Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This thread is for educational purposes only. Please do not post offensive remarks.
I saw the news yesterday about a possible bill that may go to the Legislature this session. Apparently the bill's sponsor couldn't even get a hearing two years ago.
I am ignorant about this church. I've never even heard of it before the news. I'll attach a Wiki link but I don't know how accurate it is.
If I understand what little I've learned correctly, faithful members don''t seek professional medical care for any medical issue, including diseases such as pneumonia, asthma or other disorders which tend to respond well to current medical therapies for most people. The reason for the bill is to hopefully have the Legislature review and potentially change some wording in the current law so medical care is defined more clearly. Media report an average of two child deaths each year, in Idaho, mostly from conditions most of the population seeks care and treatment, like appendicitis or pneumonia.
My understanding is the religion started in OK and members were sent to OR to start a church. Apparently, there are three branches in Idaho with two of them being in Canyon County by Meridian and Caldwell. I have no idea how many people that would include. I hope others can clarify more as I know very little about this church.
What the media has reported is members of this church believe in Faith-based healing only. To seek medical care indicates one is not a true believer or something like that. If someone dies that is God's will or proof the members didn't have enough faith. Those who seek medical care are shunned from their religious community.
I have no problem with people utilizing their faith as PART of a treatment plan. Faith can help in ways medical treatment can't. I also believe it was faith that lead to the medical interventions we have today. I'm pro medical care while trying to respect the faith of the patient and their family. In other states I have been part of a treatment team where Court Orders had to be obtained so life-saving medical care could be started. It's awkward, to say the least. But at least a healthy patient was discharged for most illnesses or injuries. We always encouraged the families to continue their faith based practices as the patient received traditional medical care. I think we were respectful of other's religious views, I know we tried to be.
Sadly, no practitioner in Idaho can obtain a court order for medical treatment given how the law is currently written. I'll be urging my Senator and Reps in the Legislature to strongly encourage a hearing for this bill in this session.
This is a Wiki link to the religion. I hope some here can add more. It sounds like each branch of this church kind of does their own thing, within the major teachings of the church, since the Oregon City leader died.
I keep away from all religions, but there are other such as the Church of Christ, Scientist and Jehovah Witnesses that also restrict medical care (I believe Jehovah's reject blood transfusions only...but not sure).
I don't know how else to respond in a way that isn't overtly political. I don't know any members of the religion personally, or much about it at all beyond how it is reported, but I do think that it seems like kids need an advocate for their health when their parents are delinquent in that responsibility. Having litigated a major parental rights case here in Idaho a few years ago, I understand the "parental rights" perspective and can somewhat respect the religious rights angle, too.
I keep away from all religions, but there are other such as the Church of Christ, Scientist and Jehovah Witnesses that also restrict medical care (I believe Jehovah's reject blood transfusions only...but not sure).
But I'm a FIRM believer in modern medicine.
Could be interesting to follow this thread....
You are getting close to the magical 1,800 rep points, f5, to get your first gold star. I couldn't give you another yet.
I absolutely respect your personal desire to avoid religion. I have NEVER read anything you've written disrespecting any religion or those who are members. I admire that about you.
Yes, this thread could be a wonderful opportunity to learn if posters will remain respectful. I can learn a lot and hope I do.
I found an article to post as I wanted to know the bill number. If it's in the article I missed it. I hope someone will post it. However, I dId find the sponsor's name, which should help. His name is John Gannon from Boise. I frankly don't care about his political affiliation as I find this bill needed in ID.
The article also explains how OR dealt with this since Oregon City was the beginning of this religion in the PNW.
I have to admit I need a refresher course on the Church of Christ teachings and probably Scientology as I thought Scientology allowed medical care such as pre-natal care, just not anything mental health and maybe no transfusions. But honestly, I would need to research that more or read the posts of those who know.
Jehovah's Witnesses (J.W.), I'm a little more familiar with as I have worked with some J.W. patients and families. J.W. members don't allow whole blood or blood products. I'll check that again to be sure I'm accurate. Blood products would primarily be Plasma. There has been at least one medication developed to infuse instead of blood or blood products. Otherwise, I think J.W. members can seek medical care and receive medicine for common problems like asthma and infections, letc alone meedical emergencies. . I also am not aware of shunning in the J.W. religion as the Followers of Christ Church members reportedly experience.
I could be wrong about what I do or don't know. I hope those with more accurate knowledge will update me by posting. I want to learn, which is why I started the thread.
I don't know how else to respond in a way that isn't overtly political. I don't know any members of the religion personally, or much about it at all beyond how it is reported, but I do think that it seems like kids need an advocate for their health when their parents are delinquent in that responsibility. Having litigated a major parental rights case here in Idaho a few years ago, I understand the "parental rights" perspective and can somewhat respect the religious rights angle, too.
It's sad because it seems so unnecessary in 2016.
Vandals,
I don't find your post inappropriate at all. Of course I don't have the final say. I agree with you. I feel the children need an advocate.
It is sad to know even one or two deaths occur each year in Idaho, due to very treatable illnesses.
I don't find your post inappropriate at all. Of course I don't have the final say. I agree with you. I feel the children need an advocate.
It is sad to know even one or two deaths occur each year in Idaho, due to very treatable illnesses.
MSR
I think it's one thing for parents refuse medical care for themselves. I think it's appropriate for parents to question/resist experimental medical care for their children in some, perhaps many cases, but I don't think it's proper for them to decide whether their children live or die based on their religious beliefs. Children are not their parents' chattel, and children's right to life supercedes their parents religious views.
