…and this is a 
Can we please just establish this one principle?
Category: Evil • Religion
Posted on: April 29, 2008 9:59 AM, by PZ Myers
Prayer doesn't work. Enshrine it in the law — prayer is not a helpful action, but rather a neglectful one. Teach it in the schools — when the health class instructs students in how to make a tourniquet or do CPR, also explain that prayer is not an option. Faith in prayer kills people.
The Wisconsin parents who allowed their daughter to die in a diabetic coma because they believed prayer was sufficient aid have been charged with second degree reckless manslaughter. That seems about right to me.
Read this account of the progression of their daughter's disease, and ask yourself at what point you would be taking her to the doctor, if she were your child. At some point between the first and second paragraph, I would have been rushing her to the emergency room; round about the third or fourth paragaph, I would have been freaking out and screaming into a telephone for an ambulance. They just let it go on and on, getting worse and worse.
Dale Neumann said on the Friday before his daughter died he noticed she was "a little more tired," but that she ate a McDonald's meal without any problems. By Saturday he noted the girl "seemed to act like she had a fever" while her breathing seemed a little labored.
Meanwhile, Leilani Neumann told police that by Saturday, "Kara was laying on the couch. Her legs looked skinny and blue. I didn't realize how skinny she was. We took her to my bed where I got her warm. I thought it was a spiritual attack. We stayed by her side nonstop and we prayed.
"I asked Kara if she loved Jesus and she shook her head yes."
Later Saturday, "Kara got up to go to the bathroom and fell off the toilet," Leilani Neumann told police.
Dale Neumann told police he thought his daughter was getting better on Sunday but that at one point he tried to sit her up but she was unable to remain up.
The investigator said he used the term "unconscious" to describe the girl's condition, according to the report, while Dale Neumann "preferred to say that she was 'in sleep mode.' "
Dale Neumann said Kara couldn't communicate and wasn't taking any water.
…
Randall Wormgoor encouraged Dale Neumann to call for medical help but the father "said he remained confident and steadfast in his belief that prayer would heal Madeline," according to an interview Dale Neumann gave to police.
Dale Neumann said he heard a "commotion" coming from the room where his daughter was lying down and that he began CPR efforts. One of the Wormgoors called 911.
Note that it wasn't even the parents who called for emergency help — it was a visiting friend. And professional help wasn't requested until she was dead. The Neumanns would no doubt have gone directly from neglecting their daughter to calling their local witch doctor priest to carry out the funeral ceremony.
The Neumanns have three other children. They've been taken away from them. That's good, too, given these statements.
Dale Neumann told investigators that "given the same set of circumstances with another child, he would not waiver in his faith and confidence in the healing power of prayer," according to the interview statement.
Police also said an e-mail Dale Neumann sent at 4:58 p.m. on March 22, the day before Kara's death, showed that the parents were aware their daughter was very ill.
The subject line of the email was: "Help our daughter needs emergency prayer!!!!" The e-mail was send to AmericasLastDays, an online ministry run by David Eells.
Right. If you want concentrated stupid so dense that it has turned into evil, check out that vile website, although it does rightly and horrifyingly point out a catch in the law.
Wisconsin law, Section 948.04 (6) states: "A person is NOT guilty of an offense under this section solely because he or she provides a child with treatment by spiritual means through prayer alone for healing…" Also in Section 448.04 (6) it states: "No law of this state regulating the practice of medicine and surgery may be construed to interfere with the practice of Christian Science. A person who elects Christian Science treatment in lieu of medical or surgical treatment for the cure of disease may not be compelled to submit to medical or surgical treatment." This section appears to refer to the application of Christian Healing as "Christian Science," since no reference is given to indicate it means a particular denomination such as the "Church of Scientology." And the writing of any law to protect only one denomination would violate the equal protection guaranteed under the constitution by protecting one sect over another.
In other words, the religious have an exemption that allows them to murder their children. "AmericasLastDays" thinks this excuses the parents; to me, it says that Wisconsin lawmakers should feel obligated to change a wretched loophole in the law that opens the door to the abuse of children.
Nothing excuses the lethal cruelty those parents exhibited to one of their kids.
Comments
I wonder if they are going to call a lawyer or just rely on prayer to keep them out of jail.
Posted by: Shaun | April 29, 2008 10:06 AM
Think of it as evolution in action.
