| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"L. Raymond" |
| Date: |
11 Feb 2004 02:16:25 PM |
| Object: |
Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
Entire bill:
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2004/bills/sbillamd/sb0090s04.htm
Utah Senator David L. Thomas has put forward a bill, the Medical
Neglect - Exclusion, that will exonerate any parent who allows his
child to die from any treatable condition, provided he did so for
religious reasons. Here's an exerpt, starting from line 94:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect.
(d) The medical decision of a competent parent or guardian does not
constitute medical neglect. A competent parent is defined herein as a
parent who is a reasonable, prudent, and fit care giver toward their
child.
(e) All parents are presumed to be competent. This presumption may be
rebutted if the state can show that a parent or parents are
incompetent beyond a reasonable doubt.
(f) Nothing in this Subsection (18) shall prohibit the state from
taking medical care measures when a licensed medical professional
finds that without a medically necessary procedure a minor child will
suffer death or serious permanent disability within 120 hours of
diagnosis.
(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (18)(f), a parent shall retain the
right to a second medical opinion.
*****
So if a kid dies because his parents refused to treat an infected
blister (that actully happened to a Christian Scientist my dad worked
with), that's just great as long as caring is against their
principles.
.
|
|
| User: "gammajoe8" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
12 Feb 2004 09:40:35 PM |
|
|
"L. Raymond" <badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:402a89a1.1613032@news.mylinuxisp.com...
Entire bill:
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2004/bills/sbillamd/sb0090s04.htm
Utah Senator David L. Thomas has put forward a bill, the Medical
Neglect - Exclusion, that will exonerate any parent who allows his
child to die from any treatable condition, provided he did so for
religious reasons. Here's an exerpt, starting from line 94:
It's strange to see such a bill, especially in Utah. Parents of children
who have died because treatment was withheld because of religious reasons
almost never are punished by the law anyway. There is the trial, of
course, which can be pretty punishing in itself, but seldom are the parents
convicted because their religious beliefs are taken into account.
Maybe the Christian Scientists feel persecuted by the Mormons in Utah.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "*nemo*" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
11 Feb 2004 04:29:49 PM |
|
|
In article <402a89a1.1613032@news.mylinuxisp.com>,
(L. Raymond) wrote:
Entire bill:
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2004/bills/sbillamd/sb0090s04.htm
Utah Senator David L. Thomas has put forward a bill, the Medical
Neglect - Exclusion, that will exonerate any parent who allows his
child to die from any treatable condition, provided he did so for
religious reasons. Here's an exerpt, starting from line 94:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect.
(d) The medical decision of a competent parent or guardian does not
constitute medical neglect. A competent parent is defined herein as a
parent who is a reasonable, prudent, and fit care giver toward their
child.
(e) All parents are presumed to be competent. This presumption may be
rebutted if the state can show that a parent or parents are
incompetent beyond a reasonable doubt.
(f) Nothing in this Subsection (18) shall prohibit the state from
taking medical care measures when a licensed medical professional
finds that without a medically necessary procedure a minor child will
suffer death or serious permanent disability within 120 hours of
diagnosis.
(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (18)(f), a parent shall retain the
right to a second medical opinion.
*****
So if a kid dies because his parents refused to treat an infected
blister (that actully happened to a Christian Scientist my dad worked
with), that's just great as long as caring is against their
principles.
Yeah -- I'll bet that flies like a lead balloon. I just wonder if this
guy has the support of his constituents on this bill. The fact that I
have to ask that question about Utah should be pretty scary all by
itself...
--
Nemo - EAC Commissioner for Bible Belt Underwater Operations.
Atheist #1331 (the Palindrome of doom!)
BAAWA Knight! - One of those warm Southern Knights, y'all!
Charter member, SMASH!!
http://home.earthlink.net/~jehdjh/Relpg.html
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus
Quotemeister since March 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "pan" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
11 Feb 2004 05:07:34 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 22:29:49 GMT, *nemo* <nemo0037@yahoo.dieSPAM.com>
wrote:
(snip)
Yeah -- I'll bet that flies like a lead balloon. I just wonder if this
guy has the support of his constituents on this bill.
