How to Use Religious Freedom laws to Kill Your Child

[sophia8]

Courtesy of Orac: Sleepy Eye parents, teen, fight to refuse chemo
At first sight, this looks like another sad case of religious parents refusing conventional medicine for their kid's cancer. But, digging deeper, it's a tad more worrying than that.
Firstly, the parents claim that they and all their children are members of a native American religious group called Nemenhah; oddly, they claim to have been members for 18 years, even though the group was only formed in 2003.
Second, the group accepts anybody, Native or not, by so-called "Spiritual Adoption"; members of the group, once "adopted" can apply - after making suitable offerings - for training in various healing methods, and become Medicine Men/Women. A certified Nemenhah Band Medicine Man or Medicine Woman can then dispense whatever healing therapies and herbs they like, without having to worry about pesky legal regulations - it's part of their religious practice, you see.
Google 'Codex' and 'Nemenhah band' and you'll get plenty of articles (like this one)urging you to join Nemenhah expressly to avoid the proposed anti-quack medicine laws that are coming in.

Going back to the Hausers, it's notable that they let their son have one course of chemotherapy, before deciding that their religion was against it. Wonder what the date on that kid's "Medicine Man" certificate is?

ETA: The deeply religious folk of Nemenhah appear to have close ties with an MLM outfit peddling nutritional supplements. Quell surprise.....

Perhaps one of the most profound and powerful aspects of this site is the opportunity to become a Native American Practitioner. As a Practitioner you are protected by the special Act of Congress established to protect freedom of belief and the right to practice that belief.

 

[Darth Rotor]

I am trying to understand why you object to this. Being a Skeptic, how can you not agree with the Darwinian move toward lower religious person breeding and survival? They are your enemy. Why would you want them to thrive?

DR

 

[KingMerv00]

I am trying to understand why you object to this. Being a Skeptic, how can you not agree with the Darwinian move toward lower religious person breeding and survival? They are your enemy. Why would you want them to thrive?

DR

1) Evolution isn't a moral code.

2) Religion is largely memetic so it isn't particularly subject to biological influences.

3) Religion does not automatically reduce reproductive fitness.

4) You're kidding right?

 

[Sir Robin Goodfellow]

I vote for kidding. Just stirring the pot, I reckon.

 

[YeahDude]

I am trying to understand why you object to this. Being a Skeptic, how can you not agree with the Darwinian move toward lower religious person breeding and survival? They are your enemy. Why would you want them to thrive?

DR

I hate to do this but.... The child (13 years old) hasn't been taught any better, why should he suffer and die because of his parents ignorance? Being a Skeptic doesn't mean we don't have feelings. Why wouldn't you care if a child was going to die because of his parent's ignorance?

Edit:
By feelings I mean impulses in the brain that we identify and label as 'feelings'

2nd edit:
If you are just kidding I apologize and kudos to you for invoking that response from me. That means it was a good one.

 

[gumboot]

I am trying to understand why you object to this. Being a Skeptic, how can you not agree with the Darwinian move toward lower religious person breeding and survival? They are your enemy. Why would you want them to thrive?

DR

Religion isn't a genetic trait, and therefore isn't bred out by evolution.

 

[slingblade]

I vote for kidding. Just stirring the pot, I reckon.

Darth doesn't smoke pot, but raise your hand if you think he should start!

 

[sophia8]

I am trying to understand why you object to this. Being a Skeptic, how can you not agree with the Darwinian move toward lower religious person breeding and survival? They are your enemy. Why would you want them to thrive?

DR

I thought my post was pretty clear. My objection is that these parents aren't religious (one news report states they're Catholic), but are buying fake Native American tribal certification so that they can falsely claim religious exemption, which would leave them free to "treat" their son with sCAM.

I predict that we'll be hearing a lot more about this Nemenhah outfit in the months to come - they're all over the intertubes, selling their fake 'tribal certification'.

 

[GreyICE]

Okay, yeah, you know what? He's below the age of majority. The parents are unfit to be parents.

They want to kill themselves? Fine. I don't particularly believe we can stop suicidal idiocy from running its course, and smoking is probably a hell of a lot less healthy than what ever they're doing.

They want to kill their kid? Screw them. Just... screw them. They don't deserve to have kids, period, the end. Take their kids away, and have the state sterilize them.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Darth doesn't smoke pot, but raise your hand if you think he should start!

There are days when I agree.

At the moment, my employment agreement mitigates against that inclination. Until I don't have to pay for food and shelter, I'll let that guide my decisions.

Thus, 'tis whiskey for me. This is not an altogether bad thing.

As for estimations on my intent ... something about a noble named after deep, deep hole.

DR

 

[Vorpal]

Religion isn't a genetic trait, and therefore isn't bred out by evolution.

No, but dispositions toward certain types of thinking could be. However, even if it were the case, the ethical concerns regarding the expressed social-Darwinism-esque sentiment remain.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

No, but dispositions toward certain types of thinking could be.

Really? A genetic basis for certain types of thinking? Are you talking about the "God gene" and the "God part of the brain" stuff, or something else?

 

[Lonewulf]

I am trying to understand why you object to this. Being a Skeptic, how can you not agree with the Darwinian move toward lower religious person breeding and survival? They are your enemy. Why would you want them to thrive?

DR

Even as a joke, this is way too tacky. Seriously, promoting killing children in the interests of eugenics is not exactly a hoot to most of us. If your delivery/timing was better, or notably, if you were making an obvious parody of someone else's arguments, then it would be just fine. But as it is, this is a failure.

(And I'm sure you'll just try to blame it on me not having a sense of humor. )

 

[Vorpal]

Really? A genetic basis for certain types of thinking?

Well, why not? Intelligence, curiosity, and personality affect the chances that either becomes/stays religious, given similar circumstances. The exact extent to which intelligence, personality, etc. are genetic might be controversial (I'm not competent to say), but it seems fairly reasonable that genetics is not insignificant to them, and these dispositions in turn affect religiosity.

As for the "God gene", well... it could be the case, but it's quite a bit more far-fetched.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Religion isn't a genetic trait, and therefore isn't bred out by evolution.

Then how come most people are the same religion as their parents? Riddle me that!

 

[KingMerv00]

Then how come most people are the same religion as their parents? Riddle me that!

Because most parents raise their children to follow the same religion as themselves.

I'd imagine politics is somewhat "hereditary" too.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Because most parents raise their children to follow the same religion as themselves.

As I recall my sarcasm was wasted on you another time. Yes, I am fully aware why kids often end up the following the same religion.

 

[KingMerv00]

As I recall my sarcasm was wasted on you another time. Yes, I am fully aware why kids often end up the following the same religion.

Sorry, but in my defense...Poe's law.

 

[Twiler]

There are days when I agree.

At the moment, my employment agreement mitigates against that inclination. Until I don't have to pay for food and shelter, I'll let that guide my decisions.

Thus, 'tis whiskey for me. This is not an altogether bad thing.

As for estimations on my intent ... something about a noble named after deep, deep hole.

DR

Sir Chasm?

 

[KingMerv00]

Sir Chasm?

Sir Opie Soh