Misplaced faith kills children

[Gone Apostate]

I have often said that it isn’t religion, per se, that I object to. It’s the faithful adherence to dogmatic certainties. This can take the form of devotion to state, party, economic principles, and causes both good and bad. Anytime people choose their ideology over evidence and reason it is a recipe for disaster.

I still maintain that this is true. But I have a particular bone to pick with religion here and now.

I just read the AP story: Slain boy's mom discusses cult life - http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... f6d76d4183

I was livid, as I’m sure you are – whether you are religious or not. I would have been when I was a religious person too. It got me to thinking though. What other examples are there of this type of behavior, outside religious devotees? For instance I agree that faithful devotion to an idea like communism (or capitalism) can be and has been as disastrous as any religious belief but where is the communist equivalent of Madeline Kara Neumann? Where is the party affiliation equivalent of Preston Bowers or Lydia Schatz? Where is the North Korean example that is comparable to the dozens or more children that are beaten and killed (not just in the African witch trials but here in America) or suffer preventable deaths (see - http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/c ... 5.abstract) due to the religious beliefs of their otherwise “sane and loving parents" every year?

I would call the events at Wako with the Branch Dividians primarily religious in nature and but I would concede a similarity to the political motivated stand off at Ruby Ridge. The Jamestown Massacre, however where parents fed the Kool-Aid to their children has no political equivalent that I’m aware of.

There are examples of mass murder on both religious and non-religious sides. There are disturbed people that have done horrific things for religious and non-religious reasons. I fail, however, to conceive of more than a couple instances where otherwise loving, sane parents neglect to care for their suffering children. There are some rare examples, equally horrific like Gloria Thomas Sam and Eliza Jane Scovill where their suffering and deaths we caused not by religious faith, but faith in pseudo science like homeopathy, etc. Aside from these, I don’t know of any other time when parents will defy the conventional wisdom/medicine that offers to treat a terrible sickness tormenting their child without a religious reason. In some cases like with Jehovah’s Witnesses and blood transfusions, they KNOW it will can their child’s life but deny it anyway, not necessarily because they think that their faith will heal their child but because they think that it would be better to die than to disobey God. This is almost exclusive to religion as far as I can see. It may not be YOUR religion but it IS almost exclusively religion that is to blame. This is the dreadful power of belief in heaven and hell. This is the single threat and promise that would justify this behavior to a rational human being. This why I have to speak out against it. Because all the religions in the world have this power and all the major religions have, at one time or another, exercised this power to the suffering and death of men women and children inside and outside their congregations. Name me one religious tradition that has more than a million members and I’m pretty sure I can find an example. My head is swimming with them right now.

If I am wrong and you can think of examples of this type of abuse done for secular reasons by “sane� people, besides the ones I have already listed please share them. I have already considered and discounted vaccine refusal - as dangerous and deplorable as it is, for reasons that, if not already apparent, can be addressed if anyone wishes me to.

Thank you.

[Nilloc James]

I'd like to hear your reason for rejecting vaccine denial.

[Gone Apostate]

How about this? There is no substantiated evidence for any health risks regarding vaccines except for NOT getting one. People that use pseudo science to deny proper protection to their children are endangering them.

[Nilloc James]

I meant: Why do you not classify vaccine denial as a secular instince of ideology endangering children.

Religion causes people to deny medical aid to children.

Vaccine conspiracies cause people to deny medical aid to children.

Its there a difference?

[Darias]

How about this? There is no substantiated evidence for any health risks regarding vaccines except for NOT getting one. People that use pseudo science to deny proper protection to their children are endangering them.

Just as a side note, vaccines in some people trigger autoimmune disorders -- my dad suffered from GBS which paralyzed him for 3 months -- he would have died without excellent medical care. He's only in his 40s. For most suffers it lasts much longer and reoccurs throughout their life.

Because I'm genetically predisposed, I avoid flu shots. I think not getting the flu at my age is an acceptable and preferable risk to contracting GBS.

My doctor suggested that I might want to avoid taking shots, so I do.

However,

Kids who get vaccinations could also contract it. Yes, it is rare, but rare means nothing when it's your child. No risks, really?

Tell that to these families:





Sources:

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vaccine/ ... nbarre.htm

[Gone Apostate]

I misunderstood. I apologize. I agree that it's very similar. In fact, I thought about addressing it in my post but I left it out because the time it would take to establish the difference, I thought would be too long. So thank you for giving me a chance to do that here.

In that vaccine denial is in MOST cases (conceding Darius's objection to the absolute declarative) based on misinformation and is potentially harmful they are almost the same. That the child is endangered do to their parents putting of their faith in the wrong place, is the same.

Here is the difference. The vaccine denier ISN'T choosing to let their child suffer, knowing that medical help is available, but refusing it. They are taking a risk yes, but not actively watching their child in agony , thinking that there is a hospital that they can go to, there is a transfusion they can have, but they turn their back on it. The religious healers don't assert that medicine can't help, they just have faith that they shouldn't use that help - that the eternal rewards are worth the suffering and death. Secondly, most parents that refuse vaccines do so with the assumption (in some cases erroneously) that should their child actually contract that which they declined to inoculate against, that modern medicine will still be able to help. So they take the risk, that they don't see as much of a risk. They aren't actively, knowingly prolonging suffering.

There are some rare tragic examples of a more secular version of this : Gloria Thomas Sam , Eliza Jane Scovill, but still these are parents that thought that medice wasn't a help for them, they that they were doing all they COULD, not all they SHOULD. That to me is the key difference.

Does that make sense?

[Nilloc James]

Religous instances reject something they know can help an dby doing so prolong/cause suffering.

Vaccine denies reject that something can help, and increase the risk of later suffering.

I see why you would not equate these.

[gp]

It was to my understanding that we were never to allow any foreign substance, (vaccines) to be put in our body. I believe that is what Yahuah, (God) tells us. Check out http://www.sherryshriner.com She has a lot of inforomation on vaccines on her website. Yah bless His people!

[Gone Apostate]

Are you serious? I don't want to spend time on that if it's a joke. If it is a joke... well done. Otherwise, I will engage.

[rreppy]

I've been a doctor since 1986, and in my opinion, any parent that denies a life-saving blood transfusion or procedure to their child for religious reasons is guilty of battery and criminal neglect and should be persecuted to the full extent of the law. To sentence a child to death for the sake of a belief in an invisible bearded man in the sky is reprehensible in the extreme. The child has an inalienable right to be allowed to grow to adulthood so that they may make an informed choice about their own religious preferences at that time.
I am disgusted by the Religious Right's use of religion to simultaneously defend the right to execute abortion doctors to protect the holy zygote, and the right to condemn a child to death on the same religious principles.