Child Abuse or Parental Rights?

[mwfanelli2]

The rest of your post was a fairly unreasonable extension of my post on legal history - not my personal beliefs. Clearly I, or any reasonable person, would never argue for a parental right to shoot children. I'm not going to argue with the unreasonable.

LOL! Yeah, unreasonable because YOU can't deal with it. It's OK to murder your child by withholding medical help but it's unreasonable to say it's OK to murder your child by putting a bullet in his/her head? Huh? In both cases, the child is dead due to their parents actions. How in the world is it unreasonable to ask what the difference is? Either a parent has personal rights to treat their child any way they want or they don't. Getting upset about one limitation of "personal freedom" but not about the other is exactly defined by the term "unreasonable."

[brmill26]

It's unreasonable because you're making it very personal and at no point have I made this personal. I have merely raised the legal history as to why the law exists like it does and made a few counter points... which you seem to have taken as personal attacks. And, I think the above evidences exactly why I refused to respond to your previous post.

If you can't stand back and look at things from an objective, non-personal standpoint, then you aren't going to be able to have a good debate about it. "...unreasonable b/c YOU can't deal with it..." is exactly the kind of argument I refuse to get into b/c you've lost sight of the bigger issues and are more interested in attacking me. That is what I call unreasonable b/c I, personally, have nothing to do with this issue.

Edit: I don't mean that to sound like some kind of dissent, I mean it happens a lot from a lot of people. I understand being invested in what you believe and resisting challenges to that. No big deal. As I also said in my first post, this is a VERY difficult issue and I'm very glad it's not up to me to decide which is right.

[mwfanelli2]

"Two parents who prayed as their 11-year-old daughter died of untreated diabetes were charged Monday with second-degree reckless homicide."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/28/....ap/index.html

[Medley]

So charges have been brought. Well, that's a step in the right direction, IMHO.

Remember the Oregon case? The Worthington's, in association with their defense attorneys (plural), have set up a website asking the 'faithful' for donations to their defense, framing it as an attack by the state on religious freedom. And they're getting those donations. It's shaping up to be a very long and costly battle- for both sides.

I'm betting that the parents die of old age before the appeals are finished- assuming that the state decides to spend the money to prosecute. Welcome to the reality of it all.

- Joe U.

[another view]

I'm betting that the parents die of old age before the appeals are finished- assuming that the state decides to spend the money to prosecute. Welcome to the reality of it all.

My money's on this too... ACLU anyone?