Posted by: MaqrMarcus Ranum | April 29, 2008 10:08 AM
The parents should consider a legal defense based on an insanity plea - that ought to get them off the hook.
Posted by: Jacob Gjedde | April 29, 2008 10:09 AM
I originally didn't want the parents to go to prison because I felt they had been misguided and had suffered enough. Reading the quotes about doing it again totally changed my mind. Does he not realize his daughter died of something that is readily curable with modern medicine? It does appear that Wisconsin state law will keep them out of trouble, though. Hopefully, this will at least be a wake up call to change the stupid law.
Also, isn't calling it a Christian Science exception violate equal protection? Can idiot Jews, Muslims, or Hindus let their children die for the sake the superstition?
Posted by: Jim RL | April 29, 2008 10:11 AM
Cue the bleating from religiots all over the place;
"That's not how WE think."
Yes it is; if you refuse to look reality in the face you are just a less severely dangerous example of deluded fool. Oh and you provide the umbrella under which these monsters are allowed to practice their evil without getting wet.
Posted by: AllanW | April 29, 2008 10:12 AM
Dale Neumann told investigators that "given the same set of circumstances with another child, he would not waiver in his faith and confidence in the healing power of prayer," according to the interview statement.
What the fuck?!
Posted by: firemancarl | April 29, 2008 10:12 AM
Jail is likely to solidify their beliefs and those of their brethren. Rather, they should be locked up in a room with several deprogrammers for a week.
Posted by: Greg Esres | April 29, 2008 10:14 AM
MaqrMarcus Ranum,
That's in poor taste. The young girl that died didn't do anything to deserve idiot parents who would watch her slowly waste away. It's a tragic case of where beleiving in superstitions takes you.
Posted by: Jim RL | April 29, 2008 10:15 AM
This kind of thing happens more than I'd care to think about it, and it really is horrifying. At least these parents were convicted of the crimes that they are so very guilty of, but regrettably this is not always the case.
And this is the reason I have trouble taking people who say, "You have to respect my beliefs" seriously.
Look where blindly respecting people's beliefs has gotten this country. We have laws stating that, "A person who elects Christian Science treatment in lieu of medical or surgical treatment for the cure of disease may not be compelled to submit to medical or surgical treatment." We have laws saying that it's ok to show what should be criminal neglect towards your kids, just because you *believe* that what you're doing is somehow grounded in the one true interpretation of a religiomoral mythology.
If a person's religion required that they go out and sacrifice a virgin every year, or that they bomb abortion clinics, we'd have no problem curtailing their freedom to practice that aspect of their religion (I hope). This is really no different. Actually, I'd say it's probably even worse, because these poor children trust their parents to love them and care for them and to do what's best for them. As Kara's mother said, "I asked Kara if she loved Jesus and she shook her head yes." This is just. so. sad. The girl probably went to her grave believing that what her parents were doing was right. The indoctrination and brainwashing that leads to this kind of acceptance of abuse and neglect from the parents that are supposed to love and care for you really ought to be beyond just criminal. It should be utterly morally repugnant to any civilized member of society.
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 29, 2008 10:15 AM
Just to be clear though: "Christian Scientist", while it technically is a term that can refer to any kind of Christian who believes in faith healing to the exclusion of modern medicine, is generally meant to refer to members of the faith-healing cult Church of Christ, Scientist. I think this is the context it is meant in the law.
Not that this in any way changes the complete amorality of that law.
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 29, 2008 10:19 AM
Tuesday, May 8th, I am going to a seminar on "the science of prayer" at the Christian Science center. It is a "community seminar". Well, its my community and I was invited. I'm gonna have a few pointed questions for the speaker (this charlatan). Anyone have any studies/examples that I can bring to give me for support (besides basic frickin' common sense)?
Posted by: Dennis N | April 29, 2008 10:20 AM
With the release of Grand Theft Auto IV for the Xbox today all the usual media and others are on their soap boxes touting how this genre of video game is a bad influence for kids and should be banned.
I wonder if the same people will be using this case to argue against the dangers of religion?
Posted by: Richard, FCD | April 29, 2008 10:21 AM
I am no lawyer, but as I understand it, the law above can only be applied to adults.
