Little girl chooses heaven......

[Outrider]

Regardless of whether there's a heaven or not - I think everyone knows where I stand on that issue - ultimately this is a question of whether the girl wants to undergo painful treatment to extend her life marginally or to accept death a short while earlier with a better quality of life in the meantime.

As an atheist, faced with that decision, I genuinely don't know what I'd do - I suspect I'd opt for better life rather than more life, but I don't think anyone really knows until they're there.

If there's a heaven then, presumably, the girl's going there sooner or later - I'm not sure how the faith element feeds into the picture. If they were denying treatment because they thought prayer would work then we'd have an issue, but regardless of what she thinks is happening after her death this is about her right to choose the death that works for her. So far as I can tell they are hoping that there's a heaven as they believe, as a bolster against the pain - I don't think I'm alone in thinking that's one of the main reasons the idea persists - but they aren't denying the very real situation of the disease and its implications.

It's just saddening that it should happen so young, with all the implications for a 'benevolent' deity in heaven that brings with it.

O.

[Sriram]

If faced with the same situation...atheists would perhaps choose...

to convince the child that, since there is no heaven or God... she should choose between being put in a coffin and getting decomposed... or a painful treatment that would drag her life on for a few more months. Nice choice for the poor girl!

And its not as if they really KNOW that there is no heaven and God!  Its just their juvenile belief....in spite of plenty of evidence to the contrary!

[ippy]

There is no 'ok' in this situation. God alone knows what it must be like to see your child suffering so.

Who?

ippy

[Outrider]

If faced with the same situation...atheists would perhaps choose...

If faced with the same situation, I don't suppose very many people can accurately predict what they'd choose - events of that magnitude have a way of changing your perspective.

to convince the child that, since there is no heaven or God... she should choose between being put in a coffin and getting decomposed... or a painful treatment that would drag her life on for a few more months. Nice choice for the poor girl!

I suspect most atheists wouldn't think to involve the idea of god in the discussion at all - they'd be too caught up in what they see as the realities of the situation to turn it into a debate about, to them, mythic ideas. It's as likely as a Christian parent worrying if actually the child might have to consider whether they'd get into Valhalla on the off-chance the Norsemen had it right.

And its not as if they really KNOW that there is no heaven and God!

And very few of them would claim that they do KNOW - they don't see any reason to accept the idea, so they dismiss it, but logically it's a (remote) possibility.

Its just their juvenile belief....in spite of plenty of evidence to the contrary!

Well, it's hardly juvenile to look at the available evidence critically and realise that none of it supports the idea. As to your contention that there's plenty of evidence... there might be, but none of it is either convincing or reliable.

O.

[Hope]

Well, I'm not going to mince my words here. That is absolute, unmitigated rubbish. Thank goodness that Shaker and others have posted. I tried reading the woolly, sanctimonious-type posts but had to scroll past them.

So glad to see you're back, Shaker. Keep well!

Unfortunately for you, Susan, the posts you refer to are no more 'absolute, unmitigated rubbish' than the ones that Shaker, you and others post.  Over the years this and other boards havee been up and running,  have yet to see any evidence in support of your stance - or at least no support that doesn't crumble under even the most basic scrutiny.  Unfortunately, despite the claims of some here, science doesn't answer all he questions people ask, and is unlikely to do so, since it is based on only one part of reality.

[Gordon]

Over the years this and other boards havee been up and running,  have yet to see any evidence in support of your stance - or at least no support that doesn't crumble under even the most basic scrutiny.

Wishful thinking, unless you can provide examples of this 'basic scrutiny' that aren't inherently fallacious.

Unfortunately, despite the claims of some here, science doesn't answer all he questions people ask, and is unlikely to do so, since it is based on only one part of reality.

Everything isn't yet known, and science doesn't claim that it is anyway, but the real issue here are those who ask spurious questions in the first place (usually 'why' instead of 'how'), and then when they are told not to be so silly they triumphantly claim science has no answers.

[Rhiannon]

If there was a chance of saving this little girl then it would be beyond wrong. There isn't. So why not heaven, or fairyland, or a neverending dreamy sleep?

I guess the parents' faith must mean they can face losing her more easily. But my friend lost a child and she said to me that the worse thing was when she realised she would never need to ask him to do anything again, never call his name. How on earth one finds a way to live with that I have no idea, but my friend has found a way to accommodate it into her life. Ben Hardwick's mum said in an interview a few years after he died that she only ever gets to hold him now in her dreams.

I find I can't judge anyone for trying to make losing a child easier.

[Outrider]

Over the years this and other boards havee been up and running,  have yet to see any evidence in support of your stance - or at least no support that doesn't crumble under even the most basic scrutiny.

