[Silver]

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/02/01/sextuplet-transfusion-070201.html

They aren't Muslim, they aren't black, so we don't have to worry about being PC. Even $tinkle can pile on, because the Jehovah's Witnesses are somewhere down with the Mormons (even lower now?) on the God totem pole.

 

[LordOpie]

by "God totem pole" do you mean 'knob'?

 

[$tinkle]

the wisdom of solomon applies: the parents should give the blood back to the hospital.

 

[Westy]

I don't know. 3 surviving kids out of 6 from one pregnancy. That is still two more than normal. Look at it this way, there will be fewer of them down the road.

 

[Silver]

Anyone want to be that the kids that got the blood transfusion die suddenly in their sleep as infants? Or am I just being cynical?

 

[Changleen]

What assholes.

 

[LordOpie]

What assholes.

Parents?

If so, why? They have a right to refuse medical treatment for their kids if they choose so 'rationally'. And religion is accepted as a rational factor.

Consider this, if they're right, their kids ascend high up into heaven sooner. If they're wrong, so what?

 

[kidwoo]

And religion is accepted as a rational factor.

Aboslutely!!!



wait......canada has a constitution?

 

[Silver]

If so, why? They have a right to refuse medical treatment for their kids if they choose so 'rationally'. And religion is accepted as a rational factor.

Explain the bold part to me for a minute, would you?

 

[bac]

I don't know. 3 surviving kids out of 6

That's a litter. I wonder if the mother took fertility drugs? Perhaps that's not against her religion? I dunno. You just don't see too many litters that weren't the product of fertility drugs.

That is still two more than normal. Look at it this way, there will be fewer of them down the road.

I doubt they are done procreating, but we can dream.

 

[LordOpie]

Explain the bold part to me for a minute, would you?

I don't have an explanation, I'm just saying that society accepts religion and that as far as I'm concerned, there's too much govt.

I would do everything in my power to save my child -- including walking on broken glass, then a vat of alcohol over hot coals if needed. I'd give my child all the medical care I could convince doctors to provide.

If they believe that not accepting blood "saves" their child, then it's pretty frigging' egotistical to say that they're wrong.

 

[$tinkle]

If they believe that not accepting blood "saves" their child, then it's pretty frigging' egotistical to say that they're wrong.

what if saying "they're wrong" comes from a scientific point of view?

 

[Silver]

If they believe that not accepting blood "saves" their child, then it's pretty frigging' egotistical to say that they're wrong.

Then they should move to a third world country where children are considered chattel and they can do what they want with them. They should be in jail for child endangerment.

 

[Transcend]

Parents?

If so, why? They have a right to refuse medical treatment for their kids if they choose so 'rationally'. And religion is accepted as a rational factor.

Consider this, if they're right, their kids ascend high up into heaven sooner. If they're wrong, so what?

If they don't, the kids die.

Yes the parents are morons. Forget modern medical science, let god fix your kids. Idiots. Completely agree with silver, they should be locked away for child endangerment, and then sterilized.

 

[$tinkle]

If they don't, the kids die.

Yes the parents are morons. Forget modern medical science, let god fix your kids. Idiots. Completely agree with silver, they should be locked away for child endangerment, and then sterilized.

well, lookit this: i agree w/ the infidel(s).

it looks like these JWs are practicing something more cultural than biblical, as a sound counter-argument can be made from a biblical POV (for the believing, that is).

 

[LordOpie]

what if saying "they're wrong" comes from a scientific point of view?

Science isn't relevant when it comes to individuals.



All I know is that when it comes to personal decisions with regards to my family, I'd be friggin' pissed if an outsider interfered.

If a parent can't be declared unfit and is acting out of love for their child, then people need to stfu.

You want to give the kids blood? Then declare the parents unfit and take all their kids.

 

[$tinkle]

Science isn't relevant when it comes to individuals.



All I know is that when it comes to personal decisions with regards to my family, I'd be friggin' pissed if an outsider interfered.

If a parent can't be declared unfit and is acting out of love for their child, then people need to stfu.

You want to give the kids blood? Then declare the parents unfit and take all their kids.

even those very few adherents of islam who practice infibulation for religious - and not medical - reasons?

 

[fluff]

The simple fact is that the parents are letting their kids die when they could be saved. That makes them unfit in the view of our western societies surely?

 

[LordOpie]

I don't have all the answers, all I'm saying is... there are only two choices:
-- do the will of the parents
- or -
-- declare them unfit... and take ALL the kids away from them.

 

[fluff]

I don't have all the answers, all I'm saying is... there are only two choices:
-- do the will of the parents
- or -
-- declare them unfit... and take ALL the kids away from them.

You sure you can't find a ickle shade of grey in there somewhere?

 

[LordOpie]

You sure you can't find a ickle shade of grey in there somewhere?

No. I'm a Sith Lord.

Where is there wiggle room?

If a parent is doing something that you consider so wrong, then they'd be unfit, yeah?

 

[fluff]

No. I'm a Sith Lord.

