An 11-year old girl died on Sunday after her parents chose to pray for her health rather than take her to a doctor.
This sort of thing, while by no means an every day occurrence, is frighteningly common, and frighteningly legal. 44 states have inserted an exemption clause into their neglect and abuse laws to protect the rights or parents to seek out alternative spiritual help rather than medical attention.
Now, if a child died because their parents were neglectful drug addicts, it would be criminal neglect. Their other children would likely be removed from the home and placed in protective custody. In cases like these, however, it is a matter of faith, and in most cases the parents will not be prosecuted.
Each and every one of these laws ought to be repealed immediately, and parents who let their child die because they refused medical treatment for their children for any reason ought to be in jail.
- Registered User
Member for 17 years, 8 months, and 24 days
Last active Sun, Dec, 10 2017 17:56:58
- 0 Followers
- 3,113 Total Posts
- 0 Thanks
Mar 26, 2008There are certain interesting differences in the neurophysiology of gay men and straight men (I don't know how great the differences are in lesbians, though I imagine they are similar); to what extent these differences are innate is questionable, since the brain does change throughout one's lifetime, but the differences are there, and cast significant doubt on the "choice" hypothesis. There are a number of other physical differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals, for instance, a lesbian's forefinger and ring finger are more likely to be of equal length than the forefinger and ring finger of a heterosexual woman.Posted in: Retired Clan Threads
So it's an interesting topic.
Oct 14, 2007The concept that there are certain things which under no circumstances can ever make one happy is absurd. Each individual is different, and finds happiness and comfort in different things. Blanket assertions are meaningless.Posted in: Talk and Entertainment
Oct 12, 2007Posted in: Retired Clan ThreadsQuote from blue »Well now really. You've been sleeping together without sex for ages now. I asked you if you'd be doing anything and you said no a long time ago. But come on, we've thought you'd be doing stuff with him eventually anyways right? Does he still weigh like 95 pounds?
He weighs 89 pounds now, as it ends up. At the time, I honestly didn't expect that anything would happen with him. I mean, yeah, we've shared a bed thousands of times, but never in a sexual way until recently. I don't know what exactly changed.
Oct 11, 2007Posted in: Retired Clan ThreadsQuote from Mamelon »Is that something you're looking for?
It certainly isn't something I avoid.
I've seen it happen before, but if it's frequent I wonder if it's really experimentation.
What counts as frequent?
I have a hard time believing that sex is ever completely meaningless.
I think it's possible, if rare.
Even if neither you nor he feels an emotional attachment because of it, the mere fact that you would be doing it is a complication in itself upon your existing relationships.
Yes, and it's already started, albeit to a very small extent. Time alone has become awkward.
I guess the question would be: what would you expect out of it? If it's supposed to be casual and not mean anything, then I doubt the the potential stress of the situation would be worth it.
It's really good sex.
Oct 11, 2007In regards to the back story: He's a very good friend of mine, whom I've known for years. Very goth, very skinny. (Remember him, Micah?) Also, he's, um, huge. It's just been an occasional thing, and he still claims to be straight. (He has his belly-button pierced, but he's adamant about his hetero-hood.)Posted in: Retired Clan Threads
Anyway my only concern is that it will quickly become ridiculously complicated, since we're such good friends, and since he kind of has a girlfriend. It's totally casual and meaningless, but these things have a way of becoming stupid very quickly.
Oct 11, 2007The film is largely worthless. There is not a single original idea presented. (Much of it is actually lifted from other films.) If you're interested in what was said in part 1, see The God Who Wasn't There; if you want to see Part 2, watch Loose Change; and if you liked the bit about the money supply, check out America: Freedom to Fascism.Posted in: Entertainment Archive
Like the films it plagiarizes, it presents an abominable amount of falsehoods, non sequitur arguments, and general asshattery.
Oct 10, 2007I smoke somewhere around three packs of Marlboro's a day, with a pack of Cloves or Luckies thrown in for good measure every now and again. I very much enjoy it, despite the health risks. They're delicious, and they calm my fluttering nerves.Posted in: Talk and Entertainment
Oct 5, 2007Posted in: DebateQuote from Trinsie »Also I found on the internet literally handfuls of court cases in which people were tried for tax evasion and they won because they asked the IRS to provide the written law in which states they have to pay the tax. When the IRS could not provide such a written law they were let go.
From the Wiki:
Some tax protesters argue that the Internal Revenue Service refuses to disclose the laws that impose the legal obligation to file Federal income tax returns or pay Federal income taxes -- and conclude that there must be no law imposing Federal income taxes.
The official Internal Revenue Service web site contains references to specific code sections and case law, including 26 U.S.C. § 6011 (duty to file returns in general); 26 U.S.C. § 6012 (duty to file income tax returns in particular); and 26 U.S.C. § 6151 (duty to pay tax at time return is required to be filed) and 26 U.S.C. § 61 (definition of gross income) and 26 U.S.C. § 6072 (timing of duty to file).
The year 2006 instruction book for Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, on page 80, contains references to 26 U.S.C. § 6001 (relating to record keeping); 26 U.S.C. § 6011 (general filing requirement); 26 U.S.C. § 6012(a) (specific income tax return filing requirement); and 26 U.S.C. § 6109 (duty to supply identification numbers). The IRS web site includes a section on tax protester arguments with citations to statutes (including the 26 U.S.C. § 6151 duty to pay the tax) and court decisions and a 64-page downloadable PDF version of the data, entitled The Truth About Frivolous Tax Arguments and a page with a link to the entire Internal Revenue Code as published by the Legal Information Institute at Cornell University Law School.
Sep 30, 2007T2 posted a message on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visits Columbia University, makes ass of selfPosted in: Talk and EntertainmentQuote from LotaShame on Colombia for their conduct toward Ahmadinejad. I found the introduction of Colombia's President to be tactless and barbaric.
Well, he could hardly go about pretending that Ahmadinejad is a nice fellow who should be shown the highest level of respect. He was, perhaps, a little harsh, but to ignore the issues he mentioned would have been worse.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.