In the main, though, the posts we put up don't need to support anything - they're pointing out that the burden of proof for claims like gods, heaven, spirit etc. lies with the claimant.

Unfortunately, despite the claims of some here, science doesn't answer all he questions people ask, and is unlikely to do so, since it is based on only one part of reality.

Well, firstly, science might just not answer all those questions yet; secondly science might adequately answer those questions but they might not like or accept the answer; thirdly, you assert that science is based on only one part of reality, but you can't justify the claim.

O.

[Owlswing]

If faced with the same situation...atheists would perhaps choose...

to convince the child that, since there is no heaven or God... she should choose between being put in a coffin and getting decomposed... or a painful treatment that would drag her life on for a few more months. Nice choice for the poor girl!

And its not as if they really KNOW that there is no heaven and God!  Its just their juvenile belief....in spite of plenty of evidence to the contrary!

Rubbish! There is absolutely NO evidence to the contrary, just belief!

[Hope]

I wouldn't want to ram any beliefs down her throat, that's the point.

If this was your case, I think you would find it very difficult to change the habit of a lifetime - a least the habit according to your lifetime on this board, jeremy.

But it's OK, in your opinion, for a bunch of one true way'ist Christians to do the same.

There may a few Christians who ram stuff down their children's throat, but then that applies to just about every set of philosophies, jeremy.

You do love this term 'one-true wayists' don't you.  Realistically, it refers to just about everyone who has the good of humanity in their sights - they all believe that their philosophy, even if not their specific deity(ies) is best for humanity.

[Hope]

And its not as if they really KNOW that there is no heaven and God!  Its just their juvenile belief....in spite of plenty of evidence to the contrary!

Rubbish! There is absolutely NO evidence to the contrary, just belief!
[/quote]OK, but then nor is there any scientific evidence whatsoever for the non-deity stance.

[Owlswing]

Well, I'm not going to mince my words here. That is absolute, unmitigated rubbish. Thank goodness that Shaker and others have posted. I tried reading the woolly, sanctimonious-type posts but had to scroll past them.

So glad to see you're back, Shaker. Keep well!

Unfortunately for you, Susan, the posts you refer to are no more 'absolute, unmitigated rubbish' than the ones that Shaker, you and others post.  Over the years this and other boards havee been up and running,  have yet to see any evidence in support of your stance - or at least no support that doesn't crumble under even the most basic scrutiny.  Unfortunately, despite the claims of some here, science doesn't answer all he questions people ask, and is unlikely to do so, since it is based on only one part of reality.

OK Hope

Will you please post on this board the exact spacial co-ordinates of Heaven so that those of use with astronomical telescopes can get a look at it.

If you can't then shut up about heaven being a fact until you can.

[Hope]

The decision of the parents is based on a belief, of course...but that does not necessarily mean that they are wrong. There is no evidence that there is no heaven or that the girl will not go there.

There are enough NDE's in the world to provide evidence that there could indeed be a heaven....and the parents/girl's decision could be correct.  Many children have had NDE's and been very happy with the experience.

 There is no evidence that there is no heaven or that the girl will not go there.  Prat.

ippy

I'm so glad that you agree with the underlying idea that Sriram is trying to put over, ippy.  It's taken you a mighty long time to do so, tho.

[Outrider]

And its not as if they really KNOW that there is no heaven and God!  Its just their juvenile belief....in spite of plenty of evidence to the contrary!

Rubbish! There is absolutely NO evidence to the contrary, just belief!

OK, but then nor is there any scientific evidence whatsoever for the non-deity stance.
[/quote]

Again, the burden is not on disbelievers to disprove every claim - no-one asks for the evidence of the non-existence of the lost Chicken-God of the Fairy kingdoms, let alone Zeus, Odin, Ameratsu, Marduk...

O.

[Hope]

Well, it's hardly juvenile to look at the available evidence critically and realise that none of it supports the idea. As to your contention that there's plenty of evidence... there might be, but none of it is either convincing or reliable.

O, I'm not sure that 'realise that none of it supports the idea' is a legitimate claim; after all, there have been plenty of professional people from journlists to scientists who have looked at the available evidence critically and - to use your terminology - realised that all of it supports the idea.

Neither can 'realise' anything in this respect - unless you (like Gordon the other day) have evidence that has never been published publically; the best you can claim is 'believe'.

[Shaker]

The decision of the parents is based on a belief, of course...but that does not necessarily mean that they are wrong. There is no evidence that there is no heaven or that the girl will not go there.

I assume Hope is away today - he must have left you in charge of the negative proof fallacy.

[Hope]

Again, the burden is not on disbelievers to disprove every claim - no-one asks for the evidence of the non-existence of the lost Chicken-God of the Fairy kingdoms, let alone Zeus, Odin, Ameratsu, Marduk...

