Are you serious?
Where do you think the crackpot beliefs came from? You surely don't think they made them up themselves? Just because there isn't a church involved - either a building or a recognised branch of christianity - doesn't mean that religion gets off scot free!
You have to accept that someone, at some point, told these parents what they should believe in respect of care for their daughter. It might have been a face-to-face discussion, they might have been in the audience at some evangelical hoe-down, they might have read it in a book published by the Christian Scientists, there are all sorts of options. They did not make it up for themselves.What I would not do is use the situation as a flimsy excuse to blame the University who gave the pharmacist his/her degree. I would not further assert that we must close down all Universities because we can no longer sit back and let these rich and powerful institutions train pharmacists, when we know some of them might give out the wrong advice and cause people harm.
Adults must take responsibility for their own actions. It would appear it is you who wants to abrogate people from their personal responsibility as soon as religion is involved, when I doubt you would ever dream of doing so under other circumstances.
But even more importantly, you seem to want to separate 'religion' and give it some sort of isolated status, cut off from the beliefs of the religious. These people are just as religious as the Pope and his immediate colleagues or the Archbishop of Canterbury; whether they follow exactly the teachings of any particular and specific sect is irrelevant - it is the religious beliefs they had that killed their daughter.
Nope - but you can google 'constellation' or try Wikipedia. This is something I know from my own - um - reading and learning over my lifetime.
I can tell you that if you look at the constellation of, e.g., Sagittarius, then the stars Kaus Media, Kaus Australis, Ascella, and Kaus Borealis actually have no special spatial relation to each other.
The first is 306 light years from earth, the second is 144 light years from earth, the third is 90 light years away, and the last is 77 light years distant. The apparent relationship between them is solely a function of them being roughly in the same direction as we look up from our planet. The same is true for the minor stars of the constellation.
When Mars trundles 'through' Sagittarius, it is of course only a few light minutes from earth, and so its relationship to the stars of the constellation is about as significant as the relationship of a bus to the trees in front of which it passes.
The constellations do not really look like the things they are named after - if you look at the night sky, you can't see a centaur shooting a bow; in fact the main stars of Sagittarius are called the teapot because that's as good an approximation to the shape they take up as anything else.
Astrology, whilst it may be fun, is just invention piled on invention piled on invention. When new planets were discovered, they were incorporated into astrology as if it hadn't been proceeding in blissful ignorance - and claiming accuracy into the bargain - of those planets for centuries. As a means of obtaining information about the life we lead or the people we encounter, or even about ourselves, it's no better than numerology or graphology.
It is their failure to phone doctor that killed their daughter.
You would also have to accept that at some point these parents have been told that a doctor is the person to phone when illness strikes. They chose to ignore that. Perhaps we should blame the medical profession for not making this clear enough
Last edited by Isis; 27th-March-2008 at 11:01 PM.
If only that were true :- why did Gordon Brown offer a free vote on stem cell research and the like recently? Why was their a religious hatred bill going through parliament? Why is there a "religion" question on the census? why did some cartoons cause rioting and death? why did some young men carry explosives onto tube trains and a bus in london? why is the Archbishop of Canterbury in the media with his latest stupid comment? etc..etc...
tell me religion will never affect your life if you are not religious with a straight face
not that either i, or i think Barry, detest religion. Thats your extreme reaction to criticism of it for some reason.
Yes, they DO participate in aspects of a religion i.e. praying, and praying as a solution to ill health-and that is the issue - there daughter died because of it. Its their religious beliefs that caused their daughters death, I'm sure they are perfectly aware of doctors but they thought prayer was better...
I don't think the phone can be blamed for her death...perhaps their reliance on the power of prayer has a look-in though
Perhaps, perhaps not - we can be sure they were told the power of prayer would heal though, thats what they used. It didn't work.You would also have to accept that at some point these parents have been told that a doctor is the person to phone when illness strikes.
Perhaps we should blame the medical profession for not making this clear enough
Wouldn't it make more sense to criticise the BAD advice on the power of prayer that caused the death rather than any GOOD advice about going to a Doctor?
I didn't say it would never affect your life, I just don't see why it affects Barry's life so badly.
I went through my angry phase with religion in my late teens / early twenties and so decided to chuck it, as do a lot of people who are brought up in an organised religion. Those days are now a dim and distant memory. I can't imagine why anyone would still be spitting nails over the subject on a regular basis when they're pushing 50, instead of just letting go and moving on.
Occassionally it does affect my life now, like when I send my child to a non-denominational school only to find it's a Church of Scotland school in disguise, but it's not the end of the world.
Some people objected to nuclear weapons, others didn't. Some people objected to the poll tax, others didn't. Some people objected to cruise missiles at Greenham Common, others didn't. What's objectionable about the fact that I feel more strongly about the damage caused by religion than you do?
You will have - I suspect - noticed that I also fulminate against ridiculous claims of all supernatural types - homeopathy to spiritualism, and beyond! And because they are ridiculous, I ridicule them. Some people slag me off (hey, Rocky! how's it hangin'?) others PM me and say 'I'd say that if I didn't know I'll get flamed for saying it'.
I missed that
I don't have enough time to read, consider and post - so i do the post bit and pay lip service to the other twoI'm just reading what the guy posts, unlike you obviously.
"your" is a general term for everyone including Barry. So what you're saying is "I didn't say it would never affect your life, I just don't see why it affects your life so badly". Which is confusing to say the least. Of course if you want the specific WHY, then ask him, or check he hasn't told you already
Clearly there are emotions involved - I'm not an automaton - but that isn't 'emotion' as in 'you're being emotional about this'.
No energy wasted.
No hypertension - blood pressure on the low side, last time I was tested.
Don't agree that I can't change things. A single post might make one person examine something which previously they had taken for granted. That's a change.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks