Parent or Felon

May 21, 2009 by admncc

I don’t know how many of you have been following the story of Colleen and Daniel Hauser…

Colleen is Daniel’s mother.  Daniel is a 13-year-old Minnesota boy who, according to reports, has a treatable form of Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Anyway, because Colleen sides with a religious group called the Nemenhah Band, who believes in natural healing methods, the two have fled following a court ordered doctor’s appointment and X-ray of the boy’s tumor.  They are trying to avoid court ordered chemotherapy.  The mother has since been placed in contempt of court and an arrest warrant was issued for “deprivation of parental rights.”

This entire situation is difficult for me to accept, and frankly, it has nothing to do with religion.  It’s about being a parent…

When I’m discussing news stories, I always do a lot of research beforehand.  It’s interesting.  I found stories and blogs suggesting that Colleen was everything from a hero to a disgrace.  But many clung onto the fact that she was just a mother.  That’s my point exactly – although I’ll bet in a slightly different light.

I’m not debating religious beliefs.  What I am saying is that if you’re a parent and your child has cancer, you need to be listening to what the doctors are saying.  It’s not an automatic death sentence like it used to be.  Oh, and regarding the religious argument, how many people from around the world, regardless of sex, race and religion, fly into to be treated at the Cleveland Clinic every year?  But yet, this woman runs from the police and the court?

Strangely, the boy is in full support of his mother’s actions.  He had recently told a judge that he would he “fight” and “punch” anyone who tried to force him to attend chemotherapy treatments.  Why?

Running from a court order is not the answer.  Some may say that the court shouldn’t have gotten involved, but we know that’s going to happen when medical treatment, parental rights and watchdog groups are involved.  My point is that the mother should realize that conventional medicine could possibly cure her son.  All she has done now is ensured herself a ticket to prison, ensure that her son will be placed under foster care and possibly put her son’s health in further danger.  I question how any parent could do that…

All Posts / Family/Lifestyle / Law and Order / Medicine / Parenting / Religion Bad Parents / Cancer / Colleen / Daniel Hauser / Hauser / Hodgkin’s lymphoma / Natural Healing Methods / Parenting / Parenting Skills /


  1. You touch on a very sensitive subject matter. I am following the story. What I am unable to accept, is that her religious beliefs are stronger than scientific evidence. The mother, at a minimum, should have sought a 2nd, 3rd and even 4th opinion before she came to a final decision. In my opinion, a good decision is weighed several times and with several opinions. Whether its her religious beliefs or a past experience, something has a hold of her that she is unable to see past. I do hope that child gets to live the life he’s intended and can appreciate his mother’s passion and understand her religious beliefs, and not become a victim of them. The father knows where the wife and child are, he has an obligation to step forward for the life of his child.

  2. Tristan says:

    Time to shock everyone–I disagree.

    The mother and her son have the right granted by the 1st Amendment to practice their religion freely. Forcing treatment on this boy is a violation of that right and is therefore criminal. I think these people are crazy, but just as crazy as anyone who would violate the liberty of these two “for their own good”.

    Court ordered chemotherapy is more disgusting than questionable parenting. If they believe that God will heal him, let God heal him. It is absolutely none of our business and this sort of thing is probably the greatest reason why we left England in the first place.

    You may be a good parent, but that doesn’t mean there’s only one way to do it. This is absolutely a religious debate and nothing more.

  3. Dan says:

    Something tells me that Tristan wouldn’t be so quick to come to that conclusion if it was his family. It is easy to debate morals and religion when you’re an observer. This lady should be locked up. Get the kid some chemotherapy

  4. Chris says:

    Hmmmm. Very sensitive topic I think. I guess every adult has the right to refuse treatment if they so wish … but I think children should be given every chance to live on. I think children don’t really understand and comprehend all of their options (I guess some could argue most adults are the same) so children, at least with medical issues, should be given the best, most effective (proven) treatments available so that they can live to be an adult. Then they can choose what to do from there.

  5. NeoConDon says:

    I’m not sure that this mother has the constitutional right to deny treatment unless it is determined that treatment will prolong the agony. Parents have an obligation to do all that is in their power to protect their children until they are old enough to make decisions for themselves. If the child accidentially cut his hand off and bled to death because the mother refused treatment and believed God would save him, is she a criminal? I think so. Otherwise, any form of abuse could be considered okay under the guise of religion. If a muslim stones his wife in public for adultery, is that man a criminal even though his sharia law calls for such a punishment? I think so.