IOW an adult can opt out of medical treatment because they believe in prayer healing, and another adult cannot be held for murder if praying for another very sick adult who (our) common sense dictates should be in a hospital but has opted out of it.
But as far as I know, children by law cannot consent to faith only healing and as such parents are required to seek medical help for them. Which is why these people are being charged with murder 2 (reckless homicide)
Posted by: drew | April 29, 2008 10:22 AM
This should be treated as a mental health matter. If they'd refused medical intervention on the basis of fairies, they'd have committed to a psychiatric hospital without second thought. If they mention "God" on the other hand (for whom the base of evidence is roughly the same), their beliefs have to be "respected".
Posted by: hyperdeath | April 29, 2008 10:22 AM
Is this another of those cultural differences between the US and Britain? Over here, shaking your head means no.
Posted by: Ross | April 29, 2008 10:22 AM
Besides the one above, obviously.
Posted by: Dennis N | April 29, 2008 10:23 AM
Same thing happened in Oregon. A 2 year old died of an easily treatable respiratory infection. The parents are being charged.
Their Death Cult is called the Followers of Christ. It is estimated that over the last 4 decades, they have killed 30 to 40 of their own kids. These groups aren't called death cults for nothing.
Never have heard of an estimate of the numbers of kids killed by faith healers per year in the USA. Could be in the hundreds easy.
Posted by: raven | April 29, 2008 10:24 AM
...while Dale Neumann "preferred to say that she was 'in sleep mode.' "
Cute. Well, Dale, I hope you will soon find yourself in "restricted freedom" mode.
Be sure to read the press release from the "ministry" they were connected with. It's a jaw-dropper, not least that they still think the girl may come back from the dead.
I can't write clearly on this subject: it reduces me to mostly incoherent rage.
Posted by: Moggie | April 29, 2008 10:25 AM
In addition to the combination of nausea and slack-jawed disbelief, I am inclined to wonder: During any time that these True Believers spend locked in a tiny box (perhaps Mr. Neumann can witness to his new roommate, "Bubba"), will their fellows regard them as political prisoners?
I suspect the answer is yes, and they will trumpet it among themselves as evidence of "persecution."
Personally, my gut instinct is that parents who murder their children ought to be persecuted at some length. Perhaps with a horse whip.
Posted by: Jeph | April 29, 2008 10:26 AM
aparently I was wrong about the children thing I was under the impression that the supreme court ruled on this in the nineties and held that children couldn't be only faith healed nevermind my above comments but they are still being charged apparently.
Posted by: drew | April 29, 2008 10:26 AM
#2 wrote: "Think of it as evolution in action."
Although #8 is correct, it was in poor taste, my objection is that, unfortunately, your statement is also incorrect:
"The Neumanns have three other children."
Since the same type of Christianity that relies on faith-healing is also notably anti-contraception/pro-large family, we cannot rely on evolutionary algorithms do get rid of such people.
We will have to change minds, because these bodies aren't going away any time soon.
Posted by: Jason Failes | April 29, 2008 10:30 AM
Slightly off-topic, tho this NPR story is about school curricula: 'Morning Edition' reporter Greg Allen gave almost four minutes of naive credulous coverage for the 'academic freedom' debate going on now in the Florida legislature, which aspires to mandate equal time for criticism of the theory of evolution. Allen cited the Discovery Institute and Ben Stein for support of such critical thinking.
There's no specific response link on the NPR story page, just the general NPR contact info. Some critical e-mail seems appropriate.
Posted by: thwaite | April 29, 2008 10:31 AM
@#15 Ross --
Over here, that's generally what is meant too if you just write "shook her head", but I have seen "shook her head yes" as a substitute for "nodded" occasionally. It's kind of bizarre though. Why use such a confusing phrase when you have the perfectly good word "nodded" at your disposal?
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 29, 2008 10:36 AM
Prayer: they're doing it wrong.
Obviously they were supposed to pray to god for the doctors to heal their child.
Posted by: Brodie | April 29, 2008 10:36 AM
How sad. This, right here, is what's so terribly wrong about these kinds preachers and the message of blind conviction they peddle. A century and a half ago, if your child developed diabetes you had no other option than to beg for them o be saved miraculously while you watched them slowly die. Then, through careful study and a factual understanding of biology, doctors found its cause was insulin deficiency, developed methods to reliably use the insulin of specific animals found to produce a similar variety as a substitute in humans, and every farm-steader in the midwest and factory worker could buy it for their children through a Sears-Roebuck catalogue. People declared it a godsend; a miracle, and without science, without a dispassionate, unbiased approach to the basic facts of life, it would never have been possible.
