Utterly Meaningless » Blog Archive » THE CONSTITUTION

    • THE CONSTITUTION

    Filed at 1:20 pm under by dcobranchi

    is not a suicide pact. Nor does the First Amendment allow you to kill your kids.

    A 13-year-old Minnesota boy with cancer must resume prescribed treatment to save his life, despite religious and other objections by his family — unless it’s already too late, a Brown County District Court judge ruled this morning… Daniel Hauser was diagnosed in January with Hodgkin’s lymphoma, but the Hausers stopped their son’s chemotherapy and radiation after one treatment in February, and began substituting alternative care… Colleen Hauser testified that she was trying to “starve” her son’s tumor with natural healing methods, such as herbs and ionized water, that she had learned about on the Internet.

    And I learned on the internet that some people will believe any stupid superstition they happen to read about.

    6 comments »

    6 Responses to “THE CONSTITUTION”


    Comment by
    Nance Confer
    May 15th, 2009
    at 1:53 pm

    And are they being charged with child abuse?

    Nance

    Comment by
    COD
    May 15th, 2009
    at 1:55 pm

    Let me see if I understand this.

    Killing a baby before it is born is bad. Killing a living breathing child is ok?

    Comment by
    Nance Confer
    May 15th, 2009
    at 1:56 pm

    You may want to take notes, Chris. The crazy can get thick in these parts. 🙂

    Nance

    Comment by
    Rob
    May 15th, 2009
    at 6:06 pm

    I saw mention of some “spiritual law”, but where do you get that these morons have any take on the constitution? And if they are strict constitutionalists, you’d think they understand it’s there to protect state’s rights. And as the story mentions, “Minnesota law requires parents to provide children with “medically necessary care,””

    Comment by
    dcobranchi
    May 15th, 2009
    at 9:19 pm

    I saw mention of some “spiritual law”, but where do you get that these morons have any take on the constitution?

    I don’t. But I’d bet money they attempted to claim that this was a violation of their 1st Amendment rights.

    And if they are strict constitutionalists, you’d think they understand it’s there to protect state’s rights.

    WTF? All this time I thought you were in the US. OUR constitution is there to protect INDIVIDUAL rights. In fact, the 1st ten amendments are referred to as the Bill of Rights. 9.5 of them protect individuals’ rights.

    States don’t have rights, only power.

    Comment by
    Rob
    May 15th, 2009
    at 11:26 pm

    Fair correction. And I wouldn’t take that bet.