This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Oregon couple convicted in faith-healing trial

Oregon couple convicted in faith-healing trial - Comments

Sample's Avatar Comment 1 by Sample

I can't help but think of those particular Jews who won't be organ donors, but will happily accept transplants should they need them. Will these Christians deny life saving care for their infants but later happily accept medical care once they are out of the prime of their lives?

Despicable.

Mike

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 15:35:18 UTC | #876611

Am I Evil?'s Avatar Comment 2 by Am I Evil?

Do I read that as a previous religious exemption to ensure a kid's death?

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 15:35:45 UTC | #876612

Neodarwinian's Avatar Comment 3 by Neodarwinian

" Religious exemption!!!! "

When will we move beyond exempting wackaloon's moronic beliefs that have such horrible manifestations in the real world?

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 15:43:48 UTC | #876615

Wake_Up's Avatar Comment 4 by Wake_Up

Just remember what Jesus said:

"Health the sick, preach the gospel..and avoid medical treatment.."

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 15:50:28 UTC | #876617

brighterstill's Avatar Comment 5 by brighterstill

Religous exemption? So it's okay to kill people so long as you're doing it for religious reasons? Well, that pretty much sums up the death penalty anyway.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 15:50:41 UTC | #876618

btheist's Avatar Comment 6 by btheist

As a species, we have evolved so far and yet so little. There is absolutely no excuse for this in the day and age and yet it happens. It happens because it is tolerated and not treated for the crime it really is. How is this different than someone who premeditates a murder and puts bullet in someone's head? This was a premeditated act resulting in death (and probably a more excruciating death than a bullet to the head).

There is no defense and no rationalization that can excuse their acts. And what the hell is a religious exemption? Dead is dead and the law should be the law.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 15:56:49 UTC | #876621

aquilacane's Avatar Comment 7 by aquilacane

That's manslaughter, you're going down. But wait, it was religiously motivated. Ah... well we still need to punish you but we respect why you killed your kid.

License to fucking kill, is religion.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:10:32 UTC | #876626

Tyler Durden's Avatar Comment 8 by Tyler Durden

Defense attorney Mark Cogan said his clients were the victims of religious persecution.

Get in the fuckin' sack!!

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:31:04 UTC | #876637

Tyler Durden's Avatar Comment 9 by Tyler Durden

In response to deaths among Followers of Christ members, state lawmakers this year removed the religious defenses from criminal laws. Those exemptions had made it tougher to convict parents who shun a child's medical care for religious reasons than those who shun it for other reasons like neglect.

Well, some good news, but too little too late to save the life of a newborn, and punish them accordingly for neglect, ignorance and stupidity.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:36:11 UTC | #876640

drumdaddy's Avatar Comment 10 by drumdaddy

So sad about these poor innocent children.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:46:07 UTC | #876645

MarkOnTheRiver's Avatar Comment 11 by MarkOnTheRiver

Dale Hickman testified that he didn't call 911 once he realized his infant son was ailing "because I was praying."

So that's all right then.

Evidently god had filled his miraculous cure quota for the fiscal quarter, and also wasn't able to offer advice to seek out immediate medical aid for their son. Kind of makes you wonder why the parents bothered to ask.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:52:51 UTC | #876647

SheilaC's Avatar Comment 12 by SheilaC

Poor little baby.

Medical experts for the prosecution testified that the baby had a 99 percent chance of survival if his parents had sought medical care

and yet:

Defense attorney Mark Cogan said [snip] there was no evidence that medical care would have saved him.

A baby is dead because his parents ignored reality, and event hough they probably loved him, they're still batting reality away.

Headdesk Headdesk Headdesk

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:52:59 UTC | #876648

brighterstill's Avatar Comment 13 by brighterstill

"Those exemptions had made it tougher to convict parents who shun a child's medical care for religious reasons than those who shun it for other reasons like neglect."

Religion is neglect: Neglect of reason and rationality - as heinous a crime when it results in the death of a child as any other kind of neglect.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:57:13 UTC | #876650

aquilacane's Avatar Comment 14 by aquilacane

I would just like to say, out of respect for Blasphemy Rights Day, fuck Jesus!

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:58:45 UTC | #876652

Sean_W's Avatar Comment 15 by Sean_W

90 Days! That's it?

Why not send them to church for a year?

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 17:07:21 UTC | #876656

blitz442's Avatar Comment 16 by blitz442

Jump to comment 12 by SheilaC

The parents evidently believe the following propositions:

Prop 1 - An invisible person exits who can cure any disease at will

Prop 2 - You can implore this invisible person to cure the disease via the mechanism of prayer; the invisible person can choose to grant this wish or not.

Prop 3 - The level of faith you have is proportional to the liklihood that your prayers will be answered.

Prop 4 - Using medical care is contrary to faith

Inference 1: The future is not written in stone; you can change the course of events Inference 2: Use of medical care will decrease the liklihood that the prayer will be answered

Prop 5 - The invisible person always decides the right thing, which includes allowing the death of baby

Prop 6 - The invisible person knows everything, including what it will do in the future

Inference 3: Every prayer you utter has already been anticipated and the answer to it cannot be modified

So two inferences contradict one another, and the other leads people to think that avoiding medical care is a good thing. Furthermore, there is no set of events that can be shown to contradict any of the propositions.