Now fanatics like this internet preacher are so afraid of losing ground to science, as if it were a competition to begin with, that they denounce and defame its products at every turn, going so far as to pressure their followers to let their children die rather than accept the simple, cheap, inconsequential aid necessary to save their lives. How many mothers and fathers have cried over their dead children throughout the millennia because of this disease? How does faith justify this cruel sacrifice, letting one's child needlessly die to bolster some pastor's message?
Posted by: Julian | April 29, 2008 10:36 AM
Jim RL writes:
That's in poor taste. The young girl that died didn't do anything to deserve idiot parents who would watch her slowly waste away. It's a tragic case of where beleiving in superstitions takes you.
The young girl didn't deserve anything - nobody does - but her parents did the equivalent of sawing off one of the branches of their genetic legacy while they were sitting on it.
All deaths are tragic, ultimately. And meaningless. Sorry you find reality in poor taste.
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | April 29, 2008 10:38 AM
I'd at first be tempted to convince them that treating physical ailments isn't contradictory with their belief that it was a 'spiritual attack', but these kinds of people are too far gone.
I'm sure we're going to get a few lurkers coming out and saying this a case of 'just a few bad seeds', and it's partially true, but I have a preemptive message for them:
The criminal negligence of the parents is appalling and extreme and (hopefully) rare, but the attitude that facilitated this wasn't just the clear lack of compassion, it was also the belief that spirituality trumps physical reality, and its this attitude that has led to so much ruin in people's lives.
I'm not trying to make a case for religions harm, since I know you find it disrespectful, but ask yourselves this: If your spiritual quest puts you at odds with the world around you, how do you expect to do good?
Posted by: Ryan F Stello | April 29, 2008 10:41 AM
From the OP:
Good. And I can only hope the death of their sister has at least taught them that what their parents were doing was *wrong*. Kids tend to naturally want to love their parents and believe that their parents will care for them. This natural desire allows abused and neglected kids to make up all sorts of excuses for their parents' behavior, and it's even worse when there's a built in religious justification for that abuse and neglect. The possibility that these kids could grow up thinking that their sister died because she wasn't faithful enough, or because they didn't pray hard enough, or because god decided it was "her time", or for any other reason than that their parents were neglectful, delusional, and unfit to have children is really saddening.
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 29, 2008 10:41 AM
Dennis N writes:
I'm gonna have a few pointed questions for the speaker (this charlatan). Anyone have any studies/examples that I can bring to give me for support (besides basic frickin' common sense)?
You can ask him about the effectiveness of the long-running British Experiement On Prayer. Namely, millions of brits praying "God Save The Queen" daily. You could note that god has not chosen to save any of the prior kings or queens, in spite of centuries of prayer. :)
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | April 29, 2008 10:42 AM
This reminds me of the story about a man trapped on a rooftop in a flood. A neighbor came by on a raft he had made and offered to rescue the man. "No," he said; "God will save me." Later, firemen in a rescue boat offered to take him. "No," he replied; "God will save me." Finally, a helicopter swung him a rope to climb aboard. Same answer.
Of course, the man ultimately drowned. When he approached St. Peter at the pearly gates, he cried, "Why didn't God save me?" St. Peter answered, "Well, He did send two boats and a helicopter."
Posted by: Olorin | April 29, 2008 10:42 AM
Wow.
Wow. Wow. Wow.
This kind of story makes me so very scared of the idea that Australia is turning into Mini'Merica (We haven't managed to outlaw Scamology. Bad sign I think.) Wasn't there some awesome study which found that prayer actually was consistent with increased fatalities, rather than helped people heal?
What makes me emotionally ambivalent and frustrated is the fact that these people will now believe that their daughter is happy and healthy and 'alive' in Heaven. :(
Posted by: Jex | April 29, 2008 10:45 AM
"Dale Neumann told investigators that "given the same set of circumstances with another child, he would not waiver in his faith and confidence in the healing power of prayer," according to the interview statement."
maybe he is setting up an insanity defense
Posted by: CleveDan | April 29, 2008 10:46 AM
From the link Moggie provided:
David Eells - 3/27/08
We at UBM would like to clear up some misconceptions from what we know, which is little.
