Faith healing in the news again
Sep. 14th, 2011 06:15 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kengrThere's yet another trial of parents whose child died because they wouldn't get a doctor but relied on prayer.
One thing that the talking heads keep bringing up is a new law that (due to this church's record of losing kids) removes religious beliefs as a defense for many sort of homicide cases.
Alas, both the talking heads and the state rep whose idea the law was keep making the same *fundamental* error.
They keep saying that it'll make these believers start taking their kids to the doctors.
Sorry. It won't. It'll just save a lot of time prosecuting them when the kids die.
You see, the state rep and the newscritters have a fundamental misunderstanding of the way laws *actually* work.
People rarely avoid doing something because of the law. In many cases, they don't think they'll get caught (that's usually the case with theft and some sorts of assaults)
In other cases, like these, it doesn't matter *what* the law says because these folk *believe* what they are doing is *right*. As such, they'll do what they believe is right, regardless of the law.
The laws *already* make failing to provide needed medical treatment illegal. And these folks have been ignoring that. Removing a defense of "religious belief" when they get tried for violating those laws isn't going to make a bit of difference.
After all, they've *never* won using it!
We *need* to get people, *especially* law makers, to understand that not everyone thinks they way they do. Or shares their beliefs. So laws that go against those beliefs are just a waste of time and resources.
It's "magical thinking" to act as if changing the laws will change those sorts of behaviors. This is one example. Many drug laws are another. And there are many, many more.
One thing that the talking heads keep bringing up is a new law that (due to this church's record of losing kids) removes religious beliefs as a defense for many sort of homicide cases.
Alas, both the talking heads and the state rep whose idea the law was keep making the same *fundamental* error.
They keep saying that it'll make these believers start taking their kids to the doctors.
Sorry. It won't. It'll just save a lot of time prosecuting them when the kids die.
You see, the state rep and the newscritters have a fundamental misunderstanding of the way laws *actually* work.
People rarely avoid doing something because of the law. In many cases, they don't think they'll get caught (that's usually the case with theft and some sorts of assaults)
In other cases, like these, it doesn't matter *what* the law says because these folk *believe* what they are doing is *right*. As such, they'll do what they believe is right, regardless of the law.
The laws *already* make failing to provide needed medical treatment illegal. And these folks have been ignoring that. Removing a defense of "religious belief" when they get tried for violating those laws isn't going to make a bit of difference.
After all, they've *never* won using it!
We *need* to get people, *especially* law makers, to understand that not everyone thinks they way they do. Or shares their beliefs. So laws that go against those beliefs are just a waste of time and resources.
It's "magical thinking" to act as if changing the laws will change those sorts of behaviors. This is one example. Many drug laws are another. And there are many, many more.