I'm dead serious here - why aren't the holders of these particular beliefs considered to be suffering from some form of mental illness?

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 17:17:33 UTC | #876659

Billions and Billions's Avatar Comment 17 by Billions and Billions

I would like to know whether that couple's faith has been shaken by the turn of events. Sadly, they probably default to the usual explanation: it is all part of God's plan, even if it defies logic.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 17:43:40 UTC | #876668

blitz442's Avatar Comment 18 by blitz442

Comment 17 by Billions and Billions

Sadly, they probably default to the usual explanation: it is all part of God's plan, even if it defies logic

I once asked a religious person if it was always part of God's plan for the particular outcome that occured, which included your prayers not being answered, what good were your prayers or any other action you undertook?

These type of questions seem to produce opposite effects in the brains of the religious and the brains of atheists.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 17:53:14 UTC | #876674

glenister_m's Avatar Comment 19 by glenister_m

I'd joke about "evolution in action" if it wasn't such a sad story. However I would suspect, or at least hope, that the church's numbers are in decline (fewer people joining, more leaving).

I'm curious if any of the other members of the church are reconsidering their policy, or having second thoughts, as opposed to claiming religious persecution? Even if it was the "Well if it was obvious that prayer and oil weren't working and it was an emergency, then I would definitely call the ambulance. I wouldn't let my child die.", as opposed to "It's god's will whether our child lives or dies.".

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:05:41 UTC | #876680

SheerReason's Avatar Comment 20 by SheerReason

Good! Finally, an example made of these religious nuts!

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:11:44 UTC | #876684

achromat666's Avatar Comment 21 by achromat666

This child was clearly brought into the world without proper care and could have been in much better shape, whether he survived or not had they simply given him medical attention. And for what? So that his parents and a crazy pastor could obey the law of the lord in yet another insane interpretation of scripture to justify their clearly unhinged behavior.

This is what happens when you accept the tenets of any faith so zealously that god's will is paramount to even the life of your child. It is dangerous, reckless, and has no place in the 21st century.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:49:17 UTC | #876700

Rodger T's Avatar Comment 22 by Rodger T

Unfortunately ,no matter how many of their own children they kill through neglect,nothing will convince these cretins that their particular god does not exist,in fact their gods inabilty/unwillingness to heal their sick children just seems to strengthen their pathetic faith. This is child sacrifice,pure and simple, yet they get a free pass because they believe fairy tales. 18 months in jail and $250,00 fine for murder by neglect? And I thought here in NZ the judiciary was soft on crime.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:50:19 UTC | #876701

Anonymous's Avatar Comment 23 by Anonymous

Comment Removed by Moderator

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:50:42 UTC | #876702

Anonymous's Avatar Comment 24 by Anonymous

Comment Removed by Moderator

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:51:45 UTC | #876703

Blackaddera's Avatar Comment 25 by Blackaddera

Here in Europe those people would get life imprisonment.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 19:01:49 UTC | #876710

Stevehill's Avatar Comment 26 by Stevehill

On the basis of the report, this baby was born at 28-29 weeks' gestation. In the UK this would typically lead to an 80% survival rate: which is good.

Or a one in five chance of death without specialist medical treatment: which is bad.

These fuckwits are killers and should go to jail for a long time.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 19:34:35 UTC | #876726

SomersetJohn's Avatar Comment 27 by SomersetJohn

Were it possible to enact and enforce such legislation I would introduce a measure th deny these deranged child killers any form of medical intervention whatsoever for any reason whatsoever for the rest of their lives.

I probably would not make a very good god.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 20:00:37 UTC | #876739

RomeStu's Avatar Comment 28 by RomeStu

When Jesus said "suffer the little children....." I didn't realise he meant it literally.

18 months in jail is a disgrace for these murderers. I guess they care more about the foetus than the actual child.

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 20:30:21 UTC | #876745

Tyler Durden's Avatar Comment 29 by Tyler Durden

Comment 28 by RomeStu :

18 months in jail is a disgrace for these murderers. I guess they care more about the foetus than the actual child.

The Hickmans will not be sentenced until Oct 31st.

"because of a religious exemption in state law at time of the crime, the couple likely will face no more than 18 months in prison and a $250,000 fine, The Oregonian reported."

There is a possibility of a longer sentence, we will have to wait and see...

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 21:09:04 UTC | #876753

Agrajag's Avatar Comment 30 by Agrajag

Comment 18 by blitz442

I once asked a religious person if it was always part of God's plan for the particular outcome that occured, which included your prayers not being answered, what good were your prayers or any other action you undertook?

George Carlin (PBUH) said it best: "What good is being god if any schmuck with a two-dollar prayer book can fuck up your plan?"
Steve

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 21:14:00 UTC | #876754