No shit, Sherlock. If you actually did know something, your children wouldn't be dying.
Posted by: Dan | April 29, 2008 10:47 AM
<snarky>
I hope the parent's position is upheld. Really, I do. I hope the court comes right out and says that prayer is an allowable form of treatment.
Then, I hope on that very same day, the police arrest every single member and/or supporter of the Unleavened Bread Ministries on charges of manslaughter by depraved indifference. The Neumanns emailed the ministry for help in a life-or-death situation, but were obviously shunned. Because, after all, if prayer really, really works, then we can conclude that the members of U.B.M. didn't follow through. Had they prayed (and in earnest), the girl would've been walking around alive, chipper and happy this very day.
</snarky>
Posted by: Raynfala | April 29, 2008 10:47 AM
@ 18
That press release is terrifying. They actually compare themselves to doctors and then ask for the same respect that doctors get despite "medical mistakes" that kill "hundreds of thousands each year". GAH! First off, I'm almost certain it's not "hundreds of thousands" that die of medical mistakes. Certainly a lot of people die in hospitals. Multiple heart attacks, strokes, cancer, immune compromised patients, there's huge lists of things doctors have little ability to fix or deal with because the technology and research isn't done yet. Yet they still do what they can, and I'll be damned if "prayer" deserves even lip service as a method of healing stacked up beside real, evidence-based medicine.
Oh the Stupid, it burns bright and hot! Incoherent rage seems to be the only option when faced with such.
Posted by: Numerical Thief | April 29, 2008 10:48 AM
Ooops... I kind of borked the HTML tags in my previous comment. But, I think you can easily see where their madness ends and my anger begins.
Posted by: Dan | April 29, 2008 10:49 AM
MaqrMarcus Ranum:
It's true that it's "evolution in action" but so is anything that affects the number of times an organism (or its offspring, or even its relatives) reproduce and with whom. In other words, just about everything involving an organism is "evolution in action".
A better statement would be that it's natural selection in action. Even there, you're getting dangerously close to social darwinism. That these things happen in nature does not make them good.
I also seriously doubt that there is some genetic difference between Dale Neumann and you or me that makes him capable of this atrocity whereas we are not. What's more likely is that this is a behavior brought about by miseducation and indoctrination. That's no defense of his actions, but it means that evolution would be a very slow remedy.
Lastly, please note that he has three surviving children.
Posted by: mcow | April 29, 2008 10:49 AM
I may be wrong, but didn't the father contradict his "prayer healing" statement when he attempted CPR? CPR is a considered an emergency medical procedure.
Posted by: Kristy | April 29, 2008 10:53 AM
Now why does this article remind me of this one?
Posted by: Chris | April 29, 2008 10:56 AM
On the legal issue, their criminal culpability should be clear. As you say, if a neo-pagan Odin worshipper were to stake someone out on the sea shore in the "bloody eagle" they'd be arrested in a heart-beat. If a Muslim Shia community were to flagellate themselves and their children up and down the street most of the day as some do in other parts of the world on the anniversary of Ali's death, they'd be dragged in on charges of child abuse. Even the practice of animal sacrifice associated with Santeria is significantly curtailed in the United States on the grounds of public health. In fact, the Supreme Court stated clearly in Employment Division v. Smith (1990) that one's free exercise rights do not supersede government's legitimate right to enforce laws passed for the public good (in this case a drug ban, though to argue it can apply to that and not cover this would be the height of hypocrisy).
However, this is the United States, and majority European Christian sects that largely accept conventional protestant dogma get a pass. If these parents were of any other religion, they'd surely be facing jail time, at the very least, but because they're "Christian Scientists" who believe in faith healing, you can never be sure if a prosecution will succeed.
Posted by: Julian | April 29, 2008 10:57 AM
#34, Raynfala - and maybe some xtians could be charged with dooming me to hell seeing as how they didn't work hard enough to convert me? Or, we could string up our disabled on the grounds that Gawd didn't answer their prayers to be healthy, for some undeniably valid reason, presumably because they are bad and evil? All sorts of fun to be had if you accept the premise that prayer works. I had an xtian friend tell me, in not so many words, that my sister had lupus and had been raped (on her way home from school) because I was an athiest. Sick, Sick, Sick thinking.
