GOPer Says It's Fine For Kids to Die in the Name of God

[doggie]

Proof religion is more important then lives to pro lifers.

http://www.alternet.org/pro-life-goper- ... e-name-god

In a deeply religious section of Idaho, a Republican state representative says that the state has no right to protect children from their parents who refuse them needed medical treatment in favor of faith healing.

“Children do die,†says Rep. Christy Perry. And it’s fine with her if Idaho children die in the name of God. Perry’s district includes many followers of a religious cult, Followers of Christ, that eschews modern medicine for faith healing. She says that the sect’s members are more comfortable confronting death when it happens to their children.

“I’m not trying to sound callous, but [people calling for reform] want to act as if death is an anomaly. But it’s not. It’s a way of life,†she says.

Perry says that a proposed ban on faith-healing would violates the religious rights of her constituents. The legislation, which would limit faith exemptions for medical care in the state’s child neglect law was proposed after a string of preventable child deaths in Perry’s district. The 12 who died were children of sect members. Most of the children died from causes like pneumonia, sepsis and easily treatable cases of food poisoning.

But Perry argues that it’s well within the Canyon County sect’s First Amendment right to refuse medical care to their children on religious grounds. She says those trying to reform the laws are denying the sect their religious freedoms.

“Is it really because these children are dying more so than other children, or is this really about an attack on a religion you don’t agree with?†Perry told Aljazeera.

On her website, Perry ironically proclaims that she's "a pro life mother and grandmother and emphasizes her honor and value of all human life, born and unborn." Perry also claims she's "an ardent supporter of defending each child’s right to life."

[RosyDaisy]

I have no words.

[doggie]

glad Oregon did a way with these excuses for parents to neglect their children. I am sure she would be all over a non christian parent that let their children die of neglect.

[ILoveJellybeans]

It is never fine for kids to die. Kids are not supposed to die. Especially when their death could easily be prevented with medicine.

[samurai_sarah]

Most of the children died from causes like pneumonia, sepsis and easily treatable cases of food poisoning.

...what?!?! :pink-shock: :angry-banghead: :angry-banghead: :angry-banghead:

[Cartmann99]

On her website, Perry ironically proclaims that she's "a pro life mother and grandmother and emphasizes her honor and value of all human life, born and unborn." Perry also claims she's "an ardent supporter of defending each child’s right to life."

Until it's born. After that, she doesn't give a damn. :angry-cussingblack:

[Jana814]

It is never fine for kids to die. Kids are not supposed to die. Especially when their death could easily be prevented with medicine.

Agree!

[browncoatslytherin]

well, using that argument, since death is inevitable for everybody, there's no need for anyone to go to the doctor, ever, for anything. if this rep is taking any medication, she needs to flush it down the toilet, because it's not going to prevent her from dying eventually, someday.

“Is it really because these children are dying more so than other children, or is this really about an attack on a religion you don’t agree with?†Perry told Aljazeera.

uh, yes. yes it is.

[samurai_sarah]

well, using that argument, since death is inevitable for everybody, there's no need for anyone to go to the doctor, ever, for anything. if this rep is taking any medication, she needs to flush it down the toilet, because it's not going to prevent her from dying eventually, someday.

(snip)

Unless you're a foetus! Then your life is sacrosanct. /end sarcasm

[Loveday]

...but [people calling for reform] want to act as if death is an anomaly. But it’s not. It’s a way of life,†she says.

No. No, it's not a way of life*, it's part of life. That doesn't mean we should encourage it by such extreme neglect as this. :angry-banghead:

[16strong]

My literal reaction: Cuckoo, cuckoo. :cray-cray:

[doggie]

it really shows that religion is more important then children in the GOP's eyes. abortion is about religion not children.

[Becket70]

She and her constituents are certifiable. Years of therapy would not help them. Where is voter suppression when you need it?

[Chowder Head]

Unless its the turn of the century, death is not a way of life fore children.

[Handmaiden of Dog]

I’m not trying to sound callous, but [people calling for reform] want to act as if death is an anomaly. But it’s not. It’s a way of life,†she says.

Perry says that a proposed ban on faith-healing would violates the religious rights of her constituents

.

Death is "a way of life"? WTF Try telling that to the parents of a little girl killed by a hit and run driver.

And she is worried about the religious right of her constituents more than she is worried about the rights of their children to live?! Damn that is callous. Much more important that Mommy and Daddy get to worship and pray they want to then to make sure nobody's life is in danger. What if Mommy and Daddy want to sacrifice their first born son because the voices in their heads told them to? Would that be OK?

[doggie]

so if you do nothing (pray) it is ok to let your child die. but to do anything (abortion) is horrible.

[FloraKitty35]

What an asshole.

[Jana814]

Unless its the turn of the century, death is not a way of life fore children.

Agree!

[DGayle]

Why have laws protecting kids at all if it's ok to let them die from active medical issues? If that's the thinking, let's euthanize the sick kids in those churches and at least spare them the suffering of slow, agonizing deaths. That's appalling, but less that letting the deaths take months. Something's fucked when literally euthanizing is the merciful option, and no, I don't support euthanasia instead of medical care.