    But, if the court is going to make a determination of a person’s quality of life and the health care associated with it, then it must recognize a fetus with a beating heart as a human being that deserves the opportunity to become a majority age before he can decide if he wants to be aborted…clearly, the mother does not have the authority to make the choice of murdering her child.

  6. This is a very grey area. I have not been following the story and do not know what alternative treatments are available. She may be counting on the power of prayer or a miracle which is her prerogative and it seems that she was within the law with her decision but apparently the courts decided otherwise.

  7. As the parent of an autistic child, I have basically pissed everyone off from my local school system to the state to the insurance companies to get my child what he needs so that he can be a productive, tax-paying, self sufficient member of society. I also have friends with children with Down’s Syndrome, Cerebal Palsy and Leukemia. Every single one of them have fought hard to get their children what they need. Apparently the above child is still not able to read, has a learning disability and has been completely not educated in the reality that is called life. Going through radiation and chemotherapy is hard. I’ve seen it and helped children through it. But the end result is that they are alive. The mother needs a reality headsmack.

  8. Tristan says:

    I don’t understand why vigor is such an unbelievable concept. Contrary to what we’ve become accustomed to seeing, which is now to the point where we don’t even blink at hypocrisy, my opinions don’t flap in the breeze. Therefore, I would not feel differently if I had a sibling of “differing views” with a dying child. I would certainly talk to both of them and try as best I could to convince them to change their minds, but I would not disrespect them and try to force treatment through the nanny state.

    I’m not the spiritual healing type, but the mind is capable of incredible things and miracles do happen. One miracle I’m hoping to see is that people wake up from the trance of deciding what is best for other people.

    Don, thank you for pointing out the obvious with regards to the unborn, as if withholding treatment for an illness due to religious beliefs is somehow unthinkable while killing a fetus because you don’t want it is your decision as a parent. The reason I don’t agree with your analogy to bleeding to death is because we’re not talking about an imminent threat to life. If it is illegal to opt out of a treatment, particularly when the disease is slow to act and treatable even at advanced stages, it must also be illegal to give your child too much fast food or ignore emotional needs or just be a crappy parent. It must be illegal to make your child fat, stupid, ugly, or just a poor fit in our society.

    Part of life’s lottery is who you get as parents. That’s the way it is. We can’t fix that for everyone just like we can’t fix whether you’re born rich or poor or dumb or ugly. What we can do is respect that “all men are created equal” and realize that we do not decide the purpose of life for anyone else. Is a smart person better than a dumb person? No. Am I better than someone willing to die for what they believe because I know something they don’t? No. Actually, I’d say it’s a pretty noble way to go, certainly superior to our commonly accepted philosophy of “he who dies with the most toys wins.” I’d rather die a noble fool than live a life of 100 years without purpose.

  9. NeoConDon says:


    Knowing that there are others in this country who (for the most part) think the same way I do makes me feel great.

    If the ignorant in America continue to turn to the gov’t instead of themselves for solutions, it will soon be illegal to give your kids too much fast food, etc.

  10. c.princess says:

    There is another similar story I remember. In 2005 S. Abraham Cherrix was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s disease and refused chemo. The family opted for a natural treatment called the Hoxsey method available in Mexico. His parents were charged with neglect and social services wanted custody of the son and took them to court. The parents lost but then I believe the decision was overturned on an appeal.
    In 2006 Virginia got a law passed called “Abraham’s Law.” It went into effect in 2007- it allows parents to refuse medical treatment under some conditions without facing neglect charges. Many people are against it.

    Next month S. Abraham Cherrix turns a healthy 19.

    I believe doctors were put on this earth for a reason and I believe doctors are in a way second to God but it’s just unfortunate some actually believe they are God by leading patients to believe their words are set in stone. CC writes: you need to be listening to what the doctors are saying. Yes I agree and if a patient is willing to listen than a doctor should be willing to listen to their patient and keep an open mind. Many doctors refuse to consider the thought of alternative medicine because they believe in science and if the alternative medicine works it would shatter their ego to be proven wrong.

    Part of any healing process involves having a good mental attitude and outlook. What Tristan wrote
    “If they believe that God will heal him, let God heal him.”
    Maybe their belief is stronger than science.

    This is such a hard one and all I can say is I truly wish Daniel every ounce of good health and happiness that exists.

  11. Georgia says:

    “Conventional medicine cannot prove alternative medicine does not work, just like they cannot not prove it does, only time will tell.

    In the mean time we cannot impose our own believes onto others, we can only tell them what we believe and in the end it is their personnal decision. And it needs to be respected..

