(January 28, 2015 at 1:25 pm)Lek Wrote: I don't speak for all christians. My opinions are my own. I agree that every situation should be considered according to its own circumstances. I've often contemplated what I would do if I had cancer or something and were faced with a similar decision. Of course, I would have to decide according to how God was leading me, but my own desires would be to discontinue the treatment.

And you would be entirely empowered to discontinue treatment for yourself, as a mature adult who is fully cognizant of the risks and consequences of doing so. But the child we were discussing was none of those things; when you talk about how we want to preserve life no matter what, you're not really taking into account the fact that we were talking about an individual case for which there isn't even really an argument to be made for not preserving the child's life: she wanted to live, there was no possibility of discontinuing treatment, in reality what they were trying to discontinue was pain, and I get why that would be, but it still doesn't change the fact that, unfortunately, the pain is inextricably linked to the treatment that would actually have worked. If anything, both the child and the parents fell for the fallacious idea that all treatments are equal, and went for the one that claims to be able to do the same thing as the chemo, but without the pain involved.

That's what- at least my- position is about: these parents made a choice that was objectively wrong, and as a consequence their child died. This isn't some hindsight thing, where it was only wrong in retrospect: no, this was easily verifiable before treating their child, so either they didn't do any research beforehand and their ignorance isn't forgivable, or they just didn't care about verifiable facts because Jesus, and I'm not going to give anyone a free pass on that score either. Based on all the facts, and not faith, what these people did was unequivocally the wrong thing to do, and that knowledge was easily obtainable before they committed themselves down a path that led to the death of a child. This is, quite simply, an avoidable waste of life, whether you think the kid's in heaven or not, surely she could have lived her life and then gone to heaven, rather than missing out on all the things an earthbound life could provide.

OK Lek, I'm going to try and put this as simply as I can for you, our position in summary is this:

The girl had cancer. With chemo, there is a 75% survival rate. Parents take her off of this and move her onto woo 'treatment' simply because she wanted to. Our position is that the parents shouldn't have done what the girl wanted, they should act in the best interest of the child as the child cannot yet make important decisions for themselves. It is totally irrelevant that she died of a stroke. The point is that children can't make decisions for themseleves and so parents have to and that the decision made by the parents was the wrong one.

(January 28, 2015 at 1:25 pm)Lek Wrote: I don't speak for all christians. My opinions are my own. I agree that every situation should be considered according to its own circumstances. I've often contemplated what I would do if I had cancer or something and were faced with a similar decision. Of course, I would have to decide according to how God was leading me, but my own desires would be to discontinue the treatment.

God gave you cancer. Not hard to see where it's leading you.

I guess it's god's idea of a "hint".

(January 29, 2015 at 7:38 am)h4ym4n Wrote:

(January 28, 2015 at 1:25 pm)Lek Wrote: I don't speak for all christians. My opinions are my own. I agree that every situation should be considered according to its own circumstances. I've often contemplated what I would do if I had cancer or something and were faced with a similar decision. Of course, I would have to decide according to how God was leading me, but my own desires would be to discontinue the treatment.

God gave you cancer. Not hard to see where it's leading you.

All aboard the god train first stop purgatory to pick up some souls then straight to heaven.

(January 28, 2015 at 1:25 pm)Lek Wrote:

(January 28, 2015 at 1:10 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: That was a good try, and you captured some of it. You left out our responsibility to give children their best chance in life, taking into account the probabilities, and a child's rights versus an adult's rights and responsibilities.

If the girl only had a 10% chance of surviving the chemo, I would feel very differently about this scenario. That we will 'go through whatever it takes' isn't very fair, it does depend on what it takes, and what the likely outcomes are.

Believing that an adult has the right to discontinue treatment even if the odds are in their favor, while a child's parents or guardians should listen to doctors and not throw away a good chance of survival and recovery for their child, is not an inconsistent position. It's not even an unChristian one.

I don't speak for all christians. My opinions are my own. I agree that every situation should be considered according to its own circumstances. I've often contemplated what I would do if I had cancer or something and were faced with a similar decision. Of course, I would have to decide according to how God was leading me, but my own desires would be to discontinue the treatment.

Well. at least you recognize that your opinions are NOT shared by all christians. I suspect they are not even shared by most.

So far, I've discussed this case with 23 christians who are family members or friends or co-workers of mine. Every single one of them agreed with the majority of us here on this forum -- that the parents are stupid and failed in their duty to take advantage of the best medical care that would likely have saved their daughter.

In full disclosure, however, I must admit that all the christians in my circle are rather mainstream. They are mostly sensible (aside from their belief in what I consider superstitious nonsense). I don't associate with fundigelicals.

That's why I was wishing for an Episcopelian, Thackerie. Or maybe a Methodist. I guess I get why we get the evangelicals, but sometimes I wish mainstream Christianity had some representation here.

(January 29, 2015 at 11:31 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: That's why I was wishing for an Episcopelian, Thackerie. Or maybe a Methodist. I guess I get why we get the evangelicals, but sometimes I wish mainstream Christianity had some representation here.

Moderates are just as bad as the evangelicals.

(January 29, 2015 at 11:31 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: That's why I was wishing for an Episcopelian, Thackerie. Or maybe a Methodist. I guess I get why we get the evangelicals, but sometimes I wish mainstream Christianity had some representation here.

What is it that you think separates "mainstream" christianity from evangelical christianity?

They ignore the bible.