100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: When religion creates ignorance... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
again...when should the government come in between someoneones belief....whatever the belief??? IMO - when a child is being abused or neglected. The children need to be protected. I agree. I think the problem is we don't want to turn over the decision of when that takes place to our government, and with good reason. But what is the alternative? Well, there are steps that they talk. It starts with an investigation with social workers in Family Services. If done correctly and is needed, it goes to court. When one reads the news, we can see that not all children get the protection needed ie shaken baby syndrome, death, etc. Religion isn't the only cause of abuse or neglect. People can have mental illnesses or drug addictions. The law stepped in with the booster seat laws. That's saved lives and injuries. The bottom line is that children need to be protected. Yeah absolutely religion is not the only cause for concern. Generally when religion isn't involved kids get the appropriate help and offenders (when caught) get appropriate punishment. We are sometimes too slow to help children and such as well. The question at hand is what do we do when religious beliefs are at the heart of the problem. The parents intent is not to harm in this case and it's a much stickier question. If I believe what I hear Fanta saying it is a parents right to kill their child if what necessary to save them goes against their religious beliefs. To me part of the protection would be to protect against ignorance too. It doesn't matter what the cause of abuse and neglect is to me - religion, addictions, mental illness, stupidity. Bottom line - protect the children. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Fanta46
on
Sun 05/17/09 10:23 AM
|
|
Fanta is saying,
it is a parents right to kill their child if what necessary to save them goes against their religious beliefs. See this is the problem. You use the wording "to kill their child." Who said that? I didnt, and I would never assume there is a guaranteed cure for a child with a terminal illness. The parents didnt give the child the illness did they? NO! So who would assume that the parents are killing the child? When religion creates ignorance... The title of this thread assumes a certain level of conceit, a certainty of conscience morality, and an assumption of knowing the end results. (God like?) Who are we to judge? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ok....call me silly (I know you guys will any way
 ) but what makes a crime in most crimes is intent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One thing I know for sure is that religion can produce ignorance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One thing I know for sure is that religion can produce ignorance. And being free of religion makes you highly intelligent? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<----knows some people that aren't religious but are ignorant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Fanta46
on
Sun 05/17/09 10:34 AM
|
|
<----knows some people that aren't religious but are ignorant Such a statement can only originate through hatred. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<----knows some people that aren't religious but are ignorant Such a statement can only originate through hatred and hatred is ignorance! WTF??? I'm saying ignorance isn't exclusive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<----knows some people that aren't religious but are ignorant Such a statement can only originate through hatred and hatred is ignorance! WTF??? I'm saying ignorance isn't exclusive Nay! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dont slap your head. Dye your hair!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
you are the one that didn't get it lol. I basically said the same as you. religion or no religion has ignorant people as well as intelligent people dork
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fanta is saying, it is a parents right to kill their child if what necessary to save them goes against their religious beliefs. See this is the problem. You use the wording "to kill their child." Who said that? I didnt, and I would never assume there is a guaranteed cure for a child with a terminal illness. The parents didnt give the child the illness did they? NO! So who would assume that the parents are killing the child? In this case yes but Fanta has taken discussion beyond that. He is now saying that no matter what the circumstance it is always a parents right to deny treatment even if the results are a known death sentence to the child. To me that is killing. I'm pushing the extreme because every time I ask the question he's dilutes the question with a non-life threatening circumstance, and answers that instead of the actual question asked. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fanta is saying, it is a parents right to kill their child if what necessary to save them goes against their religious beliefs. See this is the problem. You use the wording "to kill their child." Who said that? I didnt, and I would never assume there is a guaranteed cure for a child with a terminal illness. The parents didnt give the child the illness did they? NO! So who would assume that the parents are killing the child? In this case yes but Fanta has taken discussion beyond that. He is now saying that no matter what the circumstance it is always a parents right to deny treatment even if the results are a known death sentence to the child. To me that is killing. I'm pushing the extreme because every time I ask the question he's dilutes the question with a non-life threatening circumstance, and answers that instead of the actual question asked. That's not killing! That's letting natural events run their course. I have a little experience with unfounded death sentences from doctors who think they know everything! More often than not their know everythings are just assumptions. They Guess! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One thing I know for sure is that religion can produce ignorance. And being free of religion makes you highly intelligent? Did I say that? I just mentioned that religion can create ignorance or do you dispute that opinion also? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<----knows some people that aren't religious but are ignorant very true there are those to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
DaveyB
on
Sun 05/17/09 11:18 AM
|
|
Fanta is saying, it is a parents right to kill their child if what necessary to save them goes against their religious beliefs. See this is the problem. You use the wording "to kill their child." Who said that? I didnt, and I would never assume there is a guaranteed cure for a child with a terminal illness. The parents didnt give the child the illness did they? NO! So who would assume that the parents are killing the child? In this case yes but Fanta has taken discussion beyond that. He is now saying that no matter what the circumstance it is always a parents right to deny treatment even if the results are a known death sentence to the child. To me that is killing. I'm pushing the extreme because every time I ask the question he's dilutes the question with a non-life threatening circumstance, and answers that instead of the actual question asked. That's not killing! That's letting natural events run their course. I have a little experience with unfounded death sentences from doctors who think they know everything! More often than not their know everythings are just assumptions. They Guess! Fine will give you the "killing" thing. And again you avoid the question by defusing the question with "some times". There ARE cases when death is an absolute certainty and the cure is known. We can take Rose's example of transfusions which most Jehovah witnesses do not believe in. If a child was in an accident and is bleeding to death and has already lost too much blood to just stabilize then that child WILL die with out a transfusion. Is it ok for a parent to deny the child that transfusion, yes or no. No other BS just yes or no, is it ok in your view? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<----knows some people that aren't religious but are ignorant Such a statement can only originate through hatred. You have much to learn for such a statement can also be produced with no hatred. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<----knows some people that aren't religious but are ignorant Such a statement can only originate through hatred. You have much to learn for such a statement can also be produced with no hatred.  has nothing to do with hatred....just stating that ignorance isn't exclusive to one or another...whether it's location, race, gender, belief, etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One thing I know for sure is that religion can produce ignorance. And being free of religion makes you highly intelligent? Did I say that? I just mentioned that religion can create ignorance or do you dispute that opinion also? I dont think religion creates ignorance, but there are ignorant religous people! Do you dispute that? |
|
|
|
|