I was wondering the same thing.
I don't know why the Mormons would want such a law.
But then again,
Why would he put forward this bill without their support?
pan
The fact that I have to ask that question about Utah should
be pretty scary all by itself...
I
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matthias" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
11 Feb 2004 02:40:33 PM |
|
|
L. Raymond wrote:
Entire bill:
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2004/bills/sbillamd/sb0090s04.htm
Utah Senator David L. Thomas has put forward a bill, the Medical
Neglect - Exclusion, that will exonerate any parent who allows his
child to die from any treatable condition, provided he did so for
religious reasons. Here's an exerpt, starting from line 94:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect.
(d) The medical decision of a competent parent or guardian does not
constitute medical neglect. A competent parent is defined herein as a
parent who is a reasonable, prudent, and fit care giver toward their
child.
(e) All parents are presumed to be competent. This presumption may be
rebutted if the state can show that a parent or parents are
incompetent beyond a reasonable doubt.
(f) Nothing in this Subsection (18) shall prohibit the state from
taking medical care measures when a licensed medical professional
finds that without a medically necessary procedure a minor child will
suffer death or serious permanent disability within 120 hours of
diagnosis.
(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (18)(f), a parent shall retain the
right to a second medical opinion.
*****
So if a kid dies because his parents refused to treat an infected
blister (that actully happened to a Christian Scientist my dad worked
with), that's just great as long as caring is against their
principles.
<cynicism>
See it this way: If there will be more people like that, there will soon
be less people like that.
</cynicism>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Adam Marczyk" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
12 Feb 2004 01:31:47 AM |
|
|
Matthias <mmshiro@ureach.mapson.com> wrote in message
news:402a9524@news.starnetusa.net...
L. Raymond wrote:
Entire bill:
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2004/bills/sbillamd/sb0090s04.htm
Utah Senator David L. Thomas has put forward a bill, the Medical
Neglect - Exclusion, that will exonerate any parent who allows his
child to die from any treatable condition, provided he did so for
religious reasons. Here's an exerpt, starting from line 94:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect.
(d) The medical decision of a competent parent or guardian does not
constitute medical neglect. A competent parent is defined herein as a
parent who is a reasonable, prudent, and fit care giver toward their
child.
(e) All parents are presumed to be competent. This presumption may be
rebutted if the state can show that a parent or parents are
incompetent beyond a reasonable doubt.
(f) Nothing in this Subsection (18) shall prohibit the state from
taking medical care measures when a licensed medical professional
finds that without a medically necessary procedure a minor child will
suffer death or serious permanent disability within 120 hours of
diagnosis.
(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (18)(f), a parent shall retain the
right to a second medical opinion.
*****
So if a kid dies because his parents refused to treat an infected
blister (that actully happened to a Christian Scientist my dad worked
with), that's just great as long as caring is against their
principles.
<cynicism>
See it this way: If there will be more people like that, there will soon
be less people like that.
</cynicism>
Unfortunately, most of the people who would suffer are the ones who never
asked or volunteered to have any part of this. (Healthy adults, on the
other hand, will recover on their own from most things that afflict human
beings.) Let's not visit the sins of the parents on the children - no one
deserves to die from something we know how to treat.
--
"We have loved the stars too fondly | a.a. #2001
to be fearful of the night." | http://www.ebonmusings.org
--Tombstone epitaph of | e-mail: ebonmuse!hotmail.com
two amateur astronomers, | ICQ: 8777843
quoted in Carl Sagan's _Cosmos_ | PGP Key ID: 0x5C66F737
----------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tink" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
11 Feb 2004 03:59:19 PM |
|
|
Matthias wrote:
L. Raymond wrote:
Entire bill:
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2004/bills/sbillamd/sb0090s04.htm
Utah Senator David L. Thomas has put forward a bill, the Medical
Neglect - Exclusion, that will exonerate any parent who allows his
child to die from any treatable condition, provided he did so for
religious reasons. Here's an exerpt, starting from line 94:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect.