[Toothfairy]

Wtf is wrong with these idiots. Please tell me they're being sarcastic

[Four is Enough]

I see the problem here as being exactly Church vs. State. Mind you, as a nurse, I would wish for all humans of any age to have access to adequate and excellent health care. HOWEVER. Whose kid is it? Parents'? or State's? If church and state are truly separated, I do not think State should have the right to dictate what health care the child receives, IF it TRULY is affected by their religious beliefs. Therefore, as much as I would hate it, (for instance) a child of a group who do not allow their child, hit by a car, to receive blood products, might die. The child, if he received blood products, might still die, and his parents would be plagued by the horrible thought that they had not only allowed their child to play in traffic, but then had compounded the sin by going against their beliefs. OR he might live, but be in some way, according to their lights, "tainted" and unable to reach heaven. I don't know why they can't receive blood, but it has come up in the trauma realm over the years, and this is a true scenario. WHO DECIDES?

And, once having decided "who decides", what ELSE will you allow? If your child is mentally retarded/exceptionalized/intellectually challenged, (sorry I have a headache and can't remember the APPROPRIATE thing to say here) will you allow the government to automatically drug him so he can't sire children, or remove her ovaries so she can't have children? If he were autistic and sometimes lashed out, would you allow an automatic lobotomy because it was SOP?

This is a hellishly slippery slope for both sides of the equation. Children will and do die daily because of their parents' bona fide religious beliefs, in countries where war allows children to be part of the army.

Children do and will die daily in places where animals are held to be more important than some people, again, a bona fide religious belief. Washing in the same river where excrement from animals and people floats brings disease to children, but it's JUST a fact of their life.

Children do and will die daily in places where they are placed at risk because religious beliefs, where they are held accountable for jobs beyond their ability, where they have little understanding of safety, and less support for same.

Everyone in the US does not believe in the same thing. It is an unfortunate fact that some children die because of this. I, myself, would never sacrifice a chicken in order to cure my child's sore throat. Someone else would.

[KittenMitten]

Hi, four is enough. I hope your headache is better. I know when I have migraines I can't think my way out of a paper bag.

Your post gave me a lot to think about. It seems to me, and I could be totally wrong, that the fundies we snark on would not allow treatment more as a FU to government rather than their sincere religious beliefs. I could be wrong though. Sometimes it feels to me that some parents make these decisions, and then spout it to the world to say "Look how Godly I am" rather than making the best choice for the child, be it best medical decision or best decision for their child before God.

I wondered about to whom does the child belong, the parents or the government. I guess my belief is that the child belongs to him/herself. I guess my belief is that the child should get whatever treatment is necessary until he/she can make informed consent.

I'm sorry, but I didn't understand the last paragraph about the chicken.

But most important, I hope you feel better.

[Cleopatra7]

I think the crux of the issue stems from whether children have rights that are independent of their parents or if they are mere extensions of their parents' beliefs. I believe in the former, but many conservatives and all fundamentalists believe in the latter. If a child has rights of its own, then it has a right to proper healthcare, regardless of whether its parents believe in modern medicine or not. If they're just blank slates for their parents to do what they will, then children must die for "religious freedom." The "umbrella of protection" is simply one manifestation of this belief.

[Howl]

Other states are less squeamish about this problem. Several General Assembly Church of the First Born parents have been charged with murder for sticking to faith healing for their ill children. There was a Church of the First Born congregation where I lived in Southwestern Colorado, so this is of interest to me. One of the congregants was a nurse at the local hospital. Go figure.

Church of the First Born

Since 1976, at least 82 children linked to the Church of the First Born have died from a lack of medical treatment, says Child Healthcare is a Legal Duty — an organization that lobbies against state laws that protect parents who choose faith healing over modern medicine.

Dec. 22, 2014 An Albany, Oregon couple who believes in faith healing were sentenced to 10 years in prison on Friday in the death of Syble Rossiter, their 12-year-old daughter.

The girl died of diabetes complications in February 2013 after her parents withheld treatment in favor of prayer.

Sept. 19, 2012 A couple charged with manslaughter in the faith-healing death of their 16-year old son, Austin Sprout, were sentenced Tuesday. Brandi and Russel Bellew pleaded guilty to criminally negligent homicide charges and were sentenced to five years probation after reaching a plea deal with prosecutors.

JaLea and Greg Swezey

In February two parents in Carlton, Washington — members of a church that is part of the General Assemblies and Church of the First Born network — were charged with second-degree murder in the faith healing death of their 17-year-old son, Zachary Swezey, who had a burst appendix.

In May 2012, JaLea and Greg Swezey were acquitted on the murder charges, but were told they could still face retrial for manslaughter. In June agreed to accept a plea deal that spared them jail time but holds them responsible for their teenage son’s death after they failed to call a doctor.

Largely in response to a series of preventable ‘faith-healing’ deaths at a similar denomination, Followers of Christ Church, the Oregon legislature changed the law regarding faith healing.

House Bill 2721, which went into law June 9, 2011, eliminates reliance on spiritual treatment as defense to certain crimes in which victim is under 18 years of age. Effectively it means a reliance on faith healing can no longer be used as a defense against manslaughter charges.

Interestingly, the state worked with the Church of the First Born congregations to educate them about the law, and apparently, people were receptive.

There is a double tragedy when these parents go through the legal system. First, a child has died, but typically there are more siblings in these families, and when both parents are arrested, the children can become wards of the state, so lots of trauma for the surviving kids.

Just as children are protected against sexual abuse and gross physical abuse/neglect, they can be protected against medical neglect and there are legal repercussions for all of these things. I don't think the slope is that slippery. Medical neglect is just one more form of neglect.

[uber frau]

So is this guy completely fine with children being recruited as suicide bombers by the likes of ISIS and Boko Haram then?

Probably, as long as they only blow up other brown ppl and keep away from his Christian Murican voters.