[mjn.mixael]

Regardless of the 'fundamental Christian' vs 'secular popularity' debate... the Bible, in no way, shape, or form, teaches to wait for God to heal you and not use medications available. I suspect these loonies get this idea from the teaching about Jesus' healings during his life... but the idea still stands on iffy ground. They are probably coming from the stories where whomever was healed by Jesus usually comes with a line about how medicines weren't working. Even with that it's still a loooooong shot to go from there to not using medicine and just waiting on God.

Essentially, these people should not be the norm in Christianity as their beliefs are pretty highly unfounded.

[The E]

Exactly. What this comes down to is ultimately bad parenting. No matter what excuse these morons put forth, at the end of the day, they did nothing while their children (plural, even!) suffered. That is more reprehensible to me than anything else they might believe in.

[mjn.mixael]

Exactly. What this comes down to is ultimately bad parenting. No matter what excuse these morons put forth, at the end of the day, they did nothing while their children (plural, even!) suffered. That is more reprehensible to me than anything else they might believe in.

Speaking as a father of 2... All of my yes.

[Luis Dias]

I really don't give a rat's ass on what "the bible" teaches. Clearly, these folks think differently and I don't think they are any less christian than any other people, any indications otherwise seem obnoxious and silly to me. The problem is giving too much credit to spooky **** and none to actually do something about it. If mainstream christianity solves this connundrum by saying "God won't help who won't help themselves" then that's fine I guess. I also couldn't give a rat's ass about mainstream christianity's tropes, moralities, metaphysics, if at least they do what every sensible being will do in those situations.

Secularism is what is really important here, and probably you misunderstood my point. I don't care if people are "atheists". Those 20%+ of people I referenced do not claim to be atheists. Most likely, the majority of those folks do believe in some spooky thing. They just don't subscribe to any particular religion, and I think we are way better off as a civilization if our religious inclinations are at a minimum.

[Lorric]

Another one of these.

But this time it's different, this is the first time I've seen it happen twice with the same family.

Why were their kids not removed from their "care" after the first death?

[The E]

After that first death, they were on probation, with mandatory exams and all that. Without knowing anything else about these people, it is perfectly possible that they were good parents in other respects; Separating a family is not a step that should be taken lightly (One that, in light of this tragedy, has been taken).

[Luis Dias]

Or why did they stick with the same solution if it failed so miserably and heart-wrenchingly for the first time?

[MP-Ryan]

Or why did they stick with the same solution if it failed so miserably and heart-wrenchingly for the first time?

"Their faith wasn't strong enough, they were being tested."

I just made that up, but it stands to reason as well as anything else.  You can't attribute rationality to people who behave completely irrationally.

[Lorric]

After that first death, they were on probation, with mandatory exams and all that. Without knowing anything else about these people, it is perfectly possible that they were good parents in other respects; Separating a family is not a step that should be taken lightly (One that, in light of this tragedy, has been taken).

I suppose these "exams" must have involved basically asking them if they won't do this again. If they lied, what can you do? You would think people would see they were wrong when the faith healing didn't work the first time. But then, it doesn't really work like that with religious extremists.

Or why did they stick with the same solution if it failed so miserably and heart-wrenchingly for the first time?

I thought about asking this too, but the answer probably isn't worth asking the question for. It would probably be something like "It is a test from God!" Or "We obviously didn't pray hard enough the first time." or "This is punishment for our sins." Something like that I imagine.

I see MP-Ryan got in with basically 2 of my 3 answers 

[The E]

After that first death, they were on probation, with mandatory exams and all that. Without knowing anything else about these people, it is perfectly possible that they were good parents in other respects; Separating a family is not a step that should be taken lightly (One that, in light of this tragedy, has been taken).

I suppose these "exams" must have involved basically asking them if they won't do this again. If they lied, what can you do? You would think people would see they were wrong when the faith healing didn't work the first time. But then, it doesn't really work like that with religious extremists.

Sorry, poor wording on my part. "Exam" in this case refers to mandatory medical examinations for the children.

[Lorric]

After that first death, they were on probation, with mandatory exams and all that. Without knowing anything else about these people, it is perfectly possible that they were good parents in other respects; Separating a family is not a step that should be taken lightly (One that, in light of this tragedy, has been taken).

I suppose these "exams" must have involved basically asking them if they won't do this again. If they lied, what can you do? You would think people would see they were wrong when the faith healing didn't work the first time. But then, it doesn't really work like that with religious extremists.

Sorry, poor wording on my part. "Exam" in this case refers to mandatory medical examinations for the children.

And there's me thinking they might have at least something which sounds like a good idea. Educate these people on how the World works.

If a check on the wellbeing of the children is all it took, of course they're going to pass. They will take care of their children in all things but seeking the aid of medical professionals. If this is the procedure for dealing with the safety of children under parents who believe in faith healing, the system is useless, unless the believers happen to be bad parents in other areas of care as well.

[The E]

I am not sure I understand your reasoning here.