The Judeo-Christian tradition recognizes that children cannot give "informed consent" about religious matters. Most Christian denominations recognize this by restricting full-fledged church participation to adults. That includes joining the church and being responsible for acting in accordance with your faith. Those religions like Catholicism that practice infant baptism have a later ceremony where the young adult is expected to pledge to be a good Catholic in his/her own right (confirmation). Many Protestant churches practice adult baptism or require professions of faith from adults. The various strains of Judaism have bar and bat mitzvah ceremonies that mark children's ascent into adulthood.
At the very least, I think children need to have someone who looks out for their interests, not their parents'.
I think it's one thing for parents refuse medical care for themselves. I think it's appropriate for parents to question/resist experimental medical care for their children in some, perhaps many cases, but I don't think it's proper for them to decide whether their children live or die based on their religious beliefs. Children are not their parents' chattel, and children's right to life supercedes their parents religious views.
The Judeo-Christian tradition recognizes that children cannot give "informed consent" about religious matters. Most Christian denominations recognize this by restricting full-fledged church participation to adults. That includes joining the church and being responsible for acting in accordance with your faith. Those religions like Catholicism that practice infant baptism have a later ceremony where the young adult is expected to pledge to be a good Catholic in his/her own right (confirmation). Many Protestant churches practice adult baptism or require professions of faith from adults. The various strains of Judaism have bar and bat mitzvah ceremonies that mark children's ascent into adulthood.
At the very least, I think children need to have someone who looks out for their interests, not their parents'.
The church is secretive and keeps to themselves.
As far as I know, they don't live inside Caldwell, but just outside the city limits, in the surrounding countryside.
The Treasure Vally is full of tiny groups like this. Many of them are families, who have lived in the valley for generations and all live in their own separate homes, with each holding title to separate properties, but farm them in conjunction and cooperation with other family members.
A compound works very well for operations like this, and works just as well for people who share a common faith as much as it does for families who are all blood kin.
You are getting close to the magical 1,800 rep points, f5, to get your first gold star. I couldn't give you another yet.
I absolutely respect your personal desire to avoid religion. I have NEVER read anything you've written disrespecting any religion or those who are members. I admire that about you.
Yes, this thread could be a wonderful opportunity to learn if posters will remain respectful. I can learn a lot and hope I do.
I found an article to post as I wanted to know the bill number. If it's in the article I missed it. I hope someone will post it. However, I dId find the sponsor's name, which should help. His name is John Gannon from Boise. I frankly don't care about his political affiliation as I find this bill needed in ID.
The article also explains how OR dealt with this since Oregon City was the beginning of this religion in the PNW.
I have to admit I need a refresher course on the Church of Christ teachings and probably Scientology as I thought Scientology allowed medical care such as pre-natal care, just not anything mental health and maybe no transfusions. But honestly, I would need to research that more or read the posts of those who know.
Jehovah's Witnesses (J.W.), I'm a little more familiar with as I have worked with some J.W. patients and families. J.W. members don't allow whole blood or blood products. I'll check that again to be sure I'm accurate. Blood products would primarily be Plasma. There has been at least one medication developed to infuse instead of blood or blood products. Otherwise, I think J.W. members can seek medical care and receive medicine for common problems like asthma and infections, letc alone meedical emergencies. . I also am not aware of shunning in the J.W. religion as the Followers of Christ Church members reportedly experience.
I could be wrong about what I do or don't know. I hope those with more accurate knowledge will update me by posting. I want to learn, which is why I started the thread.
Good post f5.
MSR
Tanks....
As for Jehovah Witnesses, I believe I read an article years ago about how some cardiac surgeons were performing open heart surgery without blood transfusions. Not desirable, but the only way!
I guess I have had enough blood transfusions in my life it is like giving blood; just knocked out!
As for the law, I guess I am split. Yes, someone needs to look out for the kids, but is it the state's right to step in and take away the parents rights? This is too heavy for me. Especially considering my distrust for the government in the past few years.
I keep away from all religions, but there are other such as the Church of Christ, Scientist and Jehovah Witnesses that also restrict medical care (I believe Jehovah's reject blood transfusions only...but not sure).
But I'm a FIRM believer in modern medicine.
f5, I have been a Church of Christ member for about 35 years. In fact, my great-great grandfather who is buried in Payette was a Church of Christ missionary and planted/started several churches in the Boise area. It is not an issue for church members to seek modern, professional medical care from qualified physicians and hospitals.
The Churches of Christ, for the most part, are mainstream, non-denominational Christian churches. About the only 'weird' thing about them is that they do not use instruments during a worship service and women do not get up during a worship service to perform duties of responsibilities. They take a pretty literal interpretation of everything in the New Testament, (they teach out of the Old, but believe that the old covenant was fulfilled when Christ died and that we are now under the new covenant. All the important stuff in the OT has been restated in the NT.) . The unusual customs come from the verse where we are instructed not to add to nor take away from anything in the Bible. Since instrumental music is never mentioned in the context of a worship service in the NT . . . they don't do it.
Enough explanation lest we get off-topic. To the point, members of the Churches of Christ are fine with modern medicine, and using it to help themselves heal from injuries, diseases, and infirmities.
- - -
Oops. Reading your post more closely, I think you meant "Church of Christ Scientist". If so, they are completely different than the Churches of Christ. I'll leave the above because MSR asked about the Church of Christ, which by most accounts is considered 'mainstream', as mentioned above. Sorry for not reading more closely.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
