Aɴ Aᴛʜᴇɪsᴛ Bᴇʟɪᴇᴠᴇs

 “Your petitioners are atheists and they define their beliefs as follows. An atheist loves his fellow man instead of god. An atheist believes that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth for all men together to enjoy. An atheist believes that he can get no help through prayer but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it, and enjoy it. An atheist believes that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help to a life of fulfillment. He seeks to know himself and his fellow man rather than to know a god. An atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An atheist believes that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said. An atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death. He wants disease conquered, poverty vanquished, war eliminated. He wants man to understand and love man. He wants an ethical way of life. He believes that we cannot rely on a god or channel action into prayer nor hope for an end of troubles in a hereafter. He believes that we are our brother’s keepers and are keepers of our own lives; that we are responsible persons and the job is here and the time is now.”

 

Madalyn Murray O'Hair - Wikipedia

1959

State of the Union

Blasphemy Day

This is pretty dated, at least 4-5 years. The details may have changed but, I think the basic idea is still valid.

Around the world, free speech is being sacrificed on the altar of religion. Whether defined as hate speech, discrimination or simple blasphemy, governments are declaring unlimited free speech as the enemy of freedom of religion. This growing movement has reached the United Nations, where religiously conservative countries received a boost in their campaign to pass an international blasphemy law. It came from the most unlikely of places: the United States.

While attracting surprisingly little attention, the Obama administration supported the effort of largely Muslim nations in the U.N. Human Rights Council to recognize exceptions to free speech for any "negative racial and religious stereotyping." The exception was made as part of a resolution supporting free speech that passed this month, but it is the exception, not the rule that worries civil libertarians. Though the resolution was passed unanimously, European and developing countries made it clear that they remain at odds on the issue of protecting religions from criticism. It is viewed as a transparent bid to appeal to the "Muslim street" and our Arab allies, with the administration seeking greater coexistence through the curtailment of objectionable speech. Though it has no direct enforcement (and is weaker than earlier versions), it is still viewed as a victory for those who sought to juxtapose and balance the rights of speech and religion.

Religious Freedom. When faith overcomes common sense

This post started out with the title: "Children murdered for God. Religious Freedom. Gotta Love it." Then I decided that most theists wouldn't have the balls (Figuratively) to read a link with that title.

I tend to wander around the web, going where my mouse points me, This is a small part of that wandering.

**********************************************************************

This is where I started;  When Faith Healing Becomes Faith Killing

According to the national non-profit Children’s Healthcare is a Legal Duty (CHILD), thirty-eight states and the District of Columbia have religious exemptions from providing medical care for sick kids – many more lenient than the law being considered by the Tennessee Supreme Court. Three US states (Idaho, Iowa, and Ohio) offer parents a religious defense to manslaughter; West Virginia offers a religious defense to murder of a child and child neglect resulting in death; and Arkansas provides parents a religious defense to capital murder.

A few stops along the way;  Faith healing or faith killing?

DeGues-Morris says she hasn't done an autopsy on a Followers of Christ child in years, because in Idaho it's not illegal for a parent or guardian to choose prayer over medicine as treatment for a sick child. Idaho statute 18-1501 outlines the law that a parent who "chooses...treatment by prayer...shall not...have violated the duty of care to such child.   Dying for religion: 'They use fear - that's their main weapon' | KBOI"
Dying for Religion: Part 2 | KBOI

Victims of religion-based medical neglect

Fallen followers: Investigation finds 10 more dead children of faith healers | KATU
 
WOW,a  double header Pennsylvania parents sentenced in second faith-healing death - The Washington Post
**********UPDATE:  Lenient Prison Sentence of 31/5 to 7 years upheld for Faith-Healing Parents Who Killed Two of Their Children***********
 
Faces of the fallen | KATU.com

Religion-related medical neglect |
 
Silent Cries The Faces Of Religious Abuse

******************************************************************

   I had to stop. Whether it was disgust or a feeling of extreme sadness, I had to stop. I hope that those people that extol prayer as the be all, end all, consider that the murderers in those articles were committed to the same. Maybe more so.

Religious freedom? Do you really think it includes letting children die?

Comments are open