lostwanderingsoul
Well-Known Member
just wait til the muslims take control of the USA and you will see the same thing here.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Actually it does mean that parents don't love their children, if they put their stupid religion over their children.Refusing a blood transfusion for a child does not mean the parents do not love or deserve their children.
Yet people merrily go on about something that didn't happen recently - if it happened at all.I posted that on post 36
I support a parent's right to make decisions regarding medical treatment for their child. This assumes the parents are competent and caring, not willfully negligent. Opposers try to make it appear that since Jws refuse a single medical procedure, (a procedure doctors admit carries significant, life-threatening risks) that we deny our children medical care. That is nonsense, of course, and slanderous.So, would you agree with a parent denying their child an urgent medical procedure?
I guess your judgment applies also to non-witness parents who decide for bloodless treatment of their children because of the life-threatening risks of blood transfusions, not for religious reasons. Let's just take the children from anyone who for any reason disagrees with current medical practices. And send them to prison too.Actually it does mean that parents don't love their children, if they put their stupid religion over their children.
Those JW parents not only don't deserve their children, but they should lose their custody over the children, and rot in prison if they die, because of their negligence.
The real depravity (and tragedy) is that they can have children at all.
Opposers try to make it appear that since Jws refuse a single medical procedure, (a procedure doctors admit carries significant, life-threatening risks) that we deny our children medical care. That is nonsense, of course, and slanderous.
I support a parent's right to make decisions regarding medical treatment for their child.
Jehovah Witnesses will allow a child to bleed to death rather than give them blood. Christian Scientists won't allow any medical treatment and the Church of Scientology will let someone go insane rather than treat them with meds. Those are just three examples and doesn't include the idiotic parents who refuse to vaccinate their children.
Just because some of "our" people do it out of lacking common sense, it does not mean it is part of "our" culture.
Glad to hear that. I have long been a fan of European countries' forward thinking and in particular, their national healthcare plans. I recognize the drawbacks but they far outweigh the limitations, IMO. Given the current state of this country, IE: Trump running the front for candidate for president???? WTH people.... I have been wanting to emigrate for quite a number of years. In fact, one of my dearest friends did and he moved to the UK. These parents should not be parents. IMO.No longer much of a problem in the UK. The Courts or a JP fast track such cases and override parents objections. But some parents do not even allow their children to see doctors in case it involves Blood.
Agreed, adding that the authorities should act to do the right thing first to the situation ignoring attempts to stop them, before the case of prosecuting the guilty even arises.True.. however these acts reflect badly on a culture, particularly when there is little or no action taken by authorities to stamp out such attitudes, or prosecute the guilty.
It is right, IMO, that competent people should have the right to determine medical care for themselves and their non-mature children. How would you like to have a medical procedure forced on you because someone thought it beneficial? A frontal lobotomy, for example.You make it sound as if there are no negative aspects to said fanaticism. There is no credible excuse for refusing medical treatment on religious grounds alone.
Is it right for ignorance and fundamentalism to dictate medical treatment?
Now let's not be so hasty. This isn't a case of "all religious practices should be allowed" vs. "no religious practices should be allowed". Many religious practices are perfectly fine because they do not infringe upon the rights of others. However, imagine for just a moment that someone wanted to revive the ancient Mayan religious practice of human sacrifice to their gods. No one here (at least no one here in their right mind) would defend their right to cut out the hearts of their enemies under the banner of "religious rights". Why? Because it violates the victim's right to life.no one would ever tell an atheist that he can't make a decision based on the fact that he is an atheist so why can you tell someone they can't make a decision based on their religion. is there an attempt to stamp out all religious belief and only let those who have no religion run everything?