RoR: Forum

Post 0

Thursday, March 27 - 4:05am

Link

Edit

And now for the bad news: These people will actually receive sympathy for the loss they caused themselves.

The poor girl never had a chance. They might as well have starved her to death under the pretense of "faith." Why shouldn't they think God fills the belly too?

There has got to be a point where stupidity is criminal, and this has got to be it.

Post 1

Thursday, March 27 - 4:31am

Link

Edit

A case could be made for negligent manslaughter.

Bob Kolker

Post 2

Thursday, March 27 - 7:44am

Link

Edit

Another of millions of graphic examples of the evils of "faith."

Post 3

Thursday, March 27 - 10:57am

Link

Edit

The laws for this vary from state to state. Wisconsin law grants an exemption for faith based healing like this (thanks to the lobbying efforts of Christian Scientists), and this incident has prompted an outcry to have that law reworked. I just got an email from a local freethought group last night to this effect.

A similar case happened in Seattle a little while back when a 13 year old Jehovah's Witness boy refused a blood transfusion and died. The question there was at which age can a child be thought to be making its own decision about such matters, and at which age are they clearly just brainwashed and under the influence of parents. Tricky issue.

Post 4

Friday, March 28 - 7:16am

Link

Edit

Reply to post 2.

Ed Hudgins writes:

Another of millions of graphic examples of the evils of "faith."

I reply:

Do you believe that the laws of physics are the same everywhere? Have you been everywhere to find out? If you believe that the laws of physics are the same everywhere then you are practicing a kind of faith. A reasonable faith, not contradicted empirically, but faith never the less.

Whatever you believe to be the case and have not experienced first hand is a manifestation of faith. Not the same sort of faith that leads Catholics to eat wafers and drink wine and think they are cannibals, but faith never the less.

Bob Kolker

Post 5

Friday, March 28 - 7:34am

Link

Edit

Bob Kolker wrote:

Do you believe that the laws of physics are the same everywhere? Have you been everywhere to find out? If you believe that the laws of physics are the same everywhere then you are practicing a kind of faith. A reasonable faith, not contradicted empirically, but faith never the less.

Whatever you believe to be the case and have not experienced first hand is a manifestation of faith. Not the same sort of faith that leads Catholics to eat wafers and drink wine and think they are cannibals, but faith never the less.

There is a big difference between (ordinary) confidence and faith. The latter allows for the supernatural and/or miracles; the former doesn't. The former has an empirical ground; the latter doesn't require it

Post 6

Friday, March 28 - 7:35am

Link

Edit

Do you believe that the laws of physics are the same everywhere? Have you been everywhere to find out? If you believe that the laws of physics are the same everywhere then you are practicing a kind of faith. A reasonable faith, not contradicted empirically, but faith never the less.

No - not faith, but recognition of the law of identity....

Post 7

Friday, March 28 - 3:14pm

Link

Edit

You don't know what something you have never encountered IS. You won't know what it IS, till you encounter it. The supposition that the Universe Way Out There is just like it is Here is a supposition, not a directly known thing. Faith at work. Reasonable faith, but faith never the less.

Bob Kolker

Post 8

Friday, March 28 - 3:16pm

Link

Edit

Reply to post 5.

You said the magic word "empirical".

The difference between reasonable faith and the other kind is that reasonable faith can be tested against fact.

Bob Kolker

Post 9

Sunday, March 30 - 10:52pm

Link

Edit

I think a point is being missed here. My understanding of the Bible is that God did say that he will not provide directly to man anymore after he lead the people of Israel to the promised land. That he would do his work through vessels. He doesn't heal the sick, quench the thirsty, or feed the hungry, and he doesn't speak directly to man either. He allows man to do for himself. Someone let me know if I am wrong about this.
If people would just read those books they believe in so much, they may gain a better understand of the religeons they claim. This doesn't just count for Christians. Muslims, Jews, Mormans, and all other religeons also.
I am an Atheist, and I have a better understanding of the Bible than any christian I have ever met. I am now working on reading the qu`ran.