(d) The medical decision of a competent parent or guardian does not
constitute medical neglect. A competent parent is defined herein as a
parent who is a reasonable, prudent, and fit care giver toward their
child.
(e) All parents are presumed to be competent. This presumption may be
rebutted if the state can show that a parent or parents are
incompetent beyond a reasonable doubt.
(f) Nothing in this Subsection (18) shall prohibit the state from
taking medical care measures when a licensed medical professional
finds that without a medically necessary procedure a minor child will
suffer death or serious permanent disability within 120 hours of
diagnosis.
(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (18)(f), a parent shall retain the
right to a second medical opinion.
*****
So if a kid dies because his parents refused to treat an infected
blister (that actully happened to a Christian Scientist my dad worked
with), that's just great as long as caring is against their
principles.
<cynicism>
See it this way: If there will be more people like that, there will soon
be less people like that.
</cynicism>
Where's the cynicism? The above statement is totally accurate.
--
"There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher-
the clergyman." [Victor Hugo]
The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!)
AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS# 8808
EAC Chairman, Division of Skydiving and Sushi consumption.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
11 Feb 2004 07:11:48 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:16:25 GMT, (L.
Raymond) thought hard and said:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect
The very notion of refusing medical treatment is idiotic, but I
nonetheless see no problem with it. We have freedom of religion, you
know.
I see it as survival of the fittest in action. Look at it that way.
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 15 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, Gustav Mahler, and Krzysztof Penderecki are my Gods.
Madly Insane EAC Scientist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
11 Feb 2004 08:53:50 PM |
|
|
And so upon Wed, 11 Feb 2004 19:11:48 -0600 didst Daniel Kolle speak
thusly:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:16:25 GMT, (L.
Raymond) thought hard and said:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect
The very notion of refusing medical treatment is idiotic, but I
nonetheless see no problem with it. We have freedom of religion, you
know.
I see it as survival of the fittest in action. Look at it that way.
Allow them to deny treatment to minors who aren't given a choice in the
matter?
Dunno. We don't let them hide behind "god" when they beat their kids to
death...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
"There is no system but GNU, and Linux is one of its kernels."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
12 Feb 2004 08:45:18 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:53:50 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<y@hoo.com-amikchi> thought hard and said:
And so upon Wed, 11 Feb 2004 19:11:48 -0600 didst Daniel Kolle speak
thusly:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:16:25 GMT, (L.
Raymond) thought hard and said:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect
The very notion of refusing medical treatment is idiotic, but I
nonetheless see no problem with it. We have freedom of religion, you
know.
I see it as survival of the fittest in action. Look at it that way.
Allow them to deny treatment to minors who aren't given a choice in the
matter?
You know as well as I do that what the parents say goes well until the
kid is in his/her teens (and even after that), and you can ***** and
moan and complain about it until you are blue in the face and it will
not change a thing.
Dunno. We don't let them hide behind "god" when they beat their kids to
death...
I do not care. Let them. These people have to be a little kooky in the
first place to believe this. The kid is likely, too.
As for the child, it works both ways. If s/he lives, they can live
thinking that they were chosen to live for a "special" reason. Oooo,
my. If the child dies, s/he can at least have the consolidation that
they are going to heaven, blah blah blah.
How sweet.
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 15 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, Gustav Mahler, and Krzysztof Penderecki are my Gods.
Madly Insane EAC Scientist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
12 Feb 2004 10:39:51 PM |
|
|
And so upon Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:45:18 -0600 didst Daniel Kolle speak
thusly:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:53:50 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<y@hoo.com-amikchi> thought hard and said:
And so upon Wed, 11 Feb 2004 19:11:48 -0600 didst Daniel Kolle speak
thusly:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:16:25 GMT, (L.
Raymond) thought hard and said:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect
The very notion of refusing medical treatment is idiotic, but I
nonetheless see no problem with it. We have freedom of religion, you
know.
I see it as survival of the fittest in action. Look at it that way.