    It is easy for people to criticize their choices as patient and parents, I bet none of the critics would be willing to lend a hand in the process other than try to impose their own personnal belives.”

    The courts should not have gotten involved.

  12. Hal says:

    Tristan is right when he says that “part of life’s lottery is who you get as parents.” Some kids never have a chance unfortunately.

    Good post. I might be in the minority here, but I say let the court order the treatment. Save the kid’s life from the disease and his lousy parent if we can.

  13. Jen says:

    I think it’s sad that the mother has brainwashed the child. The doctors say he only has a month to live without the treatment. With the treatment he could recover. Hopefully, they will be found soon and he can get the help he needs.

  14. Rob says:

    The Virgina Law makers made a mistake.

    Any parent who chooses alternative medicine for their kid to treat cancer needs to be locked up.

  15. NeoConDon says:

    Even though life’s lottery is part of the equation, every child deserves to be given a chance at survival, especially when their parents are placing their lives in jeopardy. We are not a nation of men, we are a nation of laws. There are states that believe a parent has the right to refuse treatment, and states that do not. The father wants the boy home to receive treatment. That father believes that the mother is endangering the child. I agree with him. This child should be removed from the situation until the courts can decide who should have custody (if that hasn’t happend already.) After that is determined, the child and the parent can make the decision on the necessary treatment.

    A court of law never has the right to determine the medical treatment of any person…they can merely determine who should make that decision. When a court decides it has the authority to determine what health care a person should receive, it will then have the authority to determine what health care a person should NOT receive.

  16. Without reading all of the above replies this is what I have to say: THIS IS THE EXACT REASON THAT RELIGION AND SCIENCE CANNOT COEXIST HAPPILY!! Without getting all Angels and Demons on you this is what happens. Religion will say one thing and science will dispprove it or prove that it can’t be exactly as stated.

    I’m not a mother but I am a human with some sort of compassion. I don’t believe that your religion should ever keep you from being able to find a cure/treatment for something. Isn’t it Jevoah’s (I know I mispelled that) Witnesses who can’t accept blood transfusions? Are you serious? You are going to tell me that a parent can just sit by and watch their child wither away before them because their religion stops them from accepting a blood transfusion/medication/or whatever?

    I’d give my left arm to make sure that everyone in my family was able to get treatment…. this is a very very sad and disgusting case in my opinion.

  17. Sugar says:

    Treatment should be given to the child. When (and if) he turns 18, and is of sound mind, then he should be able to make his own decisions. Lord knows that I don’t have the same opinions that I had when I was 13.

  18. Jane says:

    I read an AP story this morning as a matter of fact, that was similar. It involved a lady from Wausau, Wis. She was found guilty of second-degree reckless homicide. She had been accused of praying instead of seeking medical help for her dying 11-year old daughter. She faces 25 years in prison. Good.

  19. NeoConDon says:

    Science and religion can absoulutely co-exist happily, and it has since the dawn of history. Science can’t disprove it, and our Constitution demands it. The gov’t does not have the authority to regulate religious practice or to order the health care of an individual. I’m not sure what’s more insane…the people refusing medical care because of their legitimate religious beliefs, or those of you demanding your beliefs on a total stranger. It seems that the only time the left believes in choice is when it involves the murder of a human being in the mother’s womb. Other than that, no choice.

  20. Jenny says:

    If science and religion have co-existed happily since the dawn of history can you please explain to me why people were murdered for their beliefs regarding the Earth being flat vs. round? For aruging that the Earth is not the center of the universe?

    Science disproves Religion ALL the time. Please explain to me how “Virgin Mary” was a virgin? Can a woman actually get pregnant without having sex (or IVF which wasn’t around way back when?) Then can you please let me know how mankind managed to populate the Earth if you don’t believe we evolved from Apes? God put Adam and Eve here. They got down with it. They had children. Ummm just think about it. Right there incest was created. Adam and Eve had three sons. Where are the girls? All the sons screwed their mom and started to populate the Earth. So now we have all this massive inbreeding.

    I’m not saying that one doesnt have the right to believe in what they want to. I think everyone needs to have faith/beliefs in something but please don’t try to kid me by saying that Science cannot disprove Religion. Religion is a thought, an idea, a tradition, things that can’t be proven….however Science is based on facts and can be proven or disproven.

    For the record, as open as I am. I’m against abortion unless its an extreme case like the girl gets raped and ends up pregnant or giving birth to the child can endanger the life of the mother. Abortion should be used only in extreme cases, not as a form of birth control.