Posted by: jex | April 29, 2008 10:59 AM
This is tragic but all too common.
I'm reminded of the man who was caught in a flood:
First the police told him to evacuate and he replied:"The Lord will save me."
Next a group in a boat came by and asked if he needed help and he replied:"The Lord will save me."
After climbing to his roof a helicopter came by and he replied:"The Lord will save me." He later died and when he met his maker he asked why did you not save me and God replied: " I sent the police to warn you, a boat to help you and a helicopter to pick you up what more did you want? "
It is very sad that some believe that the only way to have faith is to shun science and medicine.
Posted by: kingjoebob | April 29, 2008 11:00 AM
Actually this is true not just in Wisconsin, but in most states, 39 the last time I checked. I saw this story this morning before I left for work and was planning on writing about this case tonight for tomorrow. I was going to discuss some of the religious exemptions. (Plug, plug, even though PZ obviously beat me to this one...)
Posted by: Orac | April 29, 2008 11:00 AM
They actually linked to friendlyatheist.com. I can only hope people who know them go there and read it.
Posted by: Dennis N | April 29, 2008 11:01 AM
Wow, I missed this gem:
Posted by: Dennis N | April 29, 2008 11:03 AM
"There can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way it treats its children." -- Nelson Mandela
For "society" substitute sect. Any one will do.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9521945
Posted by: Kitty | April 29, 2008 11:04 AM
This is what "respecting other's beliefs" gets us. We (society) tried to stay out of it by saying "it's what they believe" - as though insanity is something that should be nurtured and protected. The result is that we have a child, needlessly dead, that could have been saved *easily* with modern medicine.
Respect your beliefs? No. Not anymore. Your beliefs are dangerous to yourselves, to your children, to the world, and I'll not have them any longer.
The most horrifying thing of all is that so many people will explain this away and keep on believing that magical fairies will take care of their every need.
Posted by: Steve | April 29, 2008 11:04 AM
God did hear the father's prayer -- he had Banting and Best discover insulin. It's a shame the father wasn't listening properly.
I don't understand fundies. They certainly don't think they can survive without food, even though it is produced through modern scientific methods. They don't refuse to live in houses heated and cooled through technology. Why would they view sickness as something different than hunger or shelter? Surely if one has faith that sickness will be cured, one should also have faith that hunger will be assuaged and that one will be impervious to cold and heat. Right?
Posted by: Tulse | April 29, 2008 11:05 AM
#43 Dennis N quoted --
Huh?
Can someone please explain how "common sense" tells us this?
*Science*, not *god* is why life spans have more than tripled since biblical times. (Oh wait...they actually believe people lived for 900+ years in Old Testament times...crap....)
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 29, 2008 11:08 AM
It's difficult to believe that other family members didn't turn them in to social services much sooner. A grandmother eventually did, but too late to help.
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/18336904.html
Posted by: Dan | April 29, 2008 11:11 AM
Indeed any calling of 911, CPR, or other non-acceptance of the death of their child is counter to their faith.
Kid dead - "God" must have willed it. That they did anything at all, even pray, would indicate a desire in contrast with their "God's plan".
So not only insane, stupid, and criminally negligent, but heretical as well.
Way to f#&$ up completely, Neumann family!
T
Posted by: Thomas J. Theobald | April 29, 2008 11:15 AM
Dunno, Marcus no 29. The last Queen did OK, reached 102 although that was often put down to the preservative powers of heroic quantites of gin. This one shows no signs of frailty despite topping 80.
Mind you, if your son and heir was a head-the-ball who talks to plants, who wished on an unencrypted cellphone he was a tampon and believes in every kind of woo-istic medicine going, you might be inclined to hang around for the sake of the crown, singing 'Gawd save yaw gray-shus me!' in the hope it works.
Posted by: Peter Mc | April 29, 2008 11:16 AM
Even within their own framework, I find it very selfish of them to deny her treatment. If I delusionally felt that treating my child and lacking faith would damn me, I would still do it; I would put my child first.