Where is there wiggle room?

If a parent is doing something that you consider so wrong, then they'd be unfit, yeah?

So long as theor child did not need certain medical treatment then they'd be fine, so why the need to remove the kid permanently?

 

[LordOpie]

what happens when the kid gets in infection after falling down while playing? And they do?

By insisting on giving the kid blood, you're saying when it comes to the medical health of their children, these people are incapable of making the right decision. How many people escape childhood without needing to go to the doctor?

 

[$tinkle]

How many people escape childhood without needing to go to the doctor?

in the u.s., about 48.5 million since 1973

 

[LordOpie]

in the u.s., about 48.5 million since 1973

hey, they were too weak to escape the womb,. Darwinism.

 

[fluff]

what happens when the kid gets in infection after falling down while playing? And they do?

By insisting on giving the kid blood, you're saying when it comes to the medical health of their children, these people are incapable of making the right decision. How many people escape childhood without needing to go to the doctor?

This was a specific scenario where the parents were refusing a treatment that was known would work. Many children die because of parent's mistakes or ignorance but the state does not take all children into care just in case, nor should they in this case. Kids get hurt, kids die but when the authorities are faced with an instance such as this they are obliged to act, but not to remove the children permanently from parents who are otherwise not likely to hurt them.

Few kids never need to go to the doctor, but few need blood transfusions either.

 

[$tinkle]

hey, they were too weak to escape the womb,. Darwinism.

but one lady gets breast cancer & i get a bronx cheer? i can't figure you people (non-conservative monkeys) out

 

[LordOpie]

Many children die because of parent's mistakes or ignorance...

That doesn't apply to these parents? You may disagree with their beliefs, but they're not ignorant, they understand the consequences of refusing blood for their kids. As for scripture and whether they're really right to believe that, I can't comment.

Either we accept a parent's right to make decisions based on their religion or we do not.

Where do we draw the line? What about the recent controversial vacination that could prevent cervical cancer, but some parents are against it for relgious reasons. Do we force those teenage girls to get vaccinated?

 

[LordOpie]

but one lady gets breast cancer & i get a bronx cheer? i can't figure you people (non-conservative monkeys) out

Some of us like breasts, if you don't, ok.

For me, there is no higher power than boobs.

Can I get an Amen?

 

[fluff]

That doesn't apply to these parents? You may disagree with their beliefs, but they're not ignorant, they understand the consequences of refusing blood for their kids. As for scripture and whether they're really right to believe that, I can't comment.

Either we accept a parent's right to make decisions based on their religion or we do not.

Where do we draw the line? What about the recent controversial vacination that could prevent cervical cancer, but some parents are against it for relgious reasons. Do we force those teenage girls to get vaccinated?

I do not believe we should accept the parents having a right to allow their child to die for religious reasons. That is quite a long way away from refusing a vaccination for something that may or may not happen in later life.

Stupidity, ignorance, belief; does it matter what the cause if the death is preventable? Why not throw poverty in there and let the poor kids die?

We draw the line at failing to save a life with routine treatment.

 

[fluff]

but one lady gets breast cancer & i get a bronx cheer? i can't figure you people (non-conservative monkeys) out

I thought you were busy dredging. Given up so soon?

 

[LordOpie]

I do not believe we should accept the parents having a right to allow their child to die for religious reasons. That is quite a long way away from refusing a vaccination for something that may or may not happen in later life.

Stupidity, ignorance, belief; does it matter what the cause if the death is preventable? Why not throw poverty in there and let the poor kids die?

We draw the line at failing to save a life with routine treatment.

So you're 100% against abortion?

 

[fluff]

So you're 100% against abortion?

Hmm, moving the goalposts somewhat.... but as a form of birth control, basically, yes.

 

[stevew]

You sure you can't find a ickle shade of grey in there somewhere?

For some reason, I've never laughed harder in my life....

I have an aunt & uncle who have become pariahs to the rest of the catholics on my dads side of the family by converting to jehovah's witness. Their own kids can't stand them now.

 

[fluff]

For some reason, I've never laughed harder in my life....

I have an aunt & uncle who have become pariahs to the rest of the catholics on my dads side of the family by converting to jehovah's witness. Their own kids can't stand them now.

I wonder if anyone actually espouses intolerance as a Christian core-value?

(That is a bit like going to the dark side from the dark side.)

 

[Silver]

I wonder if anyone actually espouses intolerance as a Christian core-value?

(That is a bit like going to the dark side from the dark side.)

Jesus did. The whole drop your family and follow me instead thing can be read that way...

 

[LordOpie]

I wonder if anyone actually espouses intolerance as a Christian core-value?

"You are either for me or against me" (Matthew 12:30)

 

[fluff]

Dudes, those are choices. Intolerance is not the same thing...

 

[Silver]

"You are either for me or against me" (Matthew 12:30)

You're out of your element Opie...The NT is Gentile turf.

 

[LordOpie]

You're out of your element Opie...The NT is Gentile turf.

Sorry Walter.