Allow them to deny treatment to minors who aren't given a choice in the
matter?
You know as well as I do that what the parents say goes well until the
kid is in his/her teens (and even after that), and you can ***** and
moan and complain about it until you are blue in the face and it will
not change a thing.
Not in the United States. Children are *not property.
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
"There is no system but GNU, and Linux is one of its kernels."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "William Klee" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
12 Feb 2004 07:30:34 PM |
|
|
In article <hgkl20l44t3kq6pl6l2l99o3hei8i3egvi@4ax.com>, Daniel Kolle
<DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:16:25 GMT, (L.
Raymond) thought hard and said:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect
The very notion of refusing medical treatment is idiotic, but I
nonetheless see no problem with it. We have freedom of religion, you
know.
I see it as survival of the fittest in action. Look at it that way.
So if you're in a accident, I have the freedom to let you bleed to
death. OK.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
12 Feb 2004 08:47:59 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:30:34 -0600, William Klee <fnord2k@yahoo.com>
thought hard and said:
In article <hgkl20l44t3kq6pl6l2l99o3hei8i3egvi@4ax.com>, Daniel Kolle
<DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:16:25 GMT, (L.
Raymond) thought hard and said:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect
The very notion of refusing medical treatment is idiotic, but I
nonetheless see no problem with it. We have freedom of religion, you
know.
I see it as survival of the fittest in action. Look at it that way.
So if you're in a accident, I have the freedom to let you bleed to
death. OK.
Plenty of people stand around gawking doing absolutely nothing at a
accident scene. Your point is?
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 15 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, Gustav Mahler, and Krzysztof Penderecki are my Gods.
Madly Insane EAC Scientist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "William Klee" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
13 Feb 2004 03:48:15 AM |
|
|
In article <uheo20tc0inn6mffngal4aiolng0vhkk22@4ax.com>, Daniel Kolle
<DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:30:34 -0600, William Klee <fnord2k@yahoo.com>
thought hard and said:
In article <hgkl20l44t3kq6pl6l2l99o3hei8i3egvi@4ax.com>, Daniel Kolle
<DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:16:25 GMT, (L.
Raymond) thought hard and said:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect
The very notion of refusing medical treatment is idiotic, but I
nonetheless see no problem with it. We have freedom of religion, you
know.
I see it as survival of the fittest in action. Look at it that way.
So if you're in a accident, I have the freedom to let you bleed to
death. OK.
Plenty of people stand around gawking doing absolutely nothing at a
accident scene. Your point is?
Pointing out how pointless your point is. I'm not surprised at your
lack of empathy, though: you're a republican and you're a kid, neither
group is known for being naturally empathic with others.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Kolle" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
13 Feb 2004 11:25:10 AM |
|
|
William Klee <fnord2k@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<130220040348153271%fnord2k@yahoo.com>...
In article <uheo20tc0inn6mffngal4aiolng0vhkk22@4ax.com>, Daniel Kolle
<DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:30:34 -0600, William Klee <fnord2k@yahoo.com>
thought hard and said:
In article <hgkl20l44t3kq6pl6l2l99o3hei8i3egvi@4ax.com>, Daniel Kolle
<DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:16:25 GMT, (L.
Raymond) thought hard and said:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect
The very notion of refusing medical treatment is idiotic, but I
nonetheless see no problem with it. We have freedom of religion, you
know.
I see it as survival of the fittest in action. Look at it that way.
So if you're in a accident, I have the freedom to let you bleed to
death. OK.
Plenty of people stand around gawking doing absolutely nothing at a
accident scene. Your point is?
Pointing out how pointless your point is. I'm not surprised at your
lack of empathy, though: you're a republican and you're a kid, neither
group is known for being naturally empathic with others.
Why should I feel empathy when the people in the first place do not
want it?
"Yes, little Johnie died, but do not feel sorry for us. He is in
heaven right now." Suits me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "William Klee" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
13 Feb 2004 01:44:51 PM |
|
|
In article <7614cd74.0402130925.1816440f@posting.google.com>, Daniel
Kolle <DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote:
William Klee <fnord2k@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<130220040348153271%fnord2k@yahoo.com>...
