Topic: Hypothetical situation: a child dies because its parents refuse to allow a blood transfusion

Anonymous A started this discussion 10 years ago #51,474

...the parents are then charged with negligent homicide, despite claiming that their religion forbids transfusions. Assuming this occurs in the United States, isn't this a violation of the First Amendment?

Sheila LaBoof joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 38 minutes later[^] [v] #667,242

doens' tmatter

Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 3 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #667,261

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 9 hours later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #667,360

@previous (C)
Why not?

Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #667,400

@previous (A)
Google it

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 8 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,450

@previous (D)
I already did. No clear precedent has been established in this particular scenario.

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,455

@OP
The USAmerican Constitution is a fairytale for stupid people, as is religion. Thanks.

Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 37 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,462

@667,450 (A)
Then you have your answer, why ask the question here, idiot?

Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 19 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,463

Why are the responses to this question so emotional?

Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 32 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,464

@previous (G)
Minichanners are not robots. We are human beings with feelings.

Kommo Olm replied with this 10 years ago, 21 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,465

@previous (H)
O thonk ot os.

FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,476

Not if OP was the child.

Lt Dan joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 31 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,491

I'll take 'Satan wanted that child dead' for 800, Alex.

Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,518

It's still murder, Fatt Fuck, it just shows that their religion condones murder.

Lt. Judy Hopps joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 23 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,534

@667,491 (Lt Dan)

> I'll take 'Satan wanted that child dead' for 800, Alex.

Same

Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,585

They were allowed to exercise their religion by letting the child die even though it violated a civil law and its not preventing them from following a religion by punishing them for violating a law of the land

Anonymous G replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,620

@667,464 (H)
@previous (M)
O this has happened recently?

Anonymous H replied with this 10 years ago, 25 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,621

@previous (G)
No. We were always human.

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,644

@667,462 (F)
Because there's no answer on Google.

Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 22 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #667,647

It would depend on your reading of the first amendment. It prohibits Congress from making any laws regarding the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof. It doesn't really define what entails negligent homicide.

I'm pretty sure that if you had some weird religion that required you to strap a bomb to yourself and then blow yourself up in Times Square, killing a hundred people, that might be considered illegal. Killing people or neglectfully killing children is still illegal even if your religion thinks it's cool. It's not like just anything goes. (You're certainly free to believe it's cool though)

(Edited 3 minutes later.)

Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 5 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #667,704

@previous (N)
Interesting answer.