  21. NeoConDon says:

    Science has never disproved the existence of Intelligent Design. The high priest of the church of darwinism admitted to the reality of the massive black holes in darwin’s theory and the likelyhood of intelligent design. I doubt Jonah was ever in a whale’s belly, but it is certainly more believable than thinking human beings evolved from apes…that simply defies logic and science.

  22. Tristan says:

    For a deeply-religious person, life is little more than a means to an ends. To suggest that refusing medical treatment is somehow sick or twisted just shows that you do not understand the opposing point of view. For many, death is a good thing and when your time comes you accept your fate. People of this mindset should be free to live their lives as they see fit. Implying that these actions are harmful or unjust implies that the religion itself is harmful or unjust. We need to be very careful, here.

    Jenny, I think you’re stretching your use of prove and disprove. Scientifically, there is very little that we truly understand. Gravity is a theory, not a scientific law, and that is because there are aspects of it that we do not understand. Biology is a very difficult science to understand because it consistently defies our attempts. Regarding pregnancy, if you asked someone little more than 30 years ago, IVF may have been considered impossible. I’d be willing to bet there are other ways for it to happen, too, particularly if we’re talking about an omnipotent creator of the Universe…

    The ape thing really doesn’t fly, either. Again, since we’re talking about an ultimate power that exists beyond the realm of our understanding, where a man can be created from dirt and a woman grown like a planarian from his rib…science really doesn’t matter. If you look at that as a metaphor, science may apply, but still is never ultimate law. This is why science cannot disprove religion and why there is little use in arguing in either direction.

    Try as Darwin and others might, it is not possible to explain the origins of our existence. Space and time define our understanding. Limits to either are not comprehensible, but they must exist and that is what religion handles wonderfully.

  23. Laura says:

    Jenny – I think you are absolutley right. Science does disprove religion. I have been studying this topic ever since my parents put me into a catholic school many many years ago. Yes Neo…evolution is a “theory” but so is gravity…are you going to argue with that?? The facts lie on the side of science. I don’t care what anyone believes or what religion you are. Everyone has the right to believe what they want, however, common sense should triumph all. This kids needs REAL PROVEN medical treatment. This choice should NOT be a gamble…maybe it will work…maybe it won’t….lets just sit back and wait to find out….HOW STUPID CAN YOU BE??? The kid believes his mother is right but don’t all children believe their parents know all?? But then you grow up and realize that your parents, while having a lot of good advice, were not the all-knowing beings you once thought they were. I hope the courts stick to their guns and make this child have the necessary medical treatment. Whew…I need to check my blood pressure.

  24. NeoConDon says:

    Don’t worry Laura, with all of the NON-STUPID people running our gov’t…in a few years you’ll be FORCED by the court to check your blood pressure and the gov’t will record the results. You’ll need to wait a while for your appointment, and it will be “free.” You’ll simply take home 40% less of your income. And then, the gov’t will determine how to correct your unhealthy blood pressure by limiting you to a certain diet and exercise regiment…it’s certainly not fair for everyone else to pay for your poor health decisions…comrade.

  25. Laura says:

    We all know how you feel about the government, Don. And I don’t necessarily disagree with you on most things. However, this is a life or death situation of a child here. If it were an adult who could make informed decisions…I would be against govt interference but this is a helpless child. The govt (surprising at it may be) is actually trying to help this boy and I support their decision.

  26. NeoConDon says:

    I don’t disagree with their conclusion either. But, they don’t have the authority to force their conclusion on that mother and child. It is far beyond illegal and the role of gov’t. Nothing supports the government’s assumed authority in the constitution, and the establishment clause denies the gov’t that authority. It doesn’t matter what we believe on a personal basis, we are a nation of laws, not of men.

    Depending on the role of the father, he has rights and the authority to “save” his child–The same authority that fathers should be granted when a woman plans to abort a child without the father’s consent. Unless he gave up that authority.

    This is a fun debate…good job TCC.

  27. ugh. hello. God gave us brains to figure this stuff out for a reason!?!

  28. MajorLeague09 says:

    This is a touchy subject. But the bottom line is the child should get medical treatment. I know that the chemotherapy isn’t a walk in the park, but I think that living past the age of 13 would be a big motivator. We have doctors for a reason and I believe prayer along with modern medicine play a part in the healing process. This mother has given her son a death sentence and being a mother I can’t believe that she is willing to let her son die rather than getting him the treatment he needs in order to live. No matter how religious I am, I would never put my child’s life in danger.

