[Blue Lion]

I certainly hope that we never, ever simply accept that the Government has the right to make these kinds of decisions, regardless of whether we feel they are the correct decisions or not, that is the real danger.

Unfortunately yea, you do. As a citizen of the government, you are kind of stuck with what they say. Our options are to determine what it is they say, not if they say it.

You can't deny government authority over it's people, what you can do is change what that authority says.

Agreed, they can be, but Parents are far from the only assholes in the world who's decisions affect those around them, that's why questions must always be asked, and the situation must constantly be examined and re-examined, there is no law against being an asshole, because everyone has a different definition of who is an asshole.

You're right, that's why the government picks and chooses which parts to intervene in. That's why social workers and others work with families and kids instead of having some weird system of permission slips for parents to parent their kids.

Parents parent their kids until the government sees something they don't like. That is never going to change, ever. As long as people beat their kids, molest them, kill them, the government will ALWAYS be able to step in.

[Flipside]

You can't deny government authority over it's people, what you can do is change what that authority says.

I suppose that's my whole point, if people don't express their concerns over these decisions, if people don't question every single one to make sure it is correct, then we are not changing what that authority says, we are not asking the Government to be accountable for its decisions, and that is more dangerous than these parents are.

[Blue Lion]

You can't deny government authority over it's people, what you can do is change what that authority says.

I suppose that's my whole point, if people don't express their concerns over these decisions, if people don't question every single one to make sure it is correct, then we are not changing what that authority says, we are not asking the Government to be accountable for its decisions, and that is more dangerous than these parents are.

They get to question them all the time. Pretty much like we're doing now. But they can't overturn them if they don't like it.

People elect their representatives, what else do people want?

[BlackDove]

Does Gov. have the legal (or moral) right to tell parents what to do?

Don't get confused. This really isn't about religion, its about the integrity and sovereignty of parental guardianship.

Wow, I agree with KT...

This is essentially it.  Ultimately, is the child the ward of his parents, or the ward of the state?  And keep in mind that government is far less likely than a parent to be personally invested in a kid's well being.

From what I heard, a relative of this family also went through chemotherapy and died despite (or perhaps because of) it.  So there's that to consider also.

As long as people are religious and delusional, like these people are, government should absolutely interfere.

Once people lose the stupid, then we can talk about government not interfering.

[Flipside]

What about when the Government is religious and delusional? I'm not overly aware of Government being any less free of stupid than people are.

I agree that the Government does need to intervene at times, but it's a case of always questioning why, I think that's what Blue Lion and I are basically agreeing on, but coming at it from opposite ends. That each case needs to be taken as a one-off, that way, everyone is protected from the potential stupid of everyone else.

[Kosh]

the idea of the government being able to intervene in parents' decision-making and personal beliefs does set a dangerous precedent.

They are only allowed to under very specific circumstances such as abuse, neglect, and medical neglect. That's it.

and I'm certainly not using "libertarian scare tactics."

That's what the slippery slope arguement is.

Because the key word is me, and part of everyone's fundamental natural-born, God-given right should be to have the power to decide their own fate, particularly if it only affects them.

Ordinarily this would be the case.....but this is a special circumstance.

[Blue Lion]

Mostly cause it wouldn't be him, it would be his kid

[MP-Ryan]

What if the kid had tetanus and the parents decided to pray instead of taking the kid to a doctor?

It's neglect, plain and simple. The parents are responsible for keeping the child healthy and alive. If they fail to do so, it's neglect.

That was an amazing analogy. Because tetanus treatment is hella life-threatening.

I hope you're not being sarcastic, because zack is correct.  The only cure for tetanus is not getting it in the first place.  There is no treatment for it.  Not taking a kid to a doctor after potential exposure to the tetanus bacterium is a virtual guarantee of agonizing death.

[MP-Ryan]

Precedent has already been set for this sort of case in Canada by the Supreme Court.  In the primary case, a Jehova's Witness girl who was underage refused a blood transfusion that would save her life on religious grounds.  The parents also refused to order it.  The Court said "Too bad, a minor's right to life trumps freedom of religion, and she's not old enough to make the decision herself."  She got the transfusion.

I don't think parents have the right to watch their children die untreated because of a belief system.  And as the child is not capable of making legal decisions and their belief patterns are imposed by their parents, their wishes should not be considered.  The sole important fact is that right to life is the most cherished belief in Western society, and if a treatment exists it is the obligation of the Courts to see that the child reaches an age at which they can make a decision about their medical treatment.

[Flipside]

Yup, that was the case I mentioned earlier, when it is a case of someone not making the decision for themselves, but making it for other people then, yes, there needs to be guidelines and limits, I'll accept that as given, but also it is important to not assume that every decision made by the courts in these matters is 'right' purely because it matches up to what we think the decision ought to have been in the first place.

Parents make the 'wrong' decisions for their children at times, it could be anything from leaving them in a car while they shop, to ignoring them when they complain about being bullied at school, fortunately, there is pretty strong defence against the Government getting too carried away with telling parents what are the correct decisions to make, but those defences will remain strong only so long as people allow them to.

[Blue Lion]

Leaving your kid in a car is a fairly serious thing. I'm not sure of the crime exactly, but people call cops all the time about it.

[Flipside]

Exactly, it depends under what circumstances, for how long, etc, it should, strictly speaking, never be done, but the level of response should match the level of the action, same with ignoring complaints about Bullying, sometimes it does a tiny amount of damage, sometimes it can lead to tragedy.