When does Faith become Child Abuse?

[Phage]

Originally Posted by kalniel

I think you've hit on a really important point. It's not just religions, but also cultures.

To which you can add circumcision, misogyny, racial intolerance etc etc.
There's no right answer, my cultural imperative is your abuse...

[G4Z]

What about the indoctrination issue?

I personally think that telling your kids things which terrify them into conformity and allowing them to grow up idiots and indoctrinate the next generation is also abuse. Funnily enough though, I wouldn't ban it, I would just prefer it became socially unacceptable.

[Lucio]

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

So when people don't allow their child to have vaccinations ?

That's a different kettle of fish entirely, but the main arguement is that a vaccination represents guarding against a maybe (such as in your child might otherwise catch the disease), whereas the case you outlined was clearly ignoring a serious medical condition.

[badass]

Originally Posted by G4Z

What about the indoctrination issue?

I personally think that telling your kids things which terrify them into conformity and allowing them to grow up idiots and indoctrinate the next generation is also abuse. Funnily enough though, I wouldn't ban it, I would just prefer it became socially unacceptable.

Ironic how the most intolerant aetheists are the most devoted to their own religion, global warming.

[TheAnimus]

Can't really call global warming a religion no matter how much the protagonists are zealot'ised!

Because some argue there is proof, they actually engage in scientific hypothesis.

Its those who simply state it as fact who are the religious.

[Phage]

OT I think.
I don't see climate change advocates on either side refusing their kids transfusions or similar treatments.

[TooNice]

How about (male - as the views are less clear cut) circumcisions? It's frequently practiced for people of certain faith. It's painful I am sure, though I do not think there is a firm answer as to whether it is necessarily bad in the long run.

[TeePee]

Originally Posted by TooNice

How about (male - as the views are less clear cut) circumcisions? It's frequently practiced for people of certain faith. It's painful I am sure, though I do not think there is a firm answer as to whether it is necessarily bad in the long run.

Why distinguish? Circumcision for religious reasons is mutilation, regardless of the sex of the child.

[TheAnimus]

The downside is its argued that circumcision is a good idea for men in hot sandy climate, it can actually lead to a reduction in infection risk.

That said, it must reduce the pleasure of sex a bit.

[Steve A]

Good post,

the way i see the world at the moment is that most "things" that happen or choices that are taken are based on religous beliefs, whether you be christian, muslim, jewish, But where do you draw the line between religion and Human rights ?

To force your beliefs on a child that has the god given right to decide for himself (whenever that time comes) is disgusting, for me 25 years wouldnt be long enough,

Surely Law of the land should rule over any issue such as this one, it's pure common sense, if your below the age of 16 or 18 then the choice on such matters should be down to the state/country that you live in.

Good people or not its murder.

[Salazaar]

Stupid, ill-educated and short sighted, they should have known better as grown adults in a well developed country but I no doubt that they wanted their child to survive.

So they may be guilty of manslaughter and neglect by way of negligence but not murder, there was no intent to kill their child. To be honest I think their punishment is pretty fair, remember that they've got to spend the rest of their lives with the knowlege that they killed their own daughter.

[Steve A]

yeah maybe murder was bit harsh, but at the same time if they would have let there daughter be treated she would still be playing with her friends at school right now,

Having said that i'll still stick by my guns and say that 6 months was a joke, especially in america where you probably get more for J-Walking (best american accent)

[TooNice]

Originally Posted by TeePee

Why distinguish? Circumcision for religious reasons is mutilation, regardless of the sex of the child.

Opinions on male circumcisions are less clear cut than female circumcisions. As Animus said, there are some who think that there are health benefits (AFAIK, it's not really disproven) assuming it's done properly and care taken to minimise infection risks. I've not heard of any benefit in female circumcisions.

[JPreston]

Originally Posted by Salazaar

Stupid, ill-educated and short sighted, they should have known better as grown adults in a well developed country but I no doubt that they wanted their child to survive.

So they may be guilty of manslaughter and neglect by way of negligence but not murder, there was no intent to kill their child. To be honest I think their punishment is pretty fair, remember that they've got to spend the rest of their lives with the knowlege that they killed their own daughter.

Pfft, they've got to spend the rest of their lives knowing that god killed their daughter, took her to a better place because it so pleaseth him and so on. Far from feeling guilt, they'll just be even more fervent in their ignorance.

[fuddam]

Originally Posted by JPreston

Pfft, they've got to spend the rest of their lives knowing that god killed their daughter, took her to a better place because it so pleaseth him and so on. Far from feeling guilt, they'll just be even more fervent in their ignorance.

you've got issues........

[TooNice]

Originally Posted by Salazaar

So they may be guilty of manslaughter and neglect by way of negligence but not murder, there was no intent to kill their child. To be honest I think their punishment is pretty fair, remember that they've got to spend the rest of their lives with the knowlege that they killed their own daughter.

I am also of the opinion that they got off too lightly. And I find 60 days in the faith healing case plain wrong. Is 6 months normal for manslaughter? And this was not manslaughter as a result of an accident. It's manslaughter as a result of neglect. Sure they will need to live with the consequence (however they interpret it), but I think that it should be on top of whatever price one should pay for manslaughter.