Murder by prayer: When is enough, enough?

Well. if overpopulation is considered so great a threat that one must actively support post-birth abortions, I suggest becoming a supporter of neo-conservatism, as they support both war (except when it comes to their own hide) and poverty as a means to cull the herd.

---

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman RushdieThis rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

I've never understood how the Neo-Cons can so easily usurp the "pro-life" mantle, then promote things that end life.You can't kill anyone before they're born, but once they are, all bets are off!

You talking about the Dalai Lama or the Pope ? Because Protestant Denomination don't usually have a recognizable order in their rank, other than in a local Church: church member-ancient-PastorOr you are maybe talking about the last 'sheep' part, which I would agree. Many religious people are 'sheeps'

I've pondered similar things. Although I am not a religious man, I defend the freedom of religion and separation of church and state. But we all have heard of tragic stories, like Watchtower or Christian Scientist families who deny life-saving blood transfusions based on an obscure biblical passage. And at some point you have to say that you can't just use the scapegoat that it is done under religious pretenses.Should we allow chickens everywhere to be beheaded and their blood drained in the comfort of the Santa Ria practitioner's home and disregard animal rights? Should Native Americans get a green light on Peyote because their ancestors used it?I don't know, because how easy would it be to state that anything could be done under the guise of religion as a get out of jail free card? There will on some level always be a crux when private rights and government welfare clash. On most occasions I prefer the freedom from government intrusion, but there is simply no denying that it has its place and its benefit when appropriate.

---

"I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. 'Tis the business of little minds to shrink, but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. " Thomas Paine

The way I see it, and this is just my personal moral theory, is that people should be free to do what they want, for religious or nonreligious reasons, as long as they don't put anyone else at risk with their actions.If they want to refuse blood transfusions themselves, then I'm all for it, but if they're going to deny it to another human being, then they are to be held responsible, and the government should do all it can to try and save that other person from harm.

Sounds good to me.

---

"I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. 'Tis the business of little minds to shrink, but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. " Thomas Paine

it would take too much to explain this to you an dunless you had a compassionate soul, which i see by our words you do not, then you would not grasp nor understand my exlanation.atheists and secularists would best be served by refraining from interfering in those things they do not understand nor support. it woul dbe best to call a true christian minister to help such people.i will disagree with your condemnation and judgement, that it is murder. it is not. people like yourself need to learn to mind your own business as God gave PARENTS the right to raise their own children as THEY see fit NOT as you see fit.i doubt you would liek it if christians began forcing you to follow their ways in raising children so keep your ways and opinions to yourself.

You have just demonstrated the horrible effects of religion on morality.It is not right for parents to endanger their children's lives for the sake of their stupid superstitions. The children are unable to defend themselves.Religious belief should never be allowed to trump human rights.I think that those who instruct their congregations to behave in this way should be liable to punishment under the law when harm results.This business of praying instead of getting medical help is so inane since it demonstrably DOES NOT WORK.

Does that include sexual abuse too, or does it just apply to letting them die of neglect?I'm always interested in the high moral principles of Christians.

without God there is NO morality. you do not get to say what is or isn't right nor what is or isn't endangering a child. taking a child to a hospital is endangering them because of the incompetant care that takes place within those walls. children die there as well yet there is no outcry and the stupid superstitions that permeate those places are worse than a christian 's faith. children can't defend themselves against doctors either. your argument is moot, ignorant and done out of hatred for Christ. there are no human rights without religious beliefs or did you learn nothing from your history lessons on the nazis, the japanese, the khmer rouge, the communists...? you just do not know what you are talking about and let your hatred do your thinking for you what you think doesn't matter because you are NOT perfect and the sin that blackens your heart corrupts your thinking. this business of taking sick people to a hospital instead of praying is inane since it has been demonstrated to NOT WORK> suchthinking works both ways as MORE people die in hospitals or under doctors' care than by praying for them. obviously, the failure is on the side of the secularist not those who pray.by the way, prayer for healing does work, you just won't admit it and are blinded by your hatred for Christ.

you just need to let christians handle these matters and write the laws. the secularioss have proven incapable of doing a good job of it.

Yeah, we left out all the really good laws about not eating lobsters and stoning people to death for picking up sticks on Saturday.But I digress. You seem to have ducked my question, which is a simple yes-or-no question. Let's ask it again.You say that "God gave PARENTS the right to raise their own children as THEY see fit". Does that include sexually abusing them? Yes or no?

Please back this assertion up with a citation to a reputable study.If you do not, I will have to conclude that your post is merely blind bigotry.

you would be wrong but that is par for the course with people around here. death proves another verse of the bible true...it is appointed unto man once to die, then the judgment... in evolution death does not belong and there is no purpose to it.evolutionists have to steal from creationists to make sense of the world and all the details for their 'theory' doesn't explain one thing about life.nomatter what one does, whether they pray, or go to a doctor, when God says time is up, there is nothing anyone can do to stop it. get some reality in your heads, you only rely on doctors, medicines, hospitals because you are all afraid to die for you know what comes next and it won't be heaven for you all.relying on God is the only way to go for man cannot stop what God has ordained.

Have you ever used soap to wash your hands? Have you ever drank chlorinated water? Have you ever used a band aid to stop the bleeding? Have ever had dental work done?God helps those who help themselves.If God gave you logic and reason you should take note of it.