After the first child died, the parents were found guilty of negligence and sentenced, albeit on probationary terms. Those terms included mandatory checkups for their other children, done in regular intervals. Until this tragedy happened, they apparently complied with those. It is unknown (and really not relevant) whether or not their children were sick in that time, or how those sicknesses were dealt with. The point is that the health of those children was checked and that they didn't suffer neglect.

Apparently, those checks went by without complaint (given that the probation was not deemed to be violated).

So, the children did have the attention of medical professionals. If something came up, it was probably dealt with (see also: Terms of probation).

[Lorric]

I am not sure I understand your reasoning here.

After the first child died, the parents were found guilty of negligence and sentenced, albeit on probationary terms. Those terms included mandatory checkups for their other children, done in regular intervals. Until this tragedy happened, they apparently complied with those. It is unknown (and really not relevant) whether or not their children were sick in that time, or how those sicknesses were dealt with. The point is that the health of those children was checked and that they didn't suffer neglect.

Apparently, those checks went by without complaint (given that the probation was not deemed to be violated).

So, the children did have the attention of medical professionals. If something came up, it was probably dealt with (see also: Terms of probation).

But it is children receiving medical treatment that faith healers object to. Merely checking the children over wouldn't violate that.

Now if they actually did receive some actual medical treatment, that's different, and you'd wonder why they let this happen if they'd changed their ways.

If they won't see their children get real healing, then it's a massive and unacceptable risk factor.

[The E]

Now if they actually did receive some actual medical treatment, that's different, and you'd wonder why they let this happen if they'd changed their ways.

We don't have anywhere near enough information on that subject to make a determination either way. Getting outraged at hypotheticals is a silly thing to do.

[Lorric]

Now if they actually did receive some actual medical treatment, that's different, and you'd wonder why they let this happen if they'd changed their ways.

We don't have anywhere near enough information on that subject to make a determination either way. Getting outraged at hypotheticals is a silly thing to do.

Well, while I don't know what they did, this sounds like a cookie cutter solution to childcare problems which is simply useless to this situation.

The problem is faith healing. They should be working to solve that problem, but as society has a way of tiptoeing around religion, I can imagine them not doing that.

[mjn.mixael]

There are a lot of things about tolerance and respect that a lot of people on HLP could stand to learn from society....

[Lorric]

There are a lot of things about tolerance and respect that a lot of people on HLP could stand to learn from society....

What are you referring to?

[Luis Dias]

You seem a little annoyed, so let me rephrase. (1) This is clearly an outlier situation, although not unique; (2) While not catholics, these are christians and I do not think that saying they aren't is either "tolerant" or "respectful" either, they say they are and thus I believe them full stop; (3) Mainstream branches of Christianity do not suffer from this overall malaise of being "anti-medicine" and so on.

(4) When I said cilization should minimize its religiosity, I should be more precise. I'll rephrase it thus: We should minimize Woo-thinking, Magical-Thinking. If mainstream Christianity does this sufficiently well, my gripes with it are near zero.

Is this enough, Mjn, or am I still out of line...?

[mjn.mixael]

Well, I think there's something wrong with accepting someone as self-proclaimed part of a group in general if their belief system doesn't line up.... But in modern america whee everyone is a 'christian' this becomes much more difficult. If they are clearly a bunch of loonies, then I'll consider them pretty definitely not christian. I can't believe one thing and then call myself a Buddhist and expect you all to play along with it.

My comment about people at HLP learning from society was directed at Lorric's comment. Society 'tiptoes' around religion because it's an extremely difficult topic that divides the entire world. However there are people that post here with all their 'answers' and opinions calling out different belief systems without any sort of respect, remorse or care about others. If that's what their world view teaches about living with others who think differently, I think they could learn something about tolerance and respect from a non-digital community where comments like that can't be made behind a wall of anonymity.

[Lorric]

Well, I think there's something wrong with accepting someone as self-proclaimed part of a group in general if their belief system doesn't line up.... But in modern america whee everyone is a 'christian' this becomes much more difficult. If they are clearly a bunch of loonies, then I'll consider them pretty definitely not christian. I can't believe one thing and then call myself a Buddhist and expect you all to play along with it.

My comment about people at HLP learning from society was directed at Lorric's comment. Society 'tiptoes' around religion because it's an extremely difficult topic that divides the entire world. However there are people that post here with all their 'answers' and opinions calling out different belief systems without any sort of respect, remorse or care about others. If that's what their world view teaches about living with others who think differently, I think they could learn something about tolerance and respect from a non-digital community where comments like that can't be made behind a wall of anonymity.

Perhaps you took the comment the wrong way. I think people should be able to be free to believe whatever they want. As long as it doesn't hurt anyone besides them. And society has a tendancy to let go things that would never be let go if not done in the name of religion.

This one doesn't even fall into the stalemate where you cannot prove or disprove something. Faith healing is proven to be completely useless. The concept of faith healing is something that should be taken head on by society and eradicated imo. It just means people die needlessly.

EDIT: If an adult makes the choice not to seek medical attention, that is their choice to make. But they should not be making it for others.