In article <uheo20tc0inn6mffngal4aiolng0vhkk22@4ax.com>, Daniel Kolle
<DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:30:34 -0600, William Klee <fnord2k@yahoo.com>
thought hard and said:
In article <hgkl20l44t3kq6pl6l2l99o3hei8i3egvi@4ax.com>, Daniel Kolle
<DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:16:25 GMT, (L.
Raymond) thought hard and said:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect
The very notion of refusing medical treatment is idiotic, but I
nonetheless see no problem with it. We have freedom of religion, you
know.
I see it as survival of the fittest in action. Look at it that way.
So if you're in a accident, I have the freedom to let you bleed to
death. OK.
Plenty of people stand around gawking doing absolutely nothing at a
accident scene. Your point is?
Pointing out how pointless your point is. I'm not surprised at your
lack of empathy, though: you're a republican and you're a kid, neither
group is known for being naturally empathic with others.
Why should I feel empathy when the people in the first place do not
want it?
So you follow the biblical precept of placing the sins of the fathers
upon the children. You may as well *be* a christian, since the only
christian trait you lack is a belief in a god.
"Yes, little Johnie died, but do not feel sorry for us. He is in
heaven right now." Suits me.
I was right: no empathy. You dislike one person (in this case, a
religious parent) so you feel justified in disliking someone who has no
choice in the matter, the children. I really hope that you never have
the chance to become a parent.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Meteorite Debris" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
12 Feb 2004 08:37:36 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 19:11:48 -0600 the ET form known as Daniel
Kolle<DKolle@hotmail.com> sent a radio signal across the vast expanse
of deep space -._.--._.--._.--._.--._.--._.
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:16:25 GMT, (L.
Raymond) thought hard and said:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect
The very notion of refusing medical treatment is idiotic, but I
nonetheless see no problem with it. We have freedom of religion, you
know.
I see it as survival of the fittest in action. Look at it that way.
I think you are confused about "freedom of religion". I have nothing
against people practicing whatever crazy religious ideas they may
believe - including denying THEMSELVES medical treatment. I have an
entirely different attitude when it comes to practising your religious
nonsense on someone else, especially on someone who is unable to
object like a child. If the parents want to be stupid in regard to
their own welfare that is their right but they do not have the right
to practice abuse on others.
Your "survival of the fittest" argument makes no sense either since
the selection is on the basis of memes, not genes. And the stupid
parent is still alive. The stupid one did not die - only the child who
is not necessarily genetically stupid.
--
To reply remove *THE_ANTI-SPAM_SHIELD*
apatriot #1, atheist #1417,
Chief EAC prophet -
Evil Atheist Conspiracy
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/
Shhh. Be very quiet, I'm hunting automorons. Heh heh.
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever
conceived." - Isaac Asimov
Fingerprint for PGP Keys at key server or go to
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/
RSA - 71 BA 7C 45 B5 4A 5F EA 72 DB EC 7F 7F A8 70 99
DSS - 9217 21A9 9C3F EB0B E302 AD0E 69C5 0F06 402E 0943
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Beowulf" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
12 Feb 2004 11:16:47 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 19:11:48 -0600, Daniel Kolle <DKolle@hotmail.com>
ejaculated:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:16:25 GMT, (L.
Raymond) thought hard and said:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect
The very notion of refusing medical treatment is idiotic, but I
nonetheless see no problem with it. We have freedom of religion, you
know.
I see it as survival of the fittest in action. Look at it that way.
So, when a 3 year old child dies because the parents are stupid, how
is the 3 year old child exercising its "freedom of religion"? Don't
be a fucking moron. The people hurt by these kinds of religious
practices are not the practicioners but their innocent children.