Posted by: Dennis N | April 29, 2008 11:17 AM
mcow, MaqrMarcus Ranum:
It's natural selection in action, combined with "nurture"al selection if you will. For humans rationality is an acquired trait, but a necessary one in the modern era. Human nurturing strategies that stunt rational development diminish the reproductive capacity of the group that practices them. Call that social darwinism if you must.
Posted by: House on Fire | April 29, 2008 11:18 AM
Does anyone else think it's about time some pro bono lawyer took these "religious freedom" child abuse protection laws to the Supreme Court? There must be someone willing to do it. I would, if I were a lawyer....
Seriously. If anyone knows of a good organization to contact about this, I might actually take some good ol' slacktivist action. Even if the case loses, it's important that this issue not be ignored.
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 29, 2008 11:19 AM
Fucking people, wtf. Pisses me off.
Posted by: andrew | April 29, 2008 11:20 AM
OH NOES!
Better call davescot and the marines.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | April 29, 2008 11:22 AM
If you are a competent adult, the medical professional has a duty to follow your wishes about care. Even if it means you die. Refuse a blood transfusion, surgery, chemo, rad, and I'll watch your over-21 body die. Fine.
Children have no such avenue. They are totally dependent upon adults to provide and the kids are very, very trusting. One could tell little girls that the only way to Heaven is through sex with pervy old men. The kids will believe this. We taught kindergarten students the proper way to wash hands is to wash for as long as it takes them to sing 'Happy Birthday'. All day long the kids washed hands while singing.
Posted by: Mold | April 29, 2008 11:25 AM
Perhaps Ben Stein simply forgot a word and meant to say "Christian Science leads to killing people."
Posted by: Tophe | April 29, 2008 11:26 AM
#28
I'm betting it will work the exact opposite. Both the children and parents will now believe even MORE strongly in what they did.
Killing the girl has put a roadblock in the path of seeing it any other way. To see prayer as useless, they also have to admit that their daughter/sister was essentially murdered by neglect. To avoid consciously realizing that, they'll do almost anything.
That's also what was behind the father saying he'd do it again the same way. To change his mind, he has to admit that he's done something wrong that would CAUSE him to change his mind.
After you've killed your daughter, you can either continue in this staunch faith mode, or resign yourself to extreme, corrosive lifelong guilt. Either way, you're screwed, but the lie lets you go on pretending -- lets you GO ON.
I used to wonder why the parents of kids killed in Iraq (or Vietnam) were such strong supporters of the war. I think it's this same reason.
They're frozen in place by the tsunami of guilt that will smash into them the second they admit they were anything but 100% right.
Posted by: Hank Fox | April 29, 2008 11:26 AM
@#5 Rev. BigDumbChimp --
Wow. That website is chock full of true crazy-people illogic, with gems like:
I honestly can say I'd never heard *that* particular "argument" before.
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 29, 2008 11:26 AM
The retribution theory of disease in action. Next they'll want it taught in schools ("Teach the Controversy"), and Ben Stein will be making a movie about how you get expelled from med school for even thinking that sin might be the cause of diabetes.
Thank FSM that the authorities are stepping it. Next time someone tells you that religious ignorance is bliss, remember to point out the cost of that ignorance.
Posted by: Physicalist | April 29, 2008 11:27 AM
I think 18 would be more reasonable than 21.
Posted by: Dennis N | April 29, 2008 11:27 AM
I take better care of my plants than these people did with their daughter. Maybe they are both dyslexic and think that it's the 12th century and not the 21st.
Posted by: Mena | April 29, 2008 11:28 AM
Screw dangerous -- what happened to not respecting beliefs purely on the basis that they're wrong?
Posted by: Andrew | April 29, 2008 11:29 AM
Wisconsin law, Section 948.04 (6) ...
I don't believe there is any such thing as ยง 948.04(6).
Posted by: illusory tenant | April 29, 2008 11:29 AM
@#2 "Think of it as evolution in action"
I can't. I seriously can't put it so coldly. A girl died. All that happened was that she was born to unfit parents... who should've been removed from the gene pool before they gave birth, true. But their innocent girl still died.
Too bad I'm against death penalty. Can't make exceptions, even for motherfuckers like these. They should forever rot in jail though. And be paraded around as monsters. Yea, make a circus out of them. Humiliate them. And anyone else who does this shit.
Posted by: Michelle | April 29, 2008 11:29 AM
@#59 Hank Fox --
Well, that was depressing.