O.

Sorry, O, if someone starts a thread with what they want to be seen as a statement of fact, the burden of proof is on that person and anyone supporting them.  I have never seen any threads started by folk who hold a stance similar to yours ever provide evidence for it.

[Hope]

I assume Hope is away today - he must have left you in charge of the negative proof fallacy.

Shaker, are you suggesting that belief can never be supported by evidence?  If you are, perhaps you need to rethink all your own posts as all they are are statements of your own belief.

[Shaker]

I assume Hope is away today - he must have left you in charge of the negative proof fallacy.

Shaker, are you suggesting that belief can never be supported by evidence? If you are, perhaps you need to rethink all your own posts as all they are statements of your own belief.

Which belief is that?

[Outrider]

O, I'm not sure that 'realise that none of it supports the idea' is a legitimate claim; after all, there have been plenty of professional people from journlists to scientists who have looked at the available evidence critically and - to use your terminology - realised that all of it supports the idea.

No, they've realised it doesn't disprove their ideas, and they've held on to their faith in spite of the lack of evidence. There is no way to reason to gods, if there were evidence we'd have scientists using science to point it out rather than having to rely on William Lane Craig's attempts.

Neither can 'realise' anything in this respect - unless you (like Gordon the other day) have evidence that has never been published publically; the best you can claim is 'believe'.

No, I can realise the evidence doesn't support the claim. I can then not believe the claim or I can believe the claim regardless - personally I'm in the former category. I don't 'realise' there's no god, I just realise there's no reason to think there is - lack of belief follows from that.

O.

[Hope]

Which belief is that?

To be honest, I wouldn't know.  All I can say is that there is no scientific evidence to support your belief - or at least, you've never manged to produce any when challenged to do so.

[Outrider]

Again, the burden is not on disbelievers to disprove every claim - no-one asks for the evidence of the non-existence of the lost Chicken-God of the Fairy kingdoms, let alone Zeus, Odin, Ameratsu, Marduk...

O.

Sorry, O, if someone starts a thread with what they want to be seen as a statement of fact, the burden of proof is on that person and anyone supporting them.  I have never seen any threads started by folk who hold a stance similar to yours ever provide evidence for it.

Then you can address that positive claim, but that still doesn't shift the burden of proof generally on to us to disprove every claim any more than it puts the onus on Christians to disprove all the gods they don't believe in.

O.

[floo]

Hi everyone,

A little girl who is dying prefers to stay at home and go to heaven rather than undergo (presumably painful) treatment in the hospital.

http://us.cnn.com/2015/10/27/health/girl-chooses-heaven-over-hospital-part-1/index.html

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

Julianna Snow is dying of an incurable disease. She's stable at the moment, but any germ that comes her way, even just the common cold virus, could kill her. She's told her parents that the next time this happens, she wants to die at home instead of going to the hospital for treatment.

If Julianna were an adult, there would be no debate about her case: She would get to decide when to say "enough" to medical care and be allowed to die.

But Julianna is 5 years old. Should her parents have let her know how grave her situation is? Should they have asked her about her end-of-life wishes? And now that those wishes are known, should her parents heed them?

When Julianna told her parents how much she hated NT suctioning, her mother tried to make her understand why they'd done it. "I told her that even though it was really hard in the hospital, it let her get better and come back home to us, so wasn't it worth it?" Michelle remembers.

Julianna would never answer. That's when Michelle decided to have a conversation about heaven.

Michelle asked Julianna, then 4 years old, if she were to get very sick again, did she want to go back for more treatments, or did she want to die at home?

Julianna's answer was loud and clear. She chose heaven over the hospital.

Now Michelle and Steve had to decide: Would they abide by her wishes?

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

Any views?

Sriram

What a very sad situation. If treatment is not going to improve the poor child's condition then it is kinder to let her die sooner rather than later in her own home. However, a child of that age should never have been told  how grave her condition is, imo. It is for the parents in consultation with the medics to make the decisions.

[Shaker]

Which belief is that?

To be honest, I wouldn't know.  All I can say is that there is no scientific evidence to support your belief

I've already asked you which 'belief' you're referring to and you've just said you don't know; yet here you are referring to it again. Which alleged belief of mine are you talking about?

Started on the gin early today?

[King Oberon]

Good grief Hope,

Is there a fairy kingdom? Are there any unicorns?

People claim they exist and many claim they had seen them so going by your logic despite no 'scientific' evidence to support them only hearsay and ancient literature you MUST believe in both as there is no 'scientific' evidence to disprove them either! 

Gibberish I notice you never actually address this when people point it out...