actually a "faith-based" process whereby a particular outcome is believed to be possible, then experiments are devised to produce results which we hope will match the prediction.

A humorous, light-hearted but insightful look at these ideas is "What the #$%! Do We Know", a movie starring Marlee Matlin that explains the new world of Quantum Physics and how it relates to our ideas of religion and spirituality.


Reply

#49
Miles Wrote:I have yet to see anyone define what the word 'GOD' means satisfactorily. Until that happens, I will not claim any 'belief' in the term 'GOD'. To claim belief in a signifier without knowing its signified is the same as saying one likes what a square looks like without having ever seeing a square.

I suppose I can be classified as a god.....

Great
Omnipotent
Destroyer


Rofl Rofl Rofl
Reply

#50
MisterTinkles Wrote:I suppose I can be classified as a god.....

Great
Omnipotent
Destroyer


Rofl Rofl Rofl

Oh so you're "God"? Ohhhhhhhh.

Consider my faith restored then. Bow

What ask You of Your humble servant, my Lord?
Reply



Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The Religious "View" JisthenewK 25 3,425 09-15-2012, 02:48 PM
Last Post: princealbertofb
  Religious vs. acceptance minhthien94 12 1,677 04-27-2012, 01:50 AM
Last Post: Jason74

Forum Jump:


Recently Browsing
4 Guest(s)

© 2002-2024 GaySpeak.com