  29. Tristan says:

    Laura, are you sure you know the difference between scientific theories and scientific laws? For that matter, do you know what gravity (or its theory) really is? The fact that a phenomenon exists in some form does not mean that it is understood or that it is indisputable. At any rate, the existence of gravity has absolutely nothing to do with evolution and that in turn cannot possibly disprove any religion.

    I don’t see how “common sense” should trump religion. At one time it was common sense that the Earth was flat and was the center of the Universe. Yes, I understand that this was perpetuated due to religious tyranny. It doesn’t matter. Science today has just become another religion, and the views of many here suggest that the tyranny is alive and well. As far as science is concerned, you will believe whatever you are told to believe.

    I think your view of religion was tainted through your being force fed catholicism as a child. Marylin Manson had a similar experience. That doesn’t mean there is anything wrong with religion in general, just something wrong with your experience of it.

    Don–more good points on the issue, particularly that the father can gain custody in a LAWFUL manner and our Constitution does not need to be destroyed “for our own good.” Don’t worry too much about government, though. The system is unsustainable and will take care of itself in due time. It’s funny how people think they like to listen to scientists, yet they’re really listening to politicians or academic ideologues.

  30. Though I agree mom is protected by the constitution to make decisions about her own medical treatment, that is not the issue. She also has the obligation to make decisions and choices in the best interest of her child. The child is not her body, rather her responsibility to care for in the best way she knows how…not the best way she decides.

    Oh, Pirates are on a losing streak, but the Pens are going strong!

  31. The Constant Complainer says:

    If you haven’t yet seen the news, the mother and son have returned home. However, now the mother is saying that her son was on the run (because he didn’t want to undergo more chemo), so as his mother, she went with him. Surprisingly, the report said they expect both warrants to be dropped. I’m not sure I agree with that. I think the mother should be held responsible, as the adult.

  32. Laura says:

    Tristan – You and I could go back and forth for days about science and religion. I don’t have the time nor the patience for that. If you’d like to fully understand my perspective, read the God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. The comparison to Marylin Manson was pretty funny though. My point was that the child needs medical treatment…period.

  33. Tristan says:

    I guess if the all knowing Richard Dawkins was here, I would ask him. The fact that you allegedly don’t have the time or patience to discuss this, however, says to me that you don’t understand your own position and fear stepping outside of your comfort zone to defend your stance. Really, that’s true of most any topic a person refuses to discuss.

    Ok, the child needs medical treatment and it seems likely that the child will die if he does not receive medical treatment. That still doesn’t justify state involvement to this degree. Where is the father? The point is that our nation is founded on liberty and to usurp that liberty from everyone, which is what state involvement does, to provide for the welfare of an unwilling individual is ludicrous. You cannot force help on people who do not seek it. Imagine if atheism was determined by “science” to be a mental disease dangerous to society.

    As I’ve said, the decision to refuse treatment is foolish statistically, but making it criminal just shows intolerance to views that differ from your own. Here’s an interesting piece showing the views of a Mennonite and their right to raise children:

    Maybe there is someone here who would sit by as their child was taken away from them. I would not. The courts have no place in mandating health care. Custodial arrangements can be made if there is a case for abuse and other family members bring such proceedings. If that is not sufficient, then the mother’s ability to raise her child will have to suffice. As Don has said, it is not the role of government to raise our children and frankly it shows a sad state of society when we both expect and approve of it.

  34. NeoConDon says:

    Richard Dawkins is the one I refer to as the “High Priest of the Religion of Darwinism.” He admitted to the reality of Intelligent Design. People like the very closed minded Dawkins need people to go to school, be told darwinism is fact, and move on. Sort of like the Global Warming lies going around nowadays. Then he can use the word he likes to use…”science!” Then, everyone walks around saying “science” has proven it, not realizing that the “science” they are referring to is the religious practice of Darwinism…a hokey religion that has been mathematically disproven, never scientifically proven, and is as much science as what I take out of my 1 year old’s diaper every morning…

    And Laura, I’m glad you care so much about the medical treatment of this child, but your opinion is as important as George Bush’s opinion in an Obama cabinet meeting. It’s not up to you, or me, or the court. It’s up to the parents and the child. The docs can’t force it, and the gov’t can’t force it.

  35. Tristan says:

    Also, since many think the state should be involved in the parental responsibility to do what is best for children, think about what this is suggesting. This assumes that what is “best” is defined in a reference book somewhere. Parents don’t get a Children’s Bill of Rights. They apply their own life experiences to the best of their ability to raise their children. With this in mind, who are you to say what is best and what is not for anyone other than yourself and your own children?