--
What do you get when you multiply 6 by 9?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
25 Feb 2004 05:52:52 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:16:25 GMT, (L.
Raymond), Message ID: <402a89a1.1613032@news.mylinuxisp.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
Entire bill:
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2004/bills/sbillamd/sb0090s04.htm
Utah Senator David L. Thomas has put forward a bill, the Medical
Neglect - Exclusion, that will exonerate any parent who allows his
child to die from any treatable condition, provided he did so for
religious reasons. Here's an exerpt, starting from line 94:
(c) A parent or guardian legitimately practicing religious beliefs and
who, for that reason, does not provide specified medical treatment for
a child, is not guilty of neglect.
(d) The medical decision of a competent parent or guardian does not
constitute medical neglect. A competent parent is defined herein as a
parent who is a reasonable, prudent, and fit care giver toward their
child.
(e) All parents are presumed to be competent. This presumption may be
rebutted if the state can show that a parent or parents are
incompetent beyond a reasonable doubt.
(f) Nothing in this Subsection (18) shall prohibit the state from
taking medical care measures when a licensed medical professional
finds that without a medically necessary procedure a minor child will
suffer death or serious permanent disability within 120 hours of
diagnosis.
(g) Notwithstanding Subsection (18)(f), a parent shall retain the
right to a second medical opinion.
*****
So if a kid dies because his parents refused to treat an infected
blister (that actully happened to a Christian Scientist my dad worked
with), that's just great as long as caring is against their
principles.
You mean 'lack of principles' is the epitome of 'principled morality?'
/skin crawls in horror at the depravity of the Utah Senator.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
11 Feb 2004 02:38:04 PM |
|
|
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach L. Raymond:
Entire bill:
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2004/bills/sbillamd/sb0090s04.htm
Bills like this are OK. They tend to clean up the gene pool faster than
celibacy.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
______________
The fool says in his heart "there is no God".
The wise man says it to the world.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Dog" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
13 Feb 2004 02:33:55 AM |
|
|
(Vic Sagerquist) wrote in message news:<948C8CAE1vicman@127.0.0.1>...
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach L. Raymond:
Entire bill:
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2004/bills/sbillamd/sb0090s04.htm
Bills like this are OK. They tend to clean up the gene pool faster than
celibacy.
Actually no, Vic. The ones that need to die are those who
prevent their children from getting medical treatment. I
hope you agree that the kids deserve the chance to live.
Bob Dog
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
13 Feb 2004 10:15:32 AM |
|
|
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Bob Dog:
address@withheld.com (Vic Sagerquist) wrote in message
news:<948C8CAE1vicman@127.0.0.1>...
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach L. Raymond:
Entire bill:
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2004/bills/sbillamd/sb0090s04.htm
Bills like this are OK. They tend to clean up the gene pool faster
than celibacy.
Actually no, Vic. The ones that need to die are those who
prevent their children from getting medical treatment. I
hope you agree that the kids deserve the chance to live.
Bob Dog
Actually, no one needs to die. The human race has been mentally ill since
it developed the ability to think. And subsequently, to fear.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
______________
The fool says in his heart "there is no God".
The wise man says it to the world.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Meteorite Debris" |
|
| Title: Re: Utah Senator considers sanctioning religious murder |
12 Feb 2004 08:27:44 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:38:04 -0600 the ET form known as Vic
Sagerquist<address@withheld.com> sent a radio signal across the vast
expanse of deep space -._.--._.--._.--._.--._.--._.
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach L. Raymond:
Entire bill:
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2004/bills/sbillamd/sb0090s04.htm
Bills like this are OK. They tend to clean up the gene pool faster than
celibacy.
Except here you're talking memes, not genes.
--
To reply remove *THE_ANTI-SPAM_SHIELD*
apatriot #1, atheist #1417,
Chief EAC prophet -
Evil Atheist Conspiracy
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/
Shhh. Be very quiet, I'm hunting automorons. Heh heh.
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever
conceived." - Isaac Asimov
Fingerprint for PGP Keys at key server or go to
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/
RSA - 71 BA 7C 45 B5 4A 5F EA 72 DB EC 7F 7F A8 70 99
DSS - 9217 21A9 9C3F EB0B E302 AD0E 69C5 0F06 402E 0943
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