But unfortunately probably true....
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 29, 2008 11:29 AM
(.)(.)
Posted by: wÒÓ† | April 29, 2008 11:30 AM
@Dennis #11,
Skeptico has covered many studies about how prayer doesnt work (just search for "prayer"). My personal favorite is the one done by the Templeton foundation that showed prayer does nothing. i like it because it was a pretty well controlled study, had lots of participants and was funded (to the tune of 2.4 million dollars) by a foundation that promotes spirituality.
Posted by: techskeptic | April 29, 2008 11:30 AM
Hank Fox @#59
Correct, you are basically describing cognitive dissonance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
Posted by: Jason Failes | April 29, 2008 11:31 AM
@ drew (#13, 20)
You may be thinking of 1944's Prince v Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in which the Supreme Court ruled that Jehovah's Witnesses have the right to sacrifice their lives for religious reasons, they do not have the right to sacrifice the lives of their children for those same reasons.
The right to practice religion freely does not include liberty to expose the community or the child to communicable disease or the latter to ill health or death [. . .] Parents may be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow they are free, in identical circumstances, to make martyrs of their children before they have reached the age of full and legal discretion when they can make that choice for themselves.
Also, in 1990, the Supreme Court ruled (in the Nancy Cruzan case) that a competent adult can refuse life-saving treatment. The Cruzan decision doesn't say anything about children specifically, although if I recall correctly, it does address some questions about patients who have become legally incompetent.
Posted by: SteveWH | April 29, 2008 11:31 AM
Funny. Prayer never worked for me, either, when a life was at stake. More than coincidence?
Posted by: Kseniya | April 29, 2008 11:33 AM
@ #31
The study found prayer only had effect if the recipient knew of the prayer and that lead to an increase in complications and fatalities.
I blogged about this family a few weeks ago at that time the police were not going to take the other children out of their custody because they couldn't see any evidence of abuse. A child is effectively starved to death and they cannot see any evidence of abuse. This country and everyone in it needs to remove their god goggles and recognize the shielding and enablement they provide to nuts like these.
Posted by: locksmyth | April 29, 2008 11:33 AM
This kind of denial leads to deaths just so that people don't have to face the truth.
Posted by: Ryan | April 29, 2008 11:35 AM
@ #60
Come on down today to Nanny Ogg and Granny Weatherwax's Wonderful World of Witchcraft for all your Cancer, AIDS, and Diabetes needs!
Actually, I think Esme would just hit you with a stick and tell you to go to the doctor...
Posted by: Numerical Thief | April 29, 2008 11:36 AM
But my god goggles give me the special ability to block out transitional forms!
Posted by: Dennis N | April 29, 2008 11:39 AM
Oh, come on, PZ. It was her time. If they'd treated her diabetes, she would've just gotten hit by a car instead or something, and you can't disprove that.
Posted by: M. Robert Bond | April 29, 2008 11:41 AM
So this fuckwit wants to compare his "prayer-healing" with modern medicine? Easy for him since he has no liability. If he wants to play this game he should be liable then. His malpractice insurance would be astronomical. Note: I noticed his web page took much care to separate himself from the couple in question. Fuckin' coward.
Since medical doctors are required to carry insurance, this should be the case with all these other charlatans.
Posted by: eewolf | April 29, 2008 11:41 AM
Murder by any other name is still murder: "To kill intentionally with premeditation."
Period.
I hold no sympathy nor empathy for the parents of this child.
They murdered their daughter.
The charges they are facing in the State of Wisconsin are the least that they should be charged with.
These parents are not mentally ill. I am sick and tired of excuses for actions taken based upon "religion." Religiosity is not a mental illness. It is a choice.
These parents murdered their daughter.
They murdered their daughter willfully and intentionally.
Posted by: leeleeone | April 29, 2008 11:43 AM
Would someone please explain a point of American law to me?
Is this sort of thing a crime covered under State or Federal law?
Could this be a criminal act in one State but not another?
Posted by: Kitty | April 29, 2008 11:44 AM
@ #5 - I'm waiting for, "They're not *TRUE Christians!" Ugh. Can't we come up with a test people have to take before they can become parents. And I'd trust Granny Weatherwax loooong before I'd trust that bunch of loons.
Posted by: Bryn | April 29, 2008 11:46 AM