    It has already gone too far. We are required by law to wear seat belts, to keep children in car seats until they are something like 80 pounds. I was probably a teenager before I was 80 pounds. Thankfully, I was spared the embarrassment and these arrogant laws didn’t exist. Now we want laws to decide medical treatment options. If anyone bothers to read the link I just posted, they should find it interesting that a similar cancer case with state mandated treatment resulted in a child being snatched from her home and forced to suffer under chemotherapy for a year, after which she was sent home to die. Had the liberties of the parents not been trampled for their own good, their daughter may still be alive.

    If anyone here can guarantee that isn’t the case this time, by all means, keep pressing to decide what is best for others.

    Opinion is one thing. Tyranny is quite another.

  36. NeoConDon says:

    I think you nailed it, Tristan. Too many see the ideas of “affordable health care”, “affordable education”, “affordable housing”, etc as doing good. In reality, the application and results of all of these programs are cruel, and tyrannical in nature. Then, after they get the masses addicted to these programs over several generations, they begin holding the public hostage over the removal of the programs…then, people like King Barry begin engaging in class warfare, and can win the argument because the people that voted for him are far too ignorant to realize what they’re really favoring.

    When I was in school throughout the 80’s, we were taught evolution and creationism in the public schools. Both ideas were discussed fairly. Today, the religion of Darwinism is taught as fact in a very closed minded way. After a few generations experience this, any real debate is ended. Same thing with the lies about global warming. By the time my kids get out of school, they would have been bombarded with the “science” of the theory and will believe it to be true, even if it has never been proven. I’ve even heard people truly believe that the cooling trend we’ve experienced for the past decade has been because of global warming…???

  37. Laura says:

    Wow…I’m sorry for getting you guys so worked up. This is going to be my last post on this topic. If the two of you would like to keep Laura bashing..please feel free. However I have to set some things straight.
    Tristan – when I say I don’t have time, I literally mean I don’t have time. With only 24 hours in the days and close to 23 of those hours spent at work, school or sleeping…I’d prefer NOT to debate about this.
    Don – I am not a Darwinist. I simply suggested Dawkins because I feel he has some good points (and mostly to get Tristan off my back..ha ha). However, my mind works in the way of facts. Science..all science…has been a passion of mine for as long as I can remember. Science is about constant change. Things that were once facts are proven otherwise. That’s what’s so great about it. It’s good to question things. Aren’t we glad we questioned the earth being flat? Without questioning, human evolution (in terms of knowledge) would be stagnant. That doesn’t mean I’m starting up a Darwin cult or anything. I don’t completely disregard anyone’s beliefs and I’m not as close-minded as you may think. I have been proven wrong many times and vice versa.
    Also…I realize that my opinion on the child does not really make a damn bit of difference…thanks for pointing that out so harshly.

  38. Tristan says:

    Nothing personal, Laura, I was “Jenny bashing” as well, though I hope my arguments attack an opposing stance and not any individual. I apologize if that is not the case.

    I think that saying science disproves religion is an extremely-bold statement and one that I could not just let go free without it being backed up with facts. I have strong stances in most areas, economics, philosophy, civics… but similar to you, science is my realm, and being what it is, I do not hesitate to question what I see as fuzzy logic.

    That being said, I agree that it is of utmost importance that we question everything that is in our right to question. However, I do not believe that science is exempt from that, hence my position that science does not disprove religion and that this mother, however unlikely to be doing the right thing statistically, cannot possibly be criminalized for doing what she feels is right for her child. She may be making a huge mistake, but at least she is actively pursuing her convictions for the betterment of her child’s life, which is more than can be said for many parents who have no interest in their children on a daily basis.

  39. NeoConDon says:

    I don’t write anything harshly…you took it that way. I re-read what I wrote, and if you think that’s harsh, I don’t know what to say. You’re possibly the first person that has ever left me speechless…except for my wife…:=)

  40. My husbands mother had breast cancer and she also believed in ‘natural methods’. She died three weeks after the diagnoses. I can’t say what I would do if I had cancer because I’ve never had it, but I’m sure I would be willing to do anything that I thought would have a chance of curing me.

  41. Extreme John says:

    Excellent post TCC, I wonder how many people have read through the comments and angered as time went on.

    If nothing else the fact that this is such a hot button makes it an excellent topic for discussion, regardless of what each individuals belief might